Originally posted by Chad "The King" ThunderCuck:

artistic steps? son i did grow up in the 90s. ive watched as game evolved from a handful of barely intelligable pixels to todays standard, and what i see in this game is VERY common of low effort games these days. step 1: put no effort into models or textures. step 2: plaster a metric ton of post processing, and let the engine someone else built try to make everything look better than it is with their lighting engine. step 3: call yourself "indie" and watch people flock to your game for literally no reason. thanks for convincing me to get my money back.

I love the gameplay. I have not thought for a second "This game has bad graphics, I wish I refunded it". And it doesn't have to cost a lot to be considered "art". And art is VERY expensive, ESPECIALLY for indie teams who don't have the money to pay for entire art teams with art directors. They still did an amazing job with the art regardless of the money constraints.

Originally posted by Chad "The King" ThunderCuck:

step 3: call yourself "indie" and watch people flock to your game for literally no reason. thanks for convincing me to get my money back.

This is the saddest thing I've read on this forum yet. "literally for no reason"? the reason is that it's a fun game and a fresh new experience, and potential hundreds of hours of fun. i don't understand why you have this weird mindset that you must pick at this game solely due to its art direction. I also think I should stop wasting my time trying to convince you otherwise, because you clearly have some underlying reason for your constant complaints about something so minor that no one else seems to have a problem with