Suggestions for competitions and activities

[Dudeman Thingface]

ALPHA2T, had you bothered to read the previous posts (from page 11 onwards), you would've seen that this has already been discussed.

My point is, I disagree the suggestion to make another extra competition, unless it can be proven to be vastly popular.

We don't actually know how many hi-res people are out there as they're rarely allowed to participate. The sprite jam is by all measures a pixel activity, so just like myself, people might not even bother checking whether they can submit a regular entry. To make sure I wasn't basing this on a false impression, I checked the introduction of the last 50 pixel jams to check with reality:

50 rounds - 6 allowed hi-res/hi-colour entries.

The Sprite Jam is for all intents and purposes a pixel art activity; I'm just asking for a character activity where everyone is allowed to join the fun.

I don't see the harm in adding another competition; if nobody's going to participate, it's going to die like the other ones. If people do contribute, we gained a popular competition.

Do I think excluding people is right?  No.  I don't think it's particularly fun to be able to do something and be excluded because it's not what other people are good at, but I also don't think a competition should be a 'boy's club' with 2-3 regular entrants and no one else.  I suppose you could still take this to mean I don't care, but I don't think most people would see it that way.

I agree with Loominous's idea - its worth a shot. As somebody said earlier if there are not enough entrants it will die, but it offers an opportunity to be creative

Aside from the miniscule amount of space it would take up on the server i cant really see any disbenefits. it would be fun and interesting to see what people can do beyond traditional pixel art. Call me a minority but I would definitely enter if i had time.

Oh, and I agree with you about 'boy's clubs', but we can't really know the level of interest, as people have never really had a proper chance of joining in, and by doing so establish a "tradition". I'm actually thinking mostly of 3D folks here. It's kinda like a radio station, where they always seem to be playing music that you dislike. It may very well be that they play your kind of music every 10th night, but it's most likely that you won't be tuned in to notice.

I'm going to quote everyone who was in favour of a theoretical "low-res competition", because that would be superfluous. As has already been discussed, most people here who participate in the sprite jam generally use pixel (or "low res") art.

[loominous]

Thanks Dudeman, it's a shame that so much space is taken up by people arguing against ideas that haven't even been proposed.

I also realize that reading all the posts in this discussion isn't very compelling, I've compiled this small list with the actual suggestions so far, so please read this before you join in the discussion:

The suggestions so far:

A) Keeping everything in the Sprite Jam and:

A1: Keep the lo-res restriction, but add seperate restrictions or remove them completely for hi-res entries, which would maintain the fun of restrictions for lo-res enthusiasts but at the same time allow everyone else to join in as well.

A1b: Have rules along Misj's line, where the resolution (and colours) are based on the intended resolution, which would make the restrictions easy to set, and allow everyone to join in (with seperate restrictions). Would make the rules less flexible though.

A2: Remove the restrictions, which has the downside of reducing the fun for lo-res enthusiasts.


B) Keeping the Sprite Jam as is or turn it into a dedicated pixel art activity and also:

B1: Start a Character Competition, without lo-res restrictions (though lo-res entries would be welcome). The downside would be an overlap with the sprite jam.

B2: Start a Concept Competition, which would be an idea centered activity with the goal of coming up with concept images of a character described by the host. As it's a matter of ideas rather than skillful rendition, a stickfigure doodle from a complete newbie could win over a masterfully crafted but less fitting entry. This activity would overlap less with the Sprite Jam, and since everyone from lo-res to claymation folks could join in, would have a huge potential base.

I think these are all the ideas so far, and any new are of course highly welcome.

[Shane 'ProgZmax' Stevens]

Eric and I are on the same page with this issue, especially the part about these competitions all just being a bit of fun and the winner just being some sort of title so they can define the rules for the next competition.

Loominous:

The main reason why I tend to set low-res guidelines is (and I think I explained this before) because I personally feel that low-res is easier for a majority of people to work with and get into, and the goal in competitions I host is to maximize the number of potential entrants while giving everyone a fairly good chance of winning.  Specifically, I like to use pre-set 'systems' like commodore 64, the NES, spectrum, etc, to level the playing field so everyone feels they've got a shot.  It's also amazing to see what someone as talented as yourself can manage given tighter restrictrions, and I myself have found it a very fun and informative experience to learn how to work with restrictive palettes and other odd conditions that existed in games of the past!  So that's really all there is to my reasoning there.

Also:

And then when you're greeted by opening lines such as: "Ahoy there, fellow pixel enthusiasts!" in a public general art activity, a line which I'm sure wasn't intentionally excluding, you kinda start feeling like a second class citizen.

