320x200 vs. 640x400 and character sprite size

[Unai]

Hello!

After some test runs with ProgZmax's roger sprite and a "borrowed" background picture I want to try and draw some sprites for my own little adventure.

After chatting with a friend I started to feel 320x200 maybe is a bit too small and that 640x400 would allow more detail... I'm not sure if this will backfire, though, because maybe the bigger resolution will make sprite and background drawing a pain (instead of making it easier).

What do you guys think? low-res or high-res?

Also... for those two resolutions... what sprite size do you think is best for a normal height character?

Thanks in advance!

[Anian]

To be good at it, you'll have to practice, even if you know how to draw well. It's just not same as drawing, especially low-res. I think the best thing you can do is to try both on your own and don't go for speed (you'll work faster when you get used to it) but see how it all feels and looks.
And I suggest if you still don't know then, to ask again. And maybe show a pic or two of your artwork in the style you want the graphics to be and that you draw it in.

This is no threat or anything, I'm just suggesting.   Technically, lowres does require less drawing, but you'll soon slow down with problems (or choices to be exact) on how to draw something and how it looks, should a pixel go there or there etc.

[Igor Hardy]

Lowres is quite a bit faster for doing animations - especially after you get some experience with doing them.

Well, unless you do vector graphics sprites for your hires, which is also faster, but personally I prefer the pixel art and hand-drawn look.

[GreenBoy]

That's sort of a vague question I'm afraid.  It's like asking "What's better Vegemite or Marmite?" (That may have been a little non international).  All I can recommend is that you try playing a few games in both resolutions and see what you think is best.

For me personally, when I first started trying to make a game with AGS I started doing the art in 640x400, that proved to be a mistake for me and I realized that I much preferred a lower resolution.  I love the gritiness to it, the amazing ability of good pixel artists to make you see more than is really there.

As for the size of the character I recommend you first think about the game, what you're trying to achieve, how your GUI is going to work, how much each background will contain, all these will influence the look of your game.

P.S. Also I think CJ may be the one who did the Roger sprite.

[Khris]

Also... for those two resolutions... what sprite size do you think is best for a normal height character?

After you have decided which resolution you're going to use (I'd recommend 320x240), draw a simple room with a door in the foreground. Now take 90% of that.

[Unai]

Thank you all for your answers. I know it's a vague question (that's why I asked in the Critics Lounge), but that's exactly what I wanted, to know how each of you feel about the resolutions. Looks like 320 can be a better way to start from what you say... So I'll give that a try.

As for the character size, @Khirs your "system" looks like a prettu good way, of course I'll have to take care of everything @GreenBoy mentions!!

P.S. Also I think CJ may be the one who did the Roger sprite.

I'm using some re-design ProgZmax did for Roger
I'm also using it as a model for my first sprites, to learn the basics.

[Calin Leafshade]

That's sort of a vague question I'm afraid.  It's like asking "What's better Vegemite or Marmite?"

Marmite.

[Chicky]

+1 for marmite.

320x240/200 is great for starting out. I would expect most people start using a pixel brush in MSPaint, this resolution makes it easier to manage.

Bit like starting with lego then moving onto balsa wood and glue.

Some of us never grow tired of Lego.

[Gudforby]

+1 for Lego 

[arj0n]

+1 for lego