21 is the one that jumps out at me.
It should be expected that a logo can go through a lot of hell in its life. Too small, monochrome, overcompressed, etc can all lead to loss of quality and are often present during the logo's display.Originally Posted by Omega
At first, I thought you were joking with all your logo submissions, your logo design thread, and the constant self promotion, but now I see that you are very serious. I have a feeling that I'm not speaking for only myself when I say: Please, stop.
- Your font is too thin.
- Your design is too vague.
- Your design has nothing to do with crayons or games, other than the present text.
- Nobody is going to get that it's a crayon facing the viewer, and frankly, I suspect you're lying since the logo is not much more than an upgrade from what you submitted to Mike's contest.
- Games is twice as