I don't want to get personal because it's not my place to judge you, but honestly this seems like more a personal problem, like you've come from a very pixel-centric site like Pixellation and are projecting your annoyances here.  It doesn't bother me at all to see people welcome other hi-res artists, so I don't quite get you here.  This seems like something you personally need to work on, that's all I'm saying, since I happen to know Caine very well and he does hi-res and low-res art.


Misj:

But I really don't see why urging people to think about the entire process of designing will be a barrier or alienate people, or - for that matter - create a boy's club. Who I do see it that it would force people to think about the things they do...but that will only make them better at it.

You use force and urge, and many people don't like being forced or urged to do anything, that's the problem.  We're not really here to tell people how they should design their art, which seems to be a point of confusion.  The sprite jam isn't about telling people how to draw, it's about having fun!  It's not really about learning how to draw better, that's what the Critics Lounge is for. 

Personally I don't need another competition if the rules of the sprite-jam are medium-independent. However, I don't see that the sprite-jam will do this, nor that most participants of the sprite-jam consider it the right place. Most of them appear to consider a sprite to be build from pixels (rather than presented in pixels), and to most of them the sprite-jam seems to be analogous to pixel-art-jam. So my only conclusion could be that if the sprite-jam apparently isn't the place for this, then we should find another place to do it (preferably within the AGS community).

I agree that the sprite jam does tend to be pixel art related, but only because it maximizes the number of potential members who can participate on some level, just as The Paint Game maximizes the number of contributors by allowing anyone with Paint or better to join.  In a perfect world everyone would join regardless of their chances of winning, but in the real world there are people that pass up more complicated competitions simply because they either lack the time to do concept art or detailed back stories (I fall into this category often) or because they feel outclassed.  This is just the way of things, I think, and my response in your sprite jam was more concern that you were reducing potential entrants by overcomplicating it with an almost workshop approach. 

I do think people could host a similar sprite jam encouraging people to show their steps but without those steps influencing the outcome of the competition -- ie, the result is what is judged and not the process.  This way certain groups would not be placed at a disadvantage, which is my primary worry with adding more phases to these competitions.


Another option is that once a month a Super Sprite Jam could be held that has the winners from each weekly jam compete (if they want) in a more detailed competition with rules set by one of the 4 entrants (picked at random).  This could improve participation in the regular sprite jam and allow the winners to test themselves against each other, again, for the fun of it.

Something else to consider is that the Animation Competition typically has very few entrants.  That could easily be modified to serve the needs of a generic character animation and/or creation competition.

[Aljoho]

I agree that the sprite jam does tend to be pixel art related, but only because it maximizes the number of potential members who can participate on some level, just as The Paint Game maximizes the number of contributors by allowing anyone with Paint or better to join.  In a perfect world everyone would join regardless of their chances of winning, but in the real world there are people that pass up more complicated competitions simply because they either lack the time to do concept art or detailed back stories (I fall into this category often) or because they feel outclassed.  This is just the way of things, I think, and my response in your sprite jam was more concern that you were reducing potential entrants by overcomplicating it with an almost workshop approach. 

Its not at all a workshop though - the way i understood the proposal was just to expand the mediums. (assuming we used 2A 2B ideas which split it into two competitions). Imagine it like this - there is a cake baking competition, but i suck at baking cakes. However if somebody started baking competition that allowed for cakes and cookies then i would be more likely to enter. It isn't a workshop, it just caters more to my skills because i can bake cookies but not cakes and it becomes a game not a 'slaughter'. Its not about winning, just having fun, sure, but I think creating a new competition or expanding the old one is only going to expand the audience because people can do what they are good at.

Admittedly this is a game creation forum and subsequently the majority can probably do pixel art, and a lot of people can do both lo and hi res stuff, but it will offer a way to either try something new or do what you are good at for those (which probably includes me) who aren't very good at either. People could always enter both the competitions if they split (time permitting) and could choose between what they enjoyed most if they were too busy to do both.

[loominous]

ProgZmax:

The main reason why I tend to set low-res guidelines is because I personally feel that low-res is easier for a majority of people to work with and get into

On the one hand, I understand your reasoning, and if it's true that allowing hi-res entries will reduce the number of entrants, something which we don't really know, then that's a valid argument that I hadn't considered.

On the other, excluding people of a certain kind from public events so that others may be more willing to come in greater numbers is a pretty controversial notion, one that goes against the standard western values which hold the rights/integrity of the individual as something holy, and something never to be breached, even though the outcome may be beneficial to others.

