A friend of mine is engaged in game multimedia, so he often comes into contact with people from domestic game companies. Once he met an employee of a certain company and the two chatted. The employee said that he liked Super Smash Bros. Nintendo, and said that copying the form of Super Smash Bros. in China and changing to a two-dimensional skin would definitely succeed. My friend is very surprised, is there only skin in the chaos? The employee said, what do you know, the most important thing in a game is art. All gameplay is sidelined, and the game is only good if the art is good, and no one plays the unsightly game. My friend also said that after he came into contact with many domestic gamers, it was mostly this remark, and he felt that art is more than gameplay. Believe it or not, but if you fill up the unfriendliness in the comment area, don’t blame me for blocking it directly. To add, art and gameplay have always been an either-or relationship. Excellent art can improve the player’s gaming experience, and gameplay will in turn affect art. But the current domestic problem is the excessive pursuit of art. In fact, it is not very understandable. The artist is responsible for attracting people to play a game, and the gameplay determines how long players can play. But in the current two situations in China, gameplay is not very important. The first is the legendary game. This kind of game is to cheat one to earn one. Not to mention the gameplay, the artists are often at a “dead” level. It’s just that strengthening the artist can see obvious benefits (more people are willing to click in), so they are willing to spend money on the art, as for the gameplay? This kind of game enjoys basically the soaring value and the thrill of the second person, which is not a game at all. The second type is the card drawing game. The core of this game is collection. Then naturally you have to let players have the desire to collect. Obviously, excellent card surface or modeling can prompt players to draw cards and go to gold. Of course I know someone is going to talk at this time, fart! Is it obviously the strength of the card? Whoever draws if there is no strength. But this is not a contradiction. Whoever stipulates a high-strength card must have poor art? Is it strong and good? Therefore, there are absolute positive benefits to improve art. At the same time, this kind of game basically does not pay much attention to gameplay. The main reason is that in the final analysis, it is a collection game. In fact, many people play a card draw. In fact, the heart of the gambler is also used here, but this has nothing to do with the gameplay of the art, so it will not be expanded. Up. The second is that gameplay is actually very subjective. It is much more subjective than art. Good art can be recognized by most people, but gameplay is likely to be self-defeating. Compared with art artists with absolute positive returns, they are devoted to gameplay. The R&D is a bit thankless. The last is the difficulty. It is much easier to train a good artist than to train a game producer. Of course, I don’t mean that art is a very simple thing. On the contrary, as a person who doesn’t draw straight lines, I’m right. A powerful painter is full of longing. But compared to the wild exploration of gameplay, the art can still be traced. Capital is chasing profit. Since the investment in art is small and the return is stable, naturally a large amount of money will flow to art. The final result is the game’s drawing, modeling, and music getting better and better, but it’s not fun at all. Nintendo, who has made wild blows, overthrew and reworked most of Metroid 4 that had already been completed, for the reason that it was not fun. I hope that one day a company with this kind of courage will appear in our country. At that time, our wild blow may appear. In the end, you are welcome to point out if there is any error. It is best to bring actual examples, but hope that there is no weirdness between players. please.