Skip to Content
 

Platform for the creation of Card-Intensive Art

18 replies [Last post]
Thu, 02/02/2023 - 23:15
questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011

I've been thinking a LOT recently about the obstacles in my projects and the things that I have done (in the relatively short span of time) to make some of them move forwards.

One thing that TROUBLES me and (Maybe?) others, is the high costs of making "Card Art/Illustrations". Like I have "Monster Keep" (MK) which is a small-ish game with five (5) different deck setups. For that game, I had done some playtesting and while the concept wasn't completed... The major hurdle for the Project is "Card Templates" and "Card Art/Illustration".

I realize that most Funding Platforms don't work well with Prototypes. Everyone wants to see a finalized product and in some instances the cost of art ranges from several thousands of dollars (like $2,500 USD) to several tens of thousands of dollars (like $20,000 to $25,000 USD) depending on the nature of the project.

I know of GMT's P500 "Pre-Order" platform and obviously Kickstarter and IndieGoGo and other platforms for funding like Patreon or GoFundMe. All these platform (or most) pre-suppose that your PRODUCT is FINISHED not that you need HELP completing it.

And so I have been thinking that perhaps I could DEVELOP a Platform for FUNDING of Art/Templates/Illustration/Boxes/Logos/etc. All of the ART ASSETS for a Game. Right now it's just an EARLY THOUGHT based on the fact that what I need personally to GROW and make more games ... Is FINANCING of ART ASSETS. For example, "Crystal Heroes" (CH) has one (1st) ENTIRE "Chapter Deck" Designed and Developed (perhaps it may need some additional "tweaking" ...) but I don't have the financing to make a second (2nd) "Chapter Deck": The Lady of Life and the High Elves (which is the next chapter in the game).

I have some ideas about HOW this platform could evolve but I still want to keep some of the inner-workings "confidential" because honestly I see this as an opportunity for not just ME, but MANY "Game Designers" to be able to produce ART-INTENSIVE projects.

Typically this is ANY "TCG" (Trading Card Game), "CCG" (Collectible Card Game) and anything in-between which relies of CARDS (and therefore Card Art/Illustrations) which could be a DIFFERENT approach to a project. We all know that Patreon is a GREAT platform for "Podcasts", "Video Channels", and instructional content... But it doesn't WORK for "Game Designers" especially IF your project has a lot of art assets.

Anyhow this is JUST a thought. While others are busy making "Video Games" or small PNP content (with albeit nice art) ... I find myself thinking... Why not see what are the "challenges/hurdles" with the development of such a PLATFORM for Funding Art Assets?!

In terms of SPIRIT, I think GoFundMe and Patreon would be the closer of the models of funding... Because those generally HELP "people" get monies for various reasons. I'm just thinking about this because it's one of my STRUGGLES in making GREAT games for the Community of Gamers.

Obviously platforms like Kickstarter, BackerKit, IndieGoGo which all HELP to offset the "Costs of Manufacturing" a Game are real great once you have a FINAL product. The problem with these platforms is that they are ZERO (0) use to Independent Game Designer (Indies) who have great ideas but insufficient funds to make them a REALITY which is what is REQUIRED by the larger platforms.

So I'm going to THINK about this some more and see what is the REACTION of any of the regulars or anonymous-members who might want to chime-in on this CONCEPT... Personally I could GREATLY "Benefit" from such a Platform and I believe so could OTHERS too.

Feel free to comment and share your thoughts. I host this website and volunteer my time for the Community of Game Designers who are both REGULARS and the Anonymous Visitors which like to stay informed about what is going on over here a BGDF.com. I do so freely out of my interest to HELP the community.

Sincerely.

Top
Fri, 02/03/2023 - 01:40
#1
questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
What I can picture...

Is that the site has a Project in which you would ADD Funding for ASSETS: Card, Template, Box, Logo, Game Pads, Icons, Tokens, etc.

A "Creator" adds as many of these assets he likes to his Project. For each Asset he fixes a Final Production Amount ($$$), a Sketch/Concept Preview Amount ($$) and a general description of the Asset which is required.

In addition to those, for each he fixes the Amount Increment (For example: $5 USD which means that the increment for each stage is $5 USD).