I personally am quite conservative in that aspect and tend to agree with this notion, as I think that mistreating someone in order for a group to feel happier is wrong, but there are of course moral systems that see it the other way around.

Whether you're part of the "happier group", or the mistreated individual will of course influence your view in specific cases, which is worth bearing in mind.

the goal in competitions I host is to maximize the number of potential entrants while giving everyone a fairly good chance of winning.

In a perfect world everyone would join regardless of their chances of winning

So it seems like you feel that winning, or the chance of winning actually does matter to people.

This kinda tosses the idea of "the system is fine, because they can always participate, even though their entries won't be counted" out the window, no? Don't recall whether you were of that view, so it's not meant as an attack.

You [Misj] use force and urge, and many people don't like being forced or urged to do anything, that's the problem.  We're not really here to tell people how they should design their art, which seems to be a point of confusion.  The sprite jam isn't about telling people how to draw, it's about having fun!

I agree with you, and I was personally not keen about Misj's decision to have things other than the actual sprite affect the outcome.

I think the best way for to influence people is by simply creating stuff they enjoy, and then show how you personally do it. If they like it, they'll want to try it by their own will.

There is a certain irony here though, as being forced to do something is what this whole discussion is about. 9 out 10 times this is what we hi-res enthusiasts face in the Sprite Jam.

And then when you're greeted by opening lines such as: "Ahoy there, fellow pixel enthusiasts!" in a public general art activity, a line which I'm sure wasn't intentionally excluding, you kinda start feeling like a second class citizen.

I don't want to get personal because it's not my place to judge you, but honestly this seems like more a personal problem, like you've come from a very pixel-centric site like Pixellation and are projecting your annoyances here.

I think you've misinterpreted my point. If it was a pixel art competition, and particularly one at a pixel art site, then that greeting by a host would be totally expected and natural, just as at a bachelor party, the opening line "Welcome Gentlemen!" would be, but not at a board meeting with females present.

It's like if you were to attend Mittens, and there you're greeted by a big banner reading: 'Welcome European AGSers!". Most attendants at it would be europeans, so in a way it makes sense, but I bet you'd find the phrasing needlessly excluding.

And by itself, it's not a big deal, but since hi-res participants are excluded so often, all these small things build up this admittedly over dramatized sentiment. I hope this is starting to make sense without attributing mental conditions to me.

-

I'm having a bit of trouble distilling your suggestions at the end of your post, but by what I can make out it, you favor  the B1. Character Competition idea (it doesn't contain any workshop elements), and modifying the animation competition to allow classical animation, sort of A1 for that competition. Or did I get any of that wrong?

Edit: fixed corrupt sentence

Edit: and slightly altered another one

[Misj']

My apologies for dragging this on...it's just my nature

Misj:

But I really don't see why urging people to think about the entire process of designing will be a barrier or alienate people, or - for that matter - create a boy's club. Who I do see it that it would force people to think about the things they do...but that will only make them better at it. .............. The sprite jam isn't about telling people how to draw, it's about having fun!  It's not really about learning how to draw better, that's what the Critics Lounge is for.  .............. In a perfect world everyone would join regardless of their chances of winning

But then it's not really a competition is it? - For the goal of entering a competition is to win (unless you believe that Olympic motto, but I really don't). And the way to win is to get better, so - at least indirectly - the goal of the competition is to get better. If that's not the goal, if the goal is not to have the contenders to try and do the best they can, than it's not a competition but an activity. I have no problems with activities, but my personal goal when partaking in a competition is not to show off my work or skills...

, but in the real world there are people that pass up more complicated competitions simply because they either lack the time to do concept art or detailed back stories (I fall into this category often) or because they feel outclassed.

We are all busy including me. But whenever I start on a sprite (or any other drawing for that matter) I first work with some free-hand inspirational drawings, and try to figure out the stance with stick-figures. While the inspirational drawings might take up some time (but not even that long, because I'm not that interested in getting details right) anyone will have a hard time convincing me that they have enough time to sit behind a computer and push pixels but not to draw a few stick-figures. We're not talking perfect drawings here...we're talking building a foundation for your drawing to make them better.

This is just the way of things, I think, and my response in your sprite jam was more concern that you were reducing potential entrants by overcomplicating it with an almost workshop approach.

Actually the point was to increase the number of potential entrants by allowing work-in-progress even if that work was not yet in the pixel-phase. This would allow even busy people to participate (and have a chance to win the competition if their work is truly superior, even though their pixel-skills might not be).

