My hot take is that pixel art isn't overused, people need to stop pretending it's meant to be some niche style when in actuality it's much more comparable to styles such as hand-drawn, realism, cell shaded, etc. It's evolved far beyond nostalgia at this point since young people like myself who grew up playing very few pixel art games, don't feel nostalgic for the style yet still adore it. Pixel art is now a common and normal enough medium that it shouldn't be capable of being overused, I think it would be like looking at the new Call of Duty: Black Ops 6 and saying "ewww, we really don't need anymore realistic looking games", that would be bizarre because realistic style games are a norm to us, so I guess what I'm saying is that pixel art is now the norm for 2d indie games, I can't possibly think ill of it because I hardly think of it at all. Not to say I don't judge a game's art, I do, I just do not judge the art's medium when it is already so widely normalised. Now to give some examples of currently overused styles, there is low-poly and PSX. The itch.io marketplace is absolutely packed with PSX style horror games with little to no differences between any of them. Low-poly is currently the face of low-quality asset flips. Both of these styles have issues with how they are commonly used. Pixel art is such a wide reaching medium that the only similarity we can attribute to the medium is "Indie game". Now unless you are some brain-rotted silly goose who thinks Call of Duty and CS2 are the only games to exist, it is impossible to think of indie games negatively as a whole. Idk, if pixel art is overused by indie devs then so are long-sleeve shirts by single dudes in their 20s, hate all you want but something being common does not mean it looks bad.
11 months ago
| 5
The ratio of passionate indie games per soulless for-virality indie game is roughly the same as the ratio for soulful AAA per riskless AAA
11 months ago | 6
I would say two things: "People say that indie games doesn't sell that much on Steam and other platforms. There's a lot of indie game super successful hits, even simple games. Also, a lot of crappy indie games are released every day, with clunky mechanics, vague dynamics and poor aesthetics. If indie devs stop trying to rush the development, paying attention to the details of the game, this number would change, but indies rather complaint about the 'hur, dur, people only buy AAA' instead of 'hey, I will make a game that is actually good'." "Sometimes, indies tries to innovate exaggerately. In the majority, people only want to play a game. Ideas don't sell, good games does. Not about money: if you have a high-engineering mechanic on your game, full of comands and everything, but the game is not appealing or it's just too complex for nothing, people will just give up."
11 months ago | 1
I would say: no indie game is ever finished. The developer just burns out from it and then releases whatever it's done. It's something that i heard about art in general, and i think it also applies to making indie games. Personally, i made some games before, most of them got mixed reviews, never got a 5/5 score. But i made them for the sake of being creative, of expressing ideas, so it never really bothered me. I feel that the accomplishment of finishing a game and releasing it is worth in itself, as there are many others that were never able to reach that level of perseverance and discipline.
11 months ago
| 7
If you have ever started a post with "Your game should NEVER..." you're already fighting a losing game. Especially in a narrative-heavy game, there are use cases for virtually anything. Even the "You have to learn the rules to break the rules" mindset does more harm than good. The medium is just too vast to decide on "rules" in the first place. There's no stopping point where you can decide you understand all the "rules" of game design and can this start breaking them. Just do what's appropriate for your game.
11 months ago
| 1
My hot take: it’s more easy to learn 3D modeling than pixel art. Of course , I am talking about simple 3d style, low poly, cartoon, etc.
11 months ago | 2
I’m not sure how hot of a take this this is, but scope creep isn’t always bad. Some versions are sure,like of course my fps game needs crafting for no other reason than to have crafting, but when I make games, I often find myself occasionally adding new enemies or gameplay mechanics and gimmicks, not really for any reason other than that’s the kind of thing I like to program and make. Is it important to the overall game? Not really. Could I be spending my time better? Yes. But I enjoy adding it as like a nice break from working on the larger aspects of the game. And it’s good as long as you just don’t let it get you out of hand
11 months ago | 4
My hot take is that it's a waste of time to make anything that isn't a new, at least if you want others to play it Don't design characters people will mix up with existing characters, don't copy a whole gameplay system 1 for 1 even if you're telling a new story with it, don't try replicate the exact feeling you got from another game. All those experiences already exist. When given the power to create new ones, why shouldn't we? Even if they're not as good, they add something to the world (I'm aware this won't hold up as soon a I want to make a commercially viable game lol)
11 months ago
| 1
Don't feel like you can't start with your "dream game," or some variation of it. Even if it ends up being a clumsy first iteration, sometimes that grandiose vision is what's going to motivate you to learn. Definitely do game jams and smaller projects on the side, but ultimately: make what you want to make.
11 months ago
| 0
My hot take: No game should ever ask for real money for in-game cosmetics. It is a leech-like business model that treats players as exhaustible resources rather than human beings.
11 months ago | 1
My hot take: Pixel art is harder to learn than hand drawn art, roast me all you want I’ll defend myself in the video lol
11 months ago (edited) | 7
Many indie games rely on breaking the fourth wall, but it often feels like an uninspired shortcut to make the game seem "interesting." A game's story—especially in the indie scene—should be compelling enough to stand on its own, without needing to pull the player into the narrative.
11 months ago (edited)
| 3
I am not a game developer. So I don't have any hot takes regarding game development. But I am leaving my comment here because I love playing games 🥺
11 months ago
| 0
MY HOT TAKE — Most game devs don’t want to be YouTubers. Even though it seems that most game devs have a YouTube presence most don’t wish to have one and only do it for the marketing. For me at least it would be annoying to have to film and edit all of my stupid code.
11 months ago
| 0
My hot take is that indie games developed by 1-3 people feel infitely better than triple a titles releasing with bugs on launch
11 months ago
| 0
Hmm, one of my hot takes? Indie games aren’t making as big a dent as your favorite influencer would have you believe. Triple A, even though making some poor decisions, are alive and well.
11 months ago
| 0
Either way you're too young to have enough money to buy what you need to solo develope or you are too old and too much invested into living a live when you're 9-5 working and having a family. The Phase of being inbetween is too small.
11 months ago | 0
Another one is stop making so many Roguelikes or roguelites or whatever. I’m not saying that roguelikes are bad, I’m saying that not all games need to be them. There are so many games that I’m just like, does this need to be a rougelike? The only reason that there are so many is because they are easier to make (no level design, and Substantially longer playtime) I’m not saying roguelikes shouldn’t exist. I’m just saying some games shouldn’t be them.
11 months ago (edited) | 3
Apox Fox
What are your game dev hot takes?
I'm making a video where I go over your hot takes and unpopular opinions about game dev. Your comment will be featured in my next video :D Make them as spicy as possible, it'll be fun !
11 months ago | [YT] | 33