Supporters would see the Price of each Sketch/Concept required (say $75 USD for 3 concepts) and determine based on the description alone if they want to support the creation of a Sketch/Concept Preview (For example: $5 USD increments for a total of $75 USD would mean 16 people would need to contribute in order to UNLOCK the various Sketches). Once the sketches are paid off, the Final Product is the next milestone (For example: $250 USD which means that the increment could be $10 USD and therefore it would 26 Supporters to fund the final illustration).

So what do supporters GET by funding such a Project?

Well first, I would say that people MAY VOTE on which Sketch is preferred but that the final decision over what is Illustrated depends on the Creator. Usually the decisions will concur but in some rare occasions may differ.

Next they exclusively get to Preview the Final Art Asset. This could be VIA e-mail ... In that once an Art Asset is fully funded and gets done, the Creator makes available the Final Art for consumption by Supporters ONLY.

In essence, what you are paying for is to be the FIRST people to get their eyes on said ART before it is released.

Something like that, I picture a WEBSTORE with Funding progress bars for each Item/Asset and each Supporter could have a list of contributor Projects where he/she can look at the Final Art (uploaded) in addition to any projects which are also underway (in-progress).

Anyone think this sounds interesting or cool??? Please let me know!

Top
Fri, 02/03/2023 - 01:44
#2
FrankM
Offline
Joined: 01/27/2017
I like the concept!

I like the concept to fill an unmet market need, and I'm curious which way you'd want to proceed with it.

Two ideas on how this might work... (Quest, go ahead and delete this and reach out via email if this touches on the "confidential" stuff you mentioned.

First model: a two-sided platform, artists and designers. Artists can contribute concept sketches right on up to full-blown art, but the license is escrowed until the designer buys it (which might be through a back-end percentage or whatever other terms seem agreeable to everyone). Only watermarked versions are available to the designer for prototyping.

Second model: a three-sided platform, artists and designers and backers. Backers make pledges for specific projects, artists bid on projects (putting some sketches or samples in their bid), and a contract springs into being if a designer picks an artist's bid AND has the pledged funds to pay that bid. Again, any early samples would remain watermarked to keep designers honest. The problem I see with this model is what do backers get? Guaranteed access to the resulting game? It might never get made. Early access to the unwatermarked artwork as they're made? That requires keeping the artist and designer transacting through the platform throughout the project.

Top
Fri, 02/03/2023 - 01:48
#3
FrankM
Offline
Joined: 01/27/2017
I think it's interesting

questccg wrote:
Anyone think this sounds interesting or cool??? Please let me know!

I think it's interesting... we were typing at the same time :)

Top
Fri, 02/03/2023 - 02:00
#4
questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
I'm not at all secretive about this concept

And I appreciate your interest. It is true that there is a HOLE in the MARKET. At least from my own perspective.

I would propose a Third Model which means that the "Game Designer" is in the Driver's Seat. Why? Because let's be HONEST, MOST (not all) Game Designers have STRONG IDEAS about the ART and Assets THEY need. But having gone through the experience in dealing with several artists... Sometimes the Illustration or Asset ALREADY has a general IDEA (given that the Game Designer is interested in something along a "description" of said Art/Asset).

So I think the process of Providing a "Description" of the ART/Asset is a START, explaining the OPTIONS of the Sketches/Concept Art will allow Supporter to be able to VOTE for their favorite.

But ARTISTS and DESIGNERS sometimes lack the creativity for "Background" or "Scenes" when we talk about CARD ART. Some may be more apparent than others.

I've worked on 3 projects with 3 different artists and for 2, they required assistance or input into what was going to be drawn. Ergo the "3" Sketches and/or Concept Art.

I'm trying to keep it a bit SIMPLER: you have Project Creators and Project Supporters. Everything you contribute the Minimum to, gives you access to that STAGE of the Asset/ART.

Anyhow I see this as a concrete WAY of funding Projects... We all know that most Kickstarters FAIL and so EVEN if you have ALL the ART. What you do with it is your decision: be it pitch the game to a Publisher (at no cost to them since the ART/Illustrations have been all paid for) or try to Kickstart the Game now that is more REAL than just a B&W Prototype or even Self-Publish it IF you have some monies put away to make it happen.