I do think people could host a similar sprite jam encouraging people to show their steps but without those steps influencing the outcome of the competition -- ie, the result is what is judged and not the process.

You know I disagree on this point - The creation-steps are the foundation of a good sprite (independent of the medium) and if the foundation is rotten the sprite is not usable in a game (even though it might be covered up in the presented frame), and is therefore a bad sprite...at least in my opinion.

Ps. While I think this is a good - and important - discussion, I believe that at least part of it does not belong in this particular thread. Maybe a select group of people should sit together (via PM) and think about some of the problems presented and how best to accommodate as many people as possible. That might also make some of us (including me) less defensive and thus more productive...I don't know. Maybe...
Pps. I'm not saying that the competition should be hard labour and not fun.

[Shane 'ProgZmax' Stevens]

Loominous:

I think you have my suggestions right.  I don't know who said people can enter even though 'their entries won't be counted' but it wasn't me and I don't really hold to the 'no chance of winning' thing.  Yes, I very much do believe the competition is more about fun than winning (and should stay that way), but there still has to be a winner for the competition to move forward.

I do think that winning matters very much to some people (it doesn't to me), and that probably needs to be taken into account.

And by itself, it's not a big deal, but since hi-res participants are excluded so often, all these small things build up this admittedly over dramatized sentiment.

I think one of the issues is that I don't really see hi-res members (or anyone else) from being excluded from anything except by their own preference.  No one has said 'hi-res members cannot enter this competition', the rules just don't overtly favor that particular skill.  The Background Blitz very often allows hi-res, and as you demonstrated with the pirate sprite jam you can always paint an image and reduce it Curse of Monkey Island style to fit the dimensions/color limitations.  The same can be done with the colouring ball, though the animation competition provides a sprite so there's not much room to work with there.  I understand the desire to have specifically hi-res supported activities, but I don't think it's fair to say you're being excluded from the current activities (or even being discouraged).


Misj:

We'll have to agree to disagree, because I really don't approve of having a friendly, no pressure competition built around rating a person's concepts and sketches toward completion rather than the end result.  It's just more effort than I'm interested in with a competition about having a bit of fun, and if not everyone does (or can do) it they are automatically placed at a disadvantage. 

[Dudeman Thingface]

Misj:

We'll have to agree to disagree, because I really don't approve of having a friendly, no pressure competition built around rating a person's concepts and sketches toward completion rather than the end result.  It's just more effort than I'm interested in with a competition about having a bit of fun, and if not everyone does (or can do) it they are automatically placed at a disadvantage. 

I'm agreeing with ProgzMax.
I don't think that sort of competition would work very well. It's a good concept but ... to judge how well someone can make a sprite based on their concepts and sketches is very subjective. For example, one person may be a brilliant pixel artist and only need the stick figures mentioned in Misj's previous post before making something worthy of being sold. However, the concept art of just stick figures is not very impressive compared to, say, someone who has thirty sketches, and all them showing some sort of development for the character.
Although I agree it will get people to think and really try to make concepts (and get those thirty-five sketches), it does stem down to sort of "who has the most/best developed character" as opposed to "who has a character that isn't overdeveloped and suitable for an interpretive lead character". As the latter is more often than the former used in amateur adventure games to give the player a sense of their own personality into the character.

I'm rambling on, so I'll stop now, but I guess I'm just against such a subjective concept.

[Misj']

Misj:
We'll have to agree to disagree, because I really don't approve of having a friendly, no pressure competition built around rating a person's concepts and sketches toward completion rather than the end result.  It's just more effort than I'm interested in with a competition about having a bit of fun, and if not everyone does (or can do) it they are automatically placed at a disadvantage.

I'm agreeing with ProgzMax.
I don't think that sort of competition would work very well. It's a good concept but ... to judge how well someone can make a sprite based on their concepts and sketches is very subjective. For example, one person may be a brilliant pixel artist and only need the stick figures mentioned in Misj's previous post before making something worthy of being sold. However, the concept art of just stick figures is not very impressive compared to, say, someone who has thirty sketches, and all them showing some sort of development for the character.
Although I agree it will get people to think and really try to make concepts (and get those thirty-five sketches), it does stem down to sort of "who has the most/best developed character" as opposed to "who has a character that isn't overdeveloped and suitable for an interpretive lead character". As the latter is more often than the former used in amateur adventure games to give the player a sense of their own personality into the character.

