Him and that Bellflower dude down in Tejas.
Off to bed....
Off to bed....
That pic is OK, but, on the whole, I really don't like Mongoose art for Traveller. Like the art for TNE (which I couldn't stand, either), it's too swashbuckling. Looks more space opera than hard science.
That pic is OK, but, on the whole, I really don't like Mongoose art for Traveller. Like the art for TNE (which I couldn't stand, either), it's too swashbuckling. Looks more space opera than hard science.
Blue Ghost said:One of my major beefs with games is the poor artwork. Back in the 70s and 80s I always wondered why there were such p__s-poor drawings and paintings on the covers of a lot of games that otherwise might have attracted a bigger following.
I agreeFWIWIMO, MegaTraveller had the best art of all the editions of the game.
This pretty much expresses what I think of 66% of Traveller art.
http://www.somethingawful.com/dungeons-and-dragons/traveller-artwork-steve/1/
TONE is a completely different issue, and is not solvable because each of us brings a different set of expectations and references to this game.
Mainstream publishing had a LOT more money available to it. For every SF&F book selling 20,000 copies there was a Romance novel doing twice those numbers and a NYT Best Seller at twenty times that, or more. Sometimes a LOT more. The paperback side also uses a lot of cheaper paper.
And don't forget that a lot of SF&F had really poor covers. Getting Foss, Whelan, or another talent for a cover was often limited to a particular series, and called for one piece of art per year. Game books from a prolific company require a stack of interstitial art plus a cover, and could be needed a dozen or more times per year each. On sales figures of four digits in most cases, five in a few exceptional cases. Even Dragon never had the circulation numbers of The New Yorker or Playboy (two magazines known for their interstitial art, among other things...), and by the standards you apply, neither of them has good art either. That one of them depends on *ahem* photography is also significant. Photography is potentially far more efficient monetarily. and gaming can't use it except on the occasional convention report. Those convention reports were often swimming in photos because, unlike in the News business, those pictures were effectively FREE.
Funny coincidence: the only game magazines that survive outside of the top selling RPG (Paizo's Pathfinder) are focused on miniatures, where the efficiency of the camera can make their pages cheap to fill with pictures.
This pretty much expresses what I think of 66% of Traveller art.
http://www.somethingawful.com/dungeons-and-dragons/traveller-artwork-steve/1/
This pretty much expresses what I think of 66% of Traveller art.
http://www.somethingawful.com/dungeons-and-dragons/traveller-artwork-steve/1/
We're on a road and we find a submarine full of mummies.
White Dwarf got away with it by being second use, and being the only RPG game in the UK for many years. Dragon got away with it by being where some of those artists made their name in the first place.
Well, I can totally see the financial argument. Money is the limiting factor. But here we are in 2014, and we're still dealing with the same issue. I think Traveller is hampered by its own level of success, and I think part of that has been the art.
I'll take another shot at another CT artist contributor; Bill Keith. The dude can write circles around me, but his pencils for a lot of the CT supplements really made me cringe. My friend and I almost put down Traveller because of that. Not a very good thing to say, but, well, I can't say we were the only ones thinking along that lines all those years ago.
When you're younger you don't understand about money. Okay, fine. How come Traveller didn't look as sleek as a Parker Brothers or Milton Bradley game? You get older and figure it out. But now it's 2014, and there are better and more reasonably priced artists out there now. There's an explosion of talent, and we're still kind of dealing with some of the same issues for this game.
My own thought is that the "art" never mattered to me. Traveller is imagination, not a comic book; the brain tells the story, not the pictures.
In many instances the poor "artwork" would have been better left out and a few more lines of print added.
Hmm, when I read about the Virushi the first time, Heinlein's The Star Beast popped into my head. I still sort of view them in that light. I do not have them eating metal though.
The one race I do like is he Virushi. Rhino-like aliens with the disposition of a psychiatric nurse.
Him and that Bellflower dude down in Tejas.
Off to bed....
Maybe, BG, that's because they are NOT a T4 race, but were originally documented in Journal of the Travellers Aid Society No. 12 by the late, great J. Andrew Keith.