Bottom line, I don't want to set-up some Marketplace. Both your models pre-suppose that there is some kind of BIDDING and I wanted more to have a SIMPLER version where there are only 2 Players: Creators (Designers - which don't need to be only Game Designers, could be people design Coffee Cups) and Supporters (this is your equivalent of a Backer).

If you want to discuss further, please feel free to respond. Cheers!

Top
Fri, 02/03/2023 - 02:13
#5
questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Fundamentally it would be SELLER and BUYER.

But in this particular situation you would have a "Creator" and a "Supporter".

Which corresponds to something like Kickstarter's "Creators" and "Backers". However there is a fundamental difference between what I have proposed and what is already out-there in the online Internet.

You are effectively as a Supporter, BUYING INTO Assets/ART for a given project.

Like I said, it could be Coffee Mugs. You've got 5 Mugs you want to produce, given 3 Version for each that's 15 Sketches/Concept Art. If it costs $45 USD to produce "3" Sketches, you would need "10" Supporters to contribute $50 USD... The site takes "$5" (the minimum increment).

Once this $50 USD is reached, 3 Sketches will be uploaded by the "Designer" (watermarked or not...) of 3 different Mugs. People are allowed to VOTE and COMMENT about the 3 Designs (see it's not only about GAMES...)

Next given the comments, voting and personal preference, the "Designer" can now open the Final Production of the Mug (fully rendered in color and all)... This say is $150 USD... So in this case you would require "15" Supporters and the increment is "$10" (which means that this is how much the website takes) and so you would need "16" Supporters to Fund the Final Art/Asset (design-wise).

So that mug that was a Designer product cost $210 USD to make and took a total of 26 Supporters to get the Final Concept.

Again more clarifications in HOW I see this kind of website working... Cheers!

Top
Fri, 02/03/2023 - 02:27
#6
FrankM
Offline
Joined: 01/27/2017
That's simpler than I thought

Not as complicated as I thought. My mind went to a platform model because the ones that take off tend to benefit from a lot of "free labor" by both sides of the market. Apple doesn't make the apps in the app store: developers do that for their own reasons and Apple benefits. Apple also does not do the star ratings or write the reviews: users do that for their own reasons and Apple benefits.

Anything that needs to attract two distinct populations of customers is going to have platform-y characteristics, though it's a market design decision about how far to lean into that.

Top
Fri, 02/03/2023 - 02:30
#7
questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
And we all know this...

It takes over 6 MONTHS to produce a "product" in China (let's say 1,000 of the item). This means that people who paid (and Supported ergo "Supporters") will get the low-down on the NATURE of the product's DESIGN ... MONTHS before it will be available to Purchase on Amazon.com or a Kickstarter (if you need monies to finance the manufacturing).

So getting the SCOOP on the Product BEFORE it is SOLD is IMHO worth it.

Maybe you didn't get in on a Sketch ... And only contributed $10 towards the Final Concept... You still will earn the right to VIEW this product MONTHs before everyone else.

Being able to VOTE and COMMENT is great for the Sketch/Concept Art and getting an early PREVIEW of the Product MONTHS before it is available is another reason to want to "Support" a project.

So there is a DEFINITE "incentive" ... The CONTRIBUTIONS can be as low as $5 USD and can be under the $20 USD mark to get a look at ONE of the LATEST Coffee Mugs put out by BGDF.com! Haha.

Top
Fri, 02/03/2023 - 02:39
#8
questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
I agree

FrankM wrote:
...Anything that needs to attract two distinct populations of customers is going to have platform-y characteristics, though it's a market design decision about how far to lean into that.

I think finding "Designers" will be VERY EASY. People will FLOCK to the PLATFORM... The challenge is how many "Supporters" will be gotten... That's something ELSE. And ATM more of the caveat.

I'm sure there will be a LOT of "Creators".

That's a bit the problem... Is supply and demand. How many people will support the projects. That's what I discussed tonight with my Ex-Boss. He said he needed to think about it some more. But the reality is that LARGE projects will be AT LEAST made AVAILABLE to Contribute.