I'm rambling on, so I'll stop now, but I guess I'm just against such a subjective concept.

ProgZ:

Before we begin: I play this a little personal to make a point. My intentions are not to personally attack you (even though it might seem like that)...it was just easier to present my argument this way (by giving pixel-artists a face...your face in this case). I also mis-use some of your words to show that the arguments in favour and against are not that different. I know that by using these quotes I present your opinion in a light that does not do your opinion justice. Please ignore all that, and just read the irony/sarcasm that I intended.

You do realise that you are saying that the argument 'if not everyone does (or can do) it they are automatically placed at a disadvantage' is - or at least appears to be - in disagreement with the 'in a perfect world everyone would join regardless of their chances of winning' argument? - I mean, to me it appears that on one side you say that it is not about winning but about the fun, while on the other side you consider it unfair if - due to the rules free to set by the host (as stated by Gilbet when he said: "For Sprite Jams, the host can set the rules to whatever he wants" and to a lesser extend by you when you said: "anyone can enter our existing competitions provided they want to follow the basic rules set by the host, and I think that's a good thing!") - not all participants have an equal chance of winning. The point is: that is exactly what this discussion is all about...some people feel that they are automatically 'placed at a disadvantage' because they don't do (or cannot do) pixel stuff. I don't understand how anyone's view can be different concerning these two - more or less similar - points: if it is unfair to promote the inclusion of concept-art because not everyone does (or can do) it and are therefore automatically placed at a disadvantage, then it is equally unfair to promote pixel-art because not everyone does (or can do) it and are therefore automatically placed at a disadvantage...or is my logic really completely flawed here?

I could even use your argument 'No one has said 'hi-res members cannot enter this competition', the rules just don't overtly favor that particular skill' and bend it towards: 'my 'add concept art' preference never said that 'people (pixel artists apparently) who don't show/have concepts or work-in-progress cannot enter this competition', the rules just didn't overtly favour people that are not interested in that particular skill'. I mean...if one is fair (even though it is disadvantageous to certain groups) and the other is not (because it is disadvantageous to certain groups) then my rationale is really messed up, because I don't see the difference.

By the way...creating concept-art is fun. Annoying at times, but fun non the less. And at the same time it helps you explore the character and create a better end-result in the process. Personally I believe that's a good thing...even for a sprite-jam.

I understand that you are afraid that changes within the rules will alienate certain people, and possibly chase them away. On the other hand...didn't the rules as they are not already do that? - I can say for sure that it mostly chased my away from the competitions, because there is no fun to be gotten at drawing some silly pixels (my apologies to the pixel-lovers, but I really find pixels boring). So if it is about having fun, than at least I can say that for me most of the Jams hosted have failed...because the rules enforce something that I just really don't consider fun: pixel-art. So if a few small alterations to the rules (like defining size-limitations as relative numbers based on the screen-resolution and not as absolute numbers) than I'm all for that.

(sorry for mis-using your own words against you, I did have fun writing it down though...)

Dudeman:
You stated that you were against such a subjective concept. On the other hand, deciding which sprite is the best is in itself a subjective concept...even if you include functionality (which would bring me back to sprites and characters needing to have a good foundation, and thus advocating for including work-in-progress). Oh, and to be honest, I've seen stick-figures that I am really jealous of.



Ps. I am not saying that I will ever encourage concept/work-in-progress in future Jams...but I do stand by my choice of promoting it, as well as its importance in sprite development. I felt I had to try it, just like I felt I had to try the resolution-relative size definition, promoting colour-use rather than a colour-limit, character- or skill-based rather than theme-based, and the 'as a host you are obliged to comment on everyone who spend time and energy on entering your competition'...some of these ideas may have failed, and others were successful. Each of them were, however, used to encourage participation for as many people as possible and lower the threshold for people out-side of the conventional participants.
Pps. Just imagine what would have happened if I decided to focus on style, and require each participant to enter a sprite in a style not common for him or her...

[Shane 'ProgZmax' Stevens]

I don't think you effectively used my words against me because there is a real difference here, and it's simple.  You can take a hi res image and, though some effort, make it a respectable piece of pixel art.  Loominous proved this with his pirate entry, which I thought was quite good.  Someone who works only with pixel art can't suddenly scale up a small pixel image and have it look anything but blocky and distorted in hi-res (bear with me).  This argument applies to a competition relying on the stages leading up to the result, because I for one do not have 'stages' of pixelling (nor do most pixellers) because you are just connecting dots together until they form a pleasing shape.  I don't go through the lengthy process of concept sketches or anatomical line drawings like a classical artist would, which means I have nothing to show you but my results and the color palette I've selected.  The difference here is that while you do both with hi-res artwork, you also have a result to show, and this result is what evens the playfield between the approaches and allows for a more fair competition.  Just because winning isn't important to me doesn't mean it's unimportant to other people or that the competition should be conducted in an uneven manner, and I honestly don't think the sprite jam is unfair as it stands, though imposing additional restrictions like concept art as conditions for winning would quickly make it that way. 

