This thread is meant to expand on the "Mike Doyle Blog Update etc." thread which started a discussion regarding the non-functional and cheesy design of the new Titan chits.

I [edited for content] about the new box cover art. Cover art is meant to [edited for content] in stores, and generally, I think it does a [edited for content]. However, the [edited for content] is commissioned to do the chit art as well. The original game artist (Dave Trampier) made the chits extremely memorable, acknowledging a level of abstraction while at the same time giving the creature art character. Every chit was unique, so one ogre looked a little different than another ogre. Now, I don't think anyone expects the new artist to invest the same amount of tender love and care as the original game designer, but I think a lot of us [edited for content]. The new chit art is not only [edited for content], but the level of detail is [edited for content]. The smaller the game piece means the level of abstraction [edited for content]. This not only would enhance the visual appeal of the game piece, but the functionality as well.

On top of a generally [edited for content], the chits are round. For the life of me, [edited for content]. A square shape allows for more information to be displayed. Not only simply more information, but more information relative to the art. [edited for content].

The artist rendered the chit art as if [edited for content]. WTF? Shouldn't the information be [edited for content]? Do the words, [edited for content] mean anything? Obviously the artist has talent: his talent, unfortunately, [edited for content]. With that said, none of this is meant to be personal at all, and I apologize if any of it comes across that way; I just want to see the revised edition of Titan be at least as functional as the old one. [edited for content].

Peace out.

I agree 100%. The chits need to be designed with function as their #1 priority.

These pieces spend most of their time face down. We don't see them. When we do peek at them, we need to be able to identify them quickly and accurately.


VG: Please, please, please don't repeat the errors that you made with the Die Macher cards.

There is a disturbing trend lately to ignore functionality and concentrate on the looks alone.

The "art busy" board of El Capitán and the cards of Race for the Galaxy that are hard to read. The new "graphics-heavy" Chinatown tiles i saw in another thread...

Good art enhances the feel of the game, but playability should be the top priority.

The new chits for Titan are not easy to distinguish and so not very functional (so i am glad that i have the old edition).

The new pieces look nice. But here's the kicker: because of them, I would never buy the VG version and stick with my nigh 30 year old copy. I don't want to have to spend my time squinting at the board to see if that's an ogre or a troll coming at me.

I hope they revised the board. It's the ugliest, busiest board I've ever witnessed in a game. It's migraine inducing. I remember seeing it at a convention and thought I was having a seizure. Love the game's theme but hated the old art work.

[duck backs into his cave]

It's stuff like this that make me realize what a genius Redmond Simonsen was. ( Redmond was the innovative graphic artist for the SPI era who passed away in 2005: http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/58246 ) Another artist (like Trampier) who heavily played games, understood usability, and mastered the silhouette on counters art style. He made it look easy.

Just writing this gives me the urge to run off and read through a bunch of my Ares/S&T games and look at his chits. Bye now!

Edit: But then again he did start out with games like Sorcerer. So we need to give everyone some time here.

[edited for content]

Heh. If the sixty-odd responses from various part of their target audience on the other thread didn't inspire some response from Valley, I can't see this doing much. otrex has been made aware of the other thread (by me), so we'll see if we get a response from whoever's in charge.

But yes, sign me up for functionality.

A lot of people are saying that they will stick with their old copy thanks to the graphics. While they still count as lost customers, I think in some ways it isn't much interest to the company to lose people who already have the game, even one as dependent on its cult following as Titan happens to be. That's just the marketing mentality; exactly the mentality that tends to piss of true gamers.

I am someone who has never seen a Titan set in person in his life, nor played it, but I do have an interest. The reprint increased my interest in the obvious sense that now the game would be far more accessible to me for atleast a try at it. I, too, think the chits are terrible. At the size those chits are going to be, in person, with printing resolution and potential ink artifacts, they're going to look like many similar, drab blobs. The creature designs themselves, though technically well crafted, are uninspiring, lack the character that I see in counters from previous sets. The names and stats are a strain on the eyes.

I'm not saying my voice is more powerful because of my overall lack of experience with the game; I just think it would be relevant for there to be signs that their losses will extend beyond the existing fan base. If you want this potential new customer to bite, give me a titan set that looks like Hive, not a bad collection of thematic Pogs.

Uh, that doesn't make sense. Your computer screen _is_ a light _source_ and the colors you see are waves of the spectrum as they are emitted from the monitor. The colors you see on a game board are secondary light created after light from a primary source bounces off the surface--some of which is absorbed into the printed surface. The intensity of color will change with the intensity of light from the primary source. The printed board will never look as vibrant as the board on the monitor unless you play under sunlight.

Put another way: What kind of light does your kitchen table sit under? Incandescent? Florescent? Daylight through a window? Your game board could like very different under each of these sources (due to the way the light interects with the ink and surface texture) and I doubt they will actually be brighter than an image of the orignal map on a computer screen.

Here's Mike's comments on this from his blog:
"Some people complain about darkness but I think such complaints are not well thought out or rational. Is Acquire too dark for those individuals with the black board and black playing pieces? How about Blokus? Or perhaps most space games. Some people talk of this board being to bright, but again, I think not relevent. Is San Marco too bright? Or Yspahan? Or China to play properly? When viewing on the computer we are seeing emitted light rather than reflected, so there is a naturally a light box effect when compared to the same published pieces."

Well. I don't have the original game, but I'm re-considering my preorder. I'm also looking at the BGG marketplace and Ebay considering the original...

-Jorge