Whatever I do in my Basement Apartment doesn't really count UNTIL I put the "product" OUT-THERE in the Market. And so this kind of PLATFORM could ALLOW more people to SHARE their ideas and demonstrate what is required for any given project/product.

If I need $20k to produce Art for a CCG... At least I can EXPLAIN "What" I need and then people can see if this is something worthwhile to support. Knowing what will come to market MONTHS before may NOT be a sufficient catalyst for becoming a "Supporter"...

But when we talk about $5 USD... We're not talking about HUGE monies even thought larger scale projects may have like 1,000 "Supporters". Or maybe even HIGHER given the sheer MAGNITUDE and ATTRACTIVENESS of a project.

Having a SAY or INPUT on the Design is also a less tangible benefit. But again for only $5 USD ... Whatever you say may have a deep impact on the Design of one of this crowdsourced projects/products.

Top
Fri, 02/03/2023 - 02:43
#9
FrankM
Offline
Joined: 01/27/2017
Hoping this works

I do have a card-based battling game I'd like to move past the "emojis as artwork" phase.

Probably a game journal entry incoming in the next few days.

10 Heroes, 10 Villains, 10 "Grays", 15 Conditions, and 9 Interruptions... so 54 card images. 3 to 5 card templates, some icons, box art, and a rulebook illustration or two round out the art needs.

Prior to your idea, my plan was to DALL-E this stuff and have my son practice doing comic-book-style art using the AI stuff as a reference :)

Top
Fri, 02/03/2023 - 02:50
#10
questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Furthermore...

You don't have to PAY for ALL the stages or even all the ART/Assets. You can contribute to those you like MORE. And given a wider base of "Supporters", that too can yield more support in a here-and-there fashion... Whenever you feel like dropping $20 bucks...

I know there needs to be MORE incentive.

And I figure some kind of AUTOMATED "Support" Directory could be what is needed. Meaning that your NAME or ALIAS is automatically available in the form of a CSV file such that you can include supporters in a RULEBOOK or at the Back of the Instructions Booklet, etc.

That's another cool thing: listing "Supporters" physically.

And then you can copy & paste them in Word (to generate a PDF) or In-Design (again for a PDF).

IDK ... Maybe someone else could think up BETTER "Support" incentives for giving $5 bucks here-and-there.

Top
Fri, 02/03/2023 - 10:21
#11
larienna
larienna's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2008
Quote:One thing that TROUBLES

Quote:
One thing that TROUBLES me and (Maybe?) others, is the high costs of making "Card Art/Illustrations"

There are now many AI that can generate almost all the art we need. Maybe not card template (for now), but that is normally the least problematic portion to create. So the problem is solved.

Top
Fri, 02/03/2023 - 14:08
#12
FrankM
Offline
Joined: 01/27/2017
Copyright issues

larienna wrote:
Quote:
One thing that TROUBLES me and (Maybe?) others, is the high costs of making "Card Art/Illustrations"

There are now many AI that can generate almost all the art we need. Maybe not card template (for now), but that is normally the least problematic portion to create. So the problem is solved.

AI-generated images cannot be copyrighted, and there’s a strong argument that these generators violate the copyright of the artworks they web-scrape as training material. The people who run the generators say that scraping is “fair use” but the courts have been divided on that argument in the past.

Should the generators be found to be in violation, they have to be re-trained with only public domain images, which would severely restrict their ability to mimic contemporary objects or styles.

Top
Fri, 02/03/2023 - 12:24
#13
questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
I don't agree...

larienna wrote:
There are now many AI that can generate almost all the art we need. Maybe not card template (for now), but that is normally the least problematic portion to create. So the problem is solved.

I guess you have never collaborated with artists and other contributors to a project. I firmly know what Games I would like what Artist to work on based on their portfolio and catalog of illustrations. I think this world is becoming more and more obsessed with AUTOMATION and AI that it doesn't even compete with what people are capable of drawing and illustrating.

For example my G.I. Joe card game "Hand of Fate".

That's like 200+ cards that need to be drawn. Although the drawing format is a 3 Step Process: Draw, Ink and Colorize. And it would be with respect to the genres found in Comic Books of Today and Yesterday (think 90s). That's still a lot of ART! Minimum $20k and could be closer to $25k to $30k...