As it stands, you have just as much chance of winning with your ninja as Ben does with his, or Ghost with his, because the outcome relies only on which sprite Buloght finds most visually pleasing.

I'm not sure where you're having a problem with this?

[loominous]

Sure, you can always downsize.

Let's take the Music Competition as an example. Let's say that chip music enthusiasts were the majority there, which is kind of akin to lo-res.

In nine out of ten competitions, they'd set size restrictions of the music files to 50 kb, and restrict the quality to 8bit.

In response to complaints from regular composers about being excluded, they'd argue that it's just the hi-def preferences of these people that are stopping them from participating -- everyone can after all downsample their works, and in some cases it works really well. Upsampling on the other hand wouldn't work, so the system is fair.

The regular composers suggest that, sure, they don't mind the chip music guys enjoying separate chip limitations, but couldn't they be allowed to submit entries as well, which would make everyone happy? It's after all not a Chip Music competition, and there's no other music competition on the forums to which they can submit their work.

The chip enthusiasts respond that they're happy with the current system, so they see no need to change it.

Doesn't this strike you as at least so far from ideal, that if it can be easily changed to make everyone happy, then that would seem like the right thing to do?

Edit: Modified a sentence

[Misj']

The focus of this discussion starts to be work-in-progress and concept-art (and thus strictly speaking my latest jam), while it should be: can we adapt the rules of a competition to a minimum to include a maximum number of possible contestants without excluding anyone.

I understand that some people feel no one is excluded, while others feel that they are excluded (at least excluded from using the style that is most fun to them). Personally I feel that the latter is correct, since I myself feel it too. As a result this discussion is - at least partly - personal. And this might sound arrogant, but my only request is that people set the rules such that I can play as well. I have no problem with occasional competitions that have a theme where not everyone can enter (let's say: create a sprite that would work on a Gameboy (non-colour), or another time create a sprite for a high-res game)...but in general the rules should be set such that both me and ProgZ can play. And as it is, most Jams are not open to me if I accept the rules and I can only enter if I bend the rules. I feel that shouldn't be necessary...

I don't go through the lengthy process of concept sketches or anatomical line drawings like a classical artist would, which means I have nothing to show you but my results and the color palette I've selected.

As I said I don't do pixel-art, so I may be wrong here...but I've seen the work-in-progress and tutorials of several pixel-artists, and from what I understand many of them do not have a process like "I'll put some pixels on the screen and we'll see where it ends"...as I understand it, many of them have some planning stages. SpacePirate's entry was a proof to me that pixel-artists are not falsely disadvantaged. In your case, I assume that you start with flat images and add shadowing and highlighting effects or something. If you really start with an empty screen and end with a final image without any in-between steps then indeed, you'd be at a disadvantage to others...

As it stands, you have just as much chance of winning with your ninja as Ben does with his, or Ghost with his, because the outcome relies only on which sprite Buloght finds most visually pleasing.

But strictly speaking my entry broke the colour-rule and would thus be disqualified. If I win it is by grace of Buloght, and him accepting that I re-interpreted to rules to fit with high-res art.

You can take a hi res image and, though some effort, make it a respectable piece of pixel art.  Loominous proved this with his pirate entry, which I thought was quite good.  Someone who works only with pixel art can't suddenly scale up a small pixel image and have it look anything but blocky and distorted in hi-res (bear with me).

Actually...depending on the style it doesn't take that much effort to convert a pixel-based piece into high-res. As an example Ghost's style is quite easy to high-res in my opinion, as I did here (this also applies to his more-low-res sprites by the way)...I'll admit that your pixel-style is more difficult...but creating a good quality low-res image from a high-res image doesn't take that little effort either. (by the way, you stated that 'it's just more effort than I'm interested in with a competition about having a bit of fun' to present different creation-steps, but now you're saying that high-res artists can easily put extra effort in reducing the quality of their art to fit within the pixel-arena...well, at least to me that is no fun to do, and therefore not the kind of effort I want to spend on it).

