June 9, 2018: The Fantasy Trip: Wizard Cover!

[Skarg]

Although the art is well done, as a front cover and therefore visual representation of the game to players, I think it's much weaker than the original Wizard covers.

For a front cover for a game, this new Wizard cover art doesn't evoke much of what Wizard is (a deadly magical arena combat game) and it is rather generic and shows almost nothing unique to communicate why this game would be interesting or distinct from any other game about magic (which disappoints me, since Wizard is one of my favorite magic systems, and is quite different). There's no background and the least-generic and most visually-interesting thing is that the caster is a woman, but gender, sex and appearance are not part of the game, and neither are her jewels and potion unless it includes such content from Advanced Wizard.

It would be great to use as secondary (back cover, or interior) art, but it doesn't represent the game well.

The logo also seems overly soft, colorful, rounded and cartoonish, for the flavor of the game. e.g. it doesn't conjure a feeling that goes with Yzor's cracked ribs or his opponent being finished off by a conjured wolf...

[2dope]

Don't like it at all. Steve brought back Liz Danforth to do interiors and this guy is doing the run-of-the-mill cover art in Photoshop? Sacrilege. Liz was excellent on MERP and did not clash at all with the man named Kent Burles: https://mythvoyager.deviantart.com/gallery/

He should do this job.

[JLV]

I think the picture itself is well executed...but, having said that, I have to agree that it doesn't get my blood pumping the way the original Wizard cover did (guy shooting lightning bolt at a dragon). Or even the second cover, which at least told a story.

This cover, while vibrant, just sort of begs a lot of questions instead of telling us a story. I could wish for...something more evocative. This picture would make a GREAT internal picture for the Big TFT Book, though!

[Turhan's Bey Company]

Originally Posted by JLV

I think the picture itself is well executed...but, having said that, I have to agree that it doesn't get my blood pumping

I'll join in on this. I'm a fan of Brandon's art, and this is, as JLV says, well-executed, but it's a single figure with no background. In short, it's very plain. Now, perhaps there's more going on here than we see so far. Perhaps it's part of a triptych with planned Melee and In the Labyrinth covers, but in isolation I don't see it working as a cover.

To sum up: Brandon good, art direction questionable.

(That said, I didn't care for either of the Wizard covers and I found the face-on-sphere one actively off-putting, though I did always like the original Melee cover.)

[Skarg]

Originally Posted by Turhan's Bey Company

(That said, I didn't care for either of the Wizard covers and I found the face-on-sphere one actively off-putting, though I did always like the original Melee cover.)

Yeah, I'm not excited by the first Wizard cover, and though I like the second cover, many people complain "what spell is that?" (I can excuse it as the Death spell, or maybe Summon Myrmidon - we also always wondered where these myrmidons were coming from and what their experience was like - maybe it's the soul of the summoned creature being forced to fight to the death for the wizard? That would explain the facing...). I do like the Advanced Wizard cover (though some players also wondered what spell that was).

But as I wrote before, I think all those covers are better cover choices than the current one because they (have more interesting/intriguing content than one figure, and) evoke the grim tactical combat game that Wizard is, and the new one doesn't do that for me.

[Shostak]

The visual aesthetic of a game is important to me, so I've no choice but to side with the detractors on this one, I'm sorry to say. The composition just isn't interesting.

The original Wizard cover by Clark Bradley had great ingreadients: It had a wizard in a dynamic pose. It had a DRAGON! And it had spooky figures as secondary characters. It had a composition that moved from the wizard's face through the bolt shooting from his finger to the dragon, then down into the robed spell-casters and back up to the wizard--a classic triangular motion. It also had interesting negative spaces, and a visually interesting area that held the title text while supporting the overall space of the drama. It had a simple palette that implied a full range of color. The picture implied a critical moment in an unfolding, unresolved story--a story I want to know more about every time I look at it. If it sold as a poster, I would hang it on my wall.

The new cover has a woman with poorly rendered hair (well, rendered inconsistently from the rest of her face, clothing, and accessories), striking a boring pose, and with a nondescript expression on her face. The composition has no motion whatsoever--the eye is grabbed by the glowing tendrils at the end of her hand and it stays there. Everything except the text is blue and the background is a void without a hint of setting. There is no story here to catch my imagination. I would not only not hang this as a poster, I would replace the Wizard book cover with an illustration of my own, or a copy of Bradley's.

I urgently hope this one gets rejected; it won't help to sell any games.

[Chris Rice]

Perhaps Steve could invite long time TFT devotee and acclaimed fantasy artist David O. Miller to submit an idea for a cover!

[Shostak]

The problem with going with art that has a bit too much realism (with a small letter r) in it is that it makes everything very specific--usually too much so. One of the reasons Tolkein's own illustrations are among the best of his world is that they are stylized. They depict a world that is real in itself--familiar through our experience of our own world--and yet its own unique self-consistent universe. I'm afraid Miller's art is too far into the camp of making look as real as possible. Don't get me wrong; he's got chops. But his images (particularly his color work) shows rather than evokes. The best illustrations always leave room for the viewer's imagination.

[tbeard1999]

With the caveat that I am not an artist, I didn't find it terribly evocative. The art seems pretty bland and the wizard's face seems a little...off. I think we tend to be drawn to faces, so extra attention to the face is probably a good idea.

The blue robes on a blue background tend to wash out.

Also, the words "The Fantasy Trip" and "Wizard" are glommed together in a single blob and aren't easily distinguishable.

I just don't think that this cover will make someone stop and pick the product up.

I realize that my comments are vague; subjective impressions are often like that. But this might help - here are some contemporary examples of RPG cover art that I think are well done:

https://d3idt3y1vhsqn9.cloudfront.ne...MM_Cover_1.jpg

https://cdn3.bigcommerce.com/s-9zhx0...00.659.jpg?c=2

In my opinion, the proposed Wizard art is both technically inferior and less interesting than either of these.

I googled "Wizard Art" which yielded zillions of images. Here are some that I liked and that I find to be more engaging and technically superior to the proposed cover:

Male: https://pre00.deviantart.net/f555/th...es-d9woys6.jpg

Or this: https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/...20140825184506

Both: https://img00.deviantart.net/d887/i/...ir-d7dyidd.jpg

https://pre00.deviantart.net/b2ab/th...an-d9h2r13.jpg

Female: https://i.pinimg.com/736x/5c/8f/da/5...c190442e98.jpg

Or this - https://www.wallpaperup.com/uploads/...b28b87-700.jpg (Though I'd prefer a different spell being shown).

Also, I'd rank the proposed cover as inferior to the second Wizard cover: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_0wbSHljVOZ...00/M%2526W.jpg While I realize that this artwork probably isn't available, it IS an example of very engaging artwork.

I'd say the proposed cover is no worse than the first Wizard cover: http://www.museumofplay.org/online-c...2/Z0053247.jpg EDIT - After thinking about it, I think that the first Wizard cover is superior.

As to how widely my opinion is shared, or if it would affect likely sales, I have no idea.

[Jim Kane]

One other glaring problem with the product layout is: The Product Name and Logo *has been placed at the bottom* of the displayed graphic - as opposed to the top 1/5 - 1/4 of the total image area; where it belongs. Using the layout presented, when stacked standing on a store shelf or in a display rack the logo and name of the product will be completely blocked from view if anything is in front of it in a cascade display... like a competitors product, or other copies of itself.

JK