Personally I think that both are okay. Even more so when someone seems to be doing such a good job on one of the aspect.
What's not okay is going around and arguing that you just can't do better than that. He could do better, he just don't care and I repeat, it's alright to not care.
His older post was disrespectful to all people that do take pride in what they do and want to improve it.
Maybe he can't do better than that? Maybe not everyone can get good enough at art to make decent looking modern games on a tight budget? Using contractors well requires artistic skills so that doesn't solve the problem.
And don't come with the bullshit "Everyone can become great at X, it just takes practice, see I sucked once and now I'm great!". Sure you will never be great at something without practice, but it doesn't just take practice it takes a level of talent as well. Some people are just doomed to be mediocre at some things.
> His older post was disrespectful to all people that do take pride in what they do and want to improve it.
No it wasn't. It was about him not being able to make better art on his budget. Not about others not being able to make better art with similar budgets.
That's absurd. It doesn't require artistic skills, all it require is trusting them to do a good job. There's plenty of ways to confirms they are good at what they do.
> It was about him not being able to make better art on his budget.
The thing is, he can do better art with his budget, he just don't want to and don't need to.
He said it himself multiple time that he don't want to invest time in that. He said it himself in this new post that his latest game was much longer to complete because he invested MONTHS in a new engine.
He can do it, he just won't.
He currently uses contractors. What exactly are you arguing? That he is bad at using contractors, but that lack of skill is separate from his lack of skill in art?
> The thing is, he can do better art with his budget,
How? I am sure he would love to have better art at no cost, so please explain these mysterious methods.
He use contractors to do his graphics, not to do the art direction. He choose how to do them, when to do them and how much effort to put in all of them.
> How? I am sure he would love to have better art at no cost, so please explain these mysterious methods.
I already say it on the following paragraph.
> He said it himself in this new post that his latest game was much longer to complete because he invested MONTHS in a new engine.
Based on his budget, that's quite a bit of money spend for that. It would be easy to take some of that money from his budget and instead invest it on art.
That's also not considering that he most probably pay more than needed for some of its graphics.
The fact that he think it's worthwhile to invest months into a new engine show why an art director will help greatly. As a developer, he knows how building an engine is an investment that will gains more in the long term. In art, he clearly doesn't know much and don't want to know more by is own admission. He don't know what deserve more budget, what deserve less, what can be done to get a good look for less. Another comments gave a link to a picture of someone that did a few tweaks to one of its screenshots and it was already so much better. It was mostly color corrections.
There's so much he could do, that he doesn't. It's not that he can't, it just that he won't.
Again I'll repeat myself from many others comments, there's nothing wrong with not wanting to get better arts (at best it's sad to see that its stories won't be seen by as many people, but that's not a requirement at all). The only thing I believe is wrong is that he act like it's not his choice, that he legitimately can do nothing about it.
As for priorities, people can have different priorities, but there are a few basics that in my opinion anyone can improve at with minimal effort as long as they try. Developing an aesthetic sense for what works together on a screen and what doesn't is one of those things. It's clear this guy hasn't bothered with this and in my view that makes him a mediocre game developer, which is a kind of developer that I will not look up to if I want to improve.
>Why is it ok for games to lack a good story but not ok for them to lack good art?
This can be a very long discussion but art is the one thing that is immediately visible to anyone. In some ways it's the most important aspect of a game. I don't have the same views on code that I have on art, for instance. With code you can get away with very poor practices and you can be very pragmatic about it because bad code is not nearly as visible as bad art.
Calling his art bad is not presumptuous. Saying his has "extremely poor technique and care for the craft" is.
> in my view that makes him a mediocre game developer, which is a kind of developer that I will not look up to if I want to improve.
You may not want to make games that look like those he makes, but that doesn't mean there isn't something (probably quite a lot) you could learn from him about integrating mechanics and world design.
> In some ways it's the most important aspect of a game.
Visual art may be critical to a game reaching widespread success.
However, as someone who spent a large part of their youth ensconced in MUDs, I disagree whole heartedly that (visual) art is needed to make a good game.
That is a pretty presumptuous thing to say about someone who has made a life making games which are loved by his fans. What's the skin off your back that this guy has different priorities for what he likes in games than you do? Why is it ok for games to lack a good story but not ok for them to lack good art?