[Shane 'ProgZmax' Stevens]

If you really start with an empty screen and end with a final image without any in-between steps then indeed, you'd be at a disadvantage to others...

This is pretty much my constant approach, honestly.  The only way most pixel artists can show 'method' is to record what they do and make it available, since there's so much back and forth with color picking and shifting pixels around and altering dither patterns until they look good.  And Caine actually told me he showed those steps specifically for the competition and doesn't normally do his work that way .

As far as the hi-res vs low-res conversion, I think this is another case where we will agree to disagree, since logic tells me it is easier to downsample than upsample (with good results).

most Jams are not open to me if I accept the rules and I can only enter if I bend the rules. I feel that shouldn't be necessary...

I really don't think this is true, and you could have reduced the colors of your entry to maintain the rules and still have it look good imo. 

One of the perks of the sprite jam is defining your own rules (within reason), so winning grants you quite a bit of latitude to allow larger dimensions or infinite colors (if that's your preference). 

Loominous:

I agree with you but again, I think it's the right of the winner to decide what sort of whacky/conventional rules he/she likes as far as the sprite jam goes.  If he/she gets no entries, it's obviously an unpopular idea.  If you win and say 'use any methods you like to make me this' then more power to you, and I'd have no problem with it. 

Our main point of contention seems to be the purpose of the rules.  I don't think exclusion is the goal, it's more to challenge the entrants.  That said, I still think that altering the animation competition to be a bit more interesting is a good idea, but I don't really make the decisions as far as that goes .

[loominous]

I don't think exclusion is the goal, it's more to challenge the entrants.

Sure, in almost all cases, style exclusion is simply an unfortunate side effect.

And I'm fully aware that there's a fun challenge in using as few colours and pixels as possible to create something great, and none of my suggestions have aimed at removing this challenge for pixel art enthusiasts.

I think the vital thing that's missing here though is that this particular challenge, like in chip tune music, is style specific.

Regular composers don't care about the size of their files, their sole aim is to create great music, which is enough of a challenge for any genius. In the same way, for regular artists, whether they work in clay, 3d, pencil, whathaveyou, these particular challenges simply do not exist.

This leads to the current unfortunate situation, where regular artists have lo-res restrictions imposed on them, akin to regular composers being restricted by chip-tune restrictions.

Which lead to my suggestions that either: A) Keep things as they are, but have lo-res restrictions apply only to lo-res entries, or B) turn the Sprite Jam into an official pixel art activity, and start a Character Competition that allows any style, and which aim is merely to create as good characters as possible.

Just as applying 3D restrictions, such as polygon count, to pixel art entries doesn't make sense, I simply don't understand why we can't make everyone happy by having pixel art restrictions apply to pixel art entries only, which seems as natural as can be. It just baffles me.

Edit: oh, and like Misj, I'm not at all opposed to occasional general rules to shake things up, like every once in a while have gameboy restrictions, or for that matter anime "restrictions". Variation is after all fun.

[Misj']

There are a few things that I have learned from this discussion. First of all, I do not understand pixel-art...at least not as it is done - apparently - by most people. I mean, I understand the process as it is done in Day of the Tentacle or Full Throttle where they basically used the same approach as is done for traditional art, but adapted it to fit the needs of a low resolution. But as ProgZ presents the way pixel-art is generally done here, I feel that it lies so far away from traditional art, that the way to think about certain concepts is vitally different for both. I also found that pixel-artists don't really understand traditional art, and the way a traditional artists thinks about these concepts and what is important for a piece to actually shine. Maybe this means that the two just really aren't compatible.

So that brings me to Loominous suggestions:

Which lead to my suggestions that either: A) Keep things as they are, but have lo-res restrictions apply only to lo-res entries, or B) turn the Sprite Jam into an official pixel art activity, and start a Character Competition that allows any style, and which aim is merely to create as good characters as possible.

Based on this discussion I doubt if (A) is possible, so that leaves me to (B): a Character (Oriented) Competition. And I am strongly in favour of this. However, to execute it well, it should not be like the pixel-sprite-jam where the assignment is defined as 'draw a whatever', but more in the way my granny-competition was: provide a character-description, present the tone of the game (family, horror, fantasy, etc),  and provide size-limitations that are screen-resolution dependant (it's for a game, not a cartoon). In some rare cases additional style (not medium) limitations could be added like: it's a manga game, it's a new instalment of Super Mario, etc., but this should not be a general rule.

So: I'm in favour of (B), because this discussion taught me that (A) appears to be impossible.

