I'm an active member on a game development forum, based around a certain product. A lot of the people on the forum seem to like the product logo, but I seem to be part of the minority that thinks it looks very unprofessional.
Now I know this thread isn't quite on-topic for this forum, but I really wanted your opinions on this.
Could you take a look at the logos below, and pick which one you think looks the [B]least professional[/B], and why? This would help a lot.
[img]http://img571.imageshack.us/img571/2966/picktheuglyoneout.png[/img]
[QUOTE=True Valhalla;31777849]OK, that's all I need, thanks.
The logo under discussion was the "G" logo. The company that develops the Game Maker IDE is trying to change the impression of the product from "a kids hobbyist tool" to "a professional development tool". They think this logo does that, and what shocked me was that most of the people on the GM community forum actually liked this logo.
Your quotes helped show that from an external viewpoint (ie. not part of the user base), the logo is terrible and portrays the product very badly.
Yet, I still can't talk sense to half of the people there...I'm surprised many of them call themselves game developers yet have such poor taste in design.[/QUOTE]
Honestly, Source. It's simple yet effective.
Looking for the worst one ;)
Anything with cheap gloss effects like the Unity and Ogre logos instantly looks shitty to me. The big green G also looks shitty to me. It's just too plain and cartoony I suppose. iD Tech and Source are probably the best examples of awesome, conservative logo design.
Oh, and the Unigine one is shitty as well. Looks like a watermark or something.
Ogre looks terrible. Mainly because of the font. It's unprofessional plus the stroke just makes it worse.
The mechanical G is the worst indubitably. Looks like some 3rd party game company from the 90's.
I can't totally hate on the Ogre logo though, it's just a different art style. Who says logos all have to be monotone like Source or iD.
G, Unity, and Ogre are the worst looking. They're either too colorful or glossy. ID and Source are amazing logos honestly and would fit the cover of any video game.
I don't like the Unity one, but I'm digging Ogre.
the G. it uses too many colors but and yet they are still muddy, for lack of a better word. on the other logos, the colors really shine through, but on the G, they feel desaturated.
Thanks for the replies so far. Keep them coming.
The G, because i have no fucking clue what it represents, or if the G stands for anything, and its so simple and unoriginal
And the green colour doesnt fit
That G is the worst one, hands down.
The G is the worst one by far. It looks so sterile and boring, almost evil. I would not want to be affiliated with whatever product that logo represents, that's for sure!
The other ones look pretty professional. The Ogre one could do without the mirror effect, though.
To be honest the "G" logo (GameMaker logo) would look far better if it was a simple 2 color vector.
ogre and G both look horrendous in different ways. Ogre looks like someone new to photoshop looked up "shiny web2.0 logos" and learned from a tutorial and the G looks like a bunch of awful layer styles and stock textures set to low opacity.
The G looks; as the guy above mentioned cheap, especially due to the embossing and plain black background.
Black background doesn't matter as you usually have a number of logos for different purposes
I'd say ogre for the gloss.
Thanks for all the feedback.
The G. Horrible colour scheme, combined with the fact there is no name.
Ogre also looks bad, in a cartoony sort of way.
I don't know why everybody is hating on Unity, I think it looks fine.
Unigine
I don't like that it advertises the website in the logo.
OK, that's all I need, thanks.
The logo under discussion was the "G" logo. The company that develops the Game Maker IDE is trying to change the impression of the product from "a kids hobbyist tool" to "a professional development tool". They think this logo does that, and what shocked me was that most of the people on the GM community forum actually liked this logo.
Your quotes helped show that from an external viewpoint (ie. not part of the user base), the logo is terrible and portrays the product very badly.
Yet, I still can't talk sense to half of the people there...I'm surprised many of them call themselves game developers yet have such poor taste in design.
Personally, I think the Ogre sign is the least appealing logo there. The others show clever designs and visual interest. Perhaps it's because of simple design versus too much visual information.
Ogre or G.
If I have to pick just [I]one[/I], i'd say G.
[editline]17th August 2011[/editline]
It's the 'G' itself though. The Cog looks alright, but the G looks odd. Can't quite put my finger on it. It's too sleek I guess.
On a somewhat unrelated note, I like how the logos kind of represent the feel of each engine. For example, the Unreal logo looks big, detailed, and over the top. Source, on the other hand, is very basic but seems effective overall.
Ogre.
definetly the worst.
Source is the most professional. A simple and visually charged color scheme, a recognizable logo that doesn't use photoshop layer effects, and the name of the engine. Clean, simple, professional. Second in line would be unity, then unigine.
It's when you turn your logo into this multi-dimensional piece of shit covered in gradients that it starts to look unprofessional (ie: G, Ogre, and bits of cryengine).
Source and Unity are definitely up there.
Ogre, G, and Cry Engine.
Ogre and G are just really cartoon-ish, and Cry Engine is too cluttered.
The unity logo is glossy, but it isn't overdone like the OGRE logo. It's a simple logo with just that shine, nothing overdone.
I like the UDK logo too, it's quite simple aswell.
However I felt most comfortable with advertising the Source, Unity or id tech 5 logos in a splash screen more than the others. They're simple, very little visual interest but it's definitely there.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
