AGS vs AGAST graphics question

[cruz]

Hi,

i'm now selecting the engine for the my first adventure game. I have found AGS and AGAST. AGS seems to be easier to start with, but I have noticed that games made with AGAST have better graphics (smoother and looking modern), can you explain me why and is it possible to do the same level graphics with AGS?

[mozza]

Graphics are made by the user not the Engine. So the better at drawing you are the better graphics you get.

[monkey0506]

AGAST isn't really a good beginner's engine.  You have to know a lot of scripting.  In fact, you're practically scripting the entire game from scratch.  Not much is done in the way of an "engine".  AGAST is more like a language.

AGS is a lot easier for anyone to take up and start using.  There are several tutorials, a large help base, you can even make a simple game without using scripting if you don't know how to script.  If you do script, then AGS does also have its own language, but it is built to be intuitive, yet still as powerful as possible.  In my opinion, AGS is the better choice all around.

Now that all sounds a bit propagandish, but why shouldn't it be?  I have personally used both of the engines, and I know from a begginer's standpoint how easy/difficult they both are to use.  I've worked with AGS for over a year now, and I'm still learning, but personally I think it is the best adventure game engine you can find period; it's just simply the best.

As for the graphics, it really does depend on the artist.  Most of the projects I have seen with AGS have been independent/small group projects.  Truthfully these types of projects generally tend to have lower quality graphics than some larger projects.  But, in my opinion, they also tend to have a better overall quality.

Whichever you choose, good luck with your gaming ventures!

[Rocco]

havent worked with AGAST so far, but with AGS and Wintermute.
IMO use AGS for hand-drawn games with resolution not higher as 640x480.
Wintermute for high resolution and rendered games.

[cruz]

Thanks for your answers.

[Akumayo]

After reading abit on AGAST, I would choose AGS all over again simply because of the licensing.  There is just something wonderful about knowing your game CAN be commercial, even if you have no desire to make it so.  Having no strings attatched to your game is just a nice feeling I think, so I'd say AGS.

[subspark]

These people are right. AGS is very logical and intuitive. There's consistant support for beginners with technical issues and tutorials all over the internet with premade examples.

The graphics depends on your or your artist's 'skill with a pen' as many have expressed already.
The real question your asking is how much detail and graphical prowess can be applied to the engine.
The answer is, as much as any game of today supports.

You must understand that although AGS nativley supports a 'classic early 90's' type of gameplay, the power of the engine is up to date and you can very truly create an adventure game with today's graphics and visual effects.

Take a look at Runaway, a modern game by Pendulo Studios that sells for more than some of the latest 3d games.

http://www.pendulostudios.com/

From a technical point of view, game's like these are more than doable using AGS.
From an artistical point of view, game's like these take an incredible amount of time and dedication.

Ultimately, how far are you prepared to go?
Beers!

The best of luck to you and your development team!

[Gregjazz]

As I said before:

http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=AGS&word2=AGAST