[loominous]

Misj:

Maybe this means that the two just really aren't compatible.

I'm not sure what precisely would be the problem. A nice sprite is after all a nice sprite, regardless of how it was created or what resolution/colour amount it has.

Whether the DOTT characters were pixeled from scratch or done through extensive sketch processes seems irrelevant when you judge the end result, which after all what matters in these activities and in the end.

[Misj']

I'm not sure what precisely would be the problem. A nice sprite is after all a nice sprite, regardless of how it was created or what resolution/colour amount it has.

Whether the DOTT characters were pixeled from scratch or done through extensive sketch processes seems irrelevant when you judge the end result, which after all what matters in these activities and in the end.

Yes, but apparently the interpretation of 'what is a good/workable sprite' depends too much on the design-point-of-view that someone has when looking at it.

For a traditional artist it is easier to see whether a 'traditional' sprite (Monkey Island 3, King's Quest 7, Broken Sword 1) is usable. If pixel-art is close to this traditional point of view (like DOTT, Sam'nMax, or most of the stuff Ghost draws) he can still see how and why it will work. However, the further it is away from it (like ProgZMax's work for example) he will have difficulties to judge on the usability of the sprite in a (adventure) game; even though that would be one of the definitions of a good sprite. The same is true for pixel artists: the further away on the spectrum the art is from their point-of-view the more difficult it is for them to judge it's true value.

I would love to see the Jam corrected to fit whichever approach a contestant wishes to follow to create his or her sprite. But this won't happen as long as one side doesn't understand the rules of the other. And certain key concepts are viewed upon too differently (colours are counted differently, traditional (or vector) artists do not 'think' in pixels, etc) for that to occur...apparently.

So rather than 'force' a change (even though I believe that such a change would be a good thing) I think it is better to go for the other solution: creating an additional contest that is more character oriented. I personally also think that such a contest is more valuable than the sprite-jam (both to pixel-artists, traditional-artists, flash-artists, and whatever-artists). That doesn't of course mean that the Sprite Jam would become obsolete or should be stopped.



Ps. We can discuss about this for months and never get anywhere. Some people indicated that they saw the value of such a contest, others said they don't. Let's bring this to the next step: Will we create a new contest that is character-based or not? - I say Yes.

Pps. What would be acceptable rules for such a contest? - I have indicated some in my previous post...but other may have better ideas. As long as it's character- and not sprite-based the two activities should not compete with each other.

[cat]

I just wanted to tell you that there is a new Sprite Jam going on without size our colour restrictions. So, why not stop discussing and do some art? 

[Andail]

This discussion has taken an unproportionate amount of thread-space, so I'd like to settle it for now.

Loominous, I have a very hard time understanding why this is such an issue for you.

When you went to art class, were you never instructed to take different - sometimes very demanding - paths to reach the end product? Sometimes you painted negative space, sometimes you were restricted to using only the palette knife, sometimes the reference image was turned upside down.

In the same sense (since you used the football allegory yourself, and said how it would suck if your goals suddenly didn't count for no apparent reason), a football coach might, during a training session, instruct the players as follows: To practice passing, they will advance towards the goal in pairs, make two square passes and then shoot at the goal. Imagine that one player persisted in shooting directly at the goal without passing first, claiming that "a goal is always a goal" and ignoring that there is a pedagogical aspect involved.

My best art classes weren't about everyone trying to achieve as impressive a painting as possible, using their favourite technique (and then compare the results); they were about being challenged, brought out of balance, and then grow from there.

As for the future sprite-jams
We have to try to be objective here, and see to the interest of this community and the setup of competitions. We can only implement so many activities, or the entire board will be dilluted. Just because you think a particular aspect of a competition appears to be missing, and deserves a competition of its own, doesn't mean there will be a healthy amount of participation in that off-shoot over time.

I definitely think that the open nature of the sprite jams is enough to cater for every possible technique and genre over time, but not each time.

As a moderator I would like to end this discussion for now, and simply encourage the future winners to bring variation to the jams, but not resort to some kind of compliant "just paint your favourite picture!" to appease as many as possible.

Now, give room for other debates in this thread. If you can't stand the rules in the next jam, please just refrain from posting and wait for the next one. Or better still, challenge yourself and enter anyway.

[AsimosVagan]

  Hi.

   I would love to see a programming competition here but I failed to think how it could be done. I don´t even know if there will be enough people interested.

   What do you think?

   Perhaps a timely competition, something like: program a tic-tac-toe in 24 hours?