But it's an amazing project that would be very exciting to COLLABORATE on.

That's right, I do Art Direction as well. Some cards I can leave the Artist to figure out what the concept should look like. Others I see some sketches and they are not to my liking so I suggest another avenue... I like to be more HANDS-ON with what is being illustrated.

I'm not controlling, other than to offer a VISION of what is being drawn and offer ideas for "backgrounds" for example Or poses/themes to an illustration.

So for me being part of the process is a requirement.

The deep pockets for such a project are well... More than OBVIOUS!

Top
Fri, 02/03/2023 - 16:14
#14
larienna
larienna's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2008
It's all a matter of choices

It's all a matter of choices and priority. For a GI-Joe themed game, I am sure AI could do a good job at it. Now you have to ask yourself:

If collaboration is that important, and I want 200+ cartwork, then I need to have a lot of money.

If I don't intend to have a lot of money, then either I need to forget collaboration, or find a way to reduce the number of arts.

It's a bit like computer memory, there is 3 criterias: Speed, Space and Low Cost. You can only get 2 or those 3 criterias.

For me collaboration is not important, I rather work alone, so the choice is obvious. I also don't have money, so AI it is.

Top
Sat, 02/11/2023 - 22:30
#15
FrankM
Offline
Joined: 01/27/2017
Maybe not as obvious as I thought

I didn't mention this easier, but a designer can use a PnP version of the game as one of the incentives for backers.

It can also highlight just how badly the game needs the requested art assets :)

Top
Sun, 02/12/2023 - 17:37
#16
pelle
pelle's picture
Offline
Joined: 08/11/2008
AI is the answer. In a time

AI is the answer. In a time shorter than what it would take to get a site like this off the ground the AI will be good enough for almost any games (and the remaining games I guess we have to leave for Hasbro and other huge companies). It will certainly be good enough for prototypes if it is not already. Also by around that time I expect the few attempts to shut down the AI art generators by legal means to have been swept aside. I would definitely not start up anything like this without either first waiting to see just how much of game art is taken over by AI (I expect "almost all of it" will be the answer... but that almost all games will still need paid artists and graphics designers to make anything that does not look like cheap copy-paste-clip-art-collages...). If you end up still wanting to do a site like this at least take the AI-generators into account and expect that to be the way forward for almost all prototypes.

The small but vocal group trying to argue that AI is somehow infringing on anyone's copyright are basically just displaying how little they understand of the technology and how the art-generator models are built. They will not achieve anything since they do not even understand the thing they are trying to stop. They just know they don't like the AI art and are desperately trying to think of SOMETHING that can help them stop it, but unfortunately for them the best thing they can think of is not relevant and also not related to anything about how the AI art works in reality.

Top
Tue, 03/21/2023 - 18:55
#17
FrankM
Offline
Joined: 01/27/2017
Somebody takes IP seriously

Looks like Adobe is training their image generator on “safe for commercial use” images only.

https://firefly.adobe.com/faq

Showing that this is possible will probably hasten the day that “scrape every image we can find” will be found to violate copyright.

Top
Wed, 04/19/2023 - 06:10
#18
pelle
pelle's picture
Offline
Joined: 08/11/2008
FrankM wrote:Looks like Adobe

FrankM wrote:
Looks like Adobe is training their image generator on “safe for commercial use” images only.

https://firefly.adobe.com/faq

Showing that this is possible will probably hasten the day that “scrape every image we can find” will be found to violate copyright.

Adobe and Microsoft and Facebook and a few others would LOVE that, because they have access to billions of images they can use, thanks to their various EULAs and users of their services. They can afford to buy any collection they want to, so they have limitless access to training-data for their AI without having to scrape the web.

It would make it much, much harder for free alternatives or smaller competitors.

Artists would still face competition from AI-generated artwor, so no benefit to them, but it would ensure that only the biggest corporations with most resources could legally train AI models.

That would be the worst possible outcome in my opinion, other than a complete ban on AI-generated art. It would take ages for community projects (open source tools etc) to scrape together legal artwork for good enough training unless it was still OK to scrape the web to do so. Adobe could put AI-generators in Photoshop and get an even worse almost-monopoly on graphics software than they had traditionally.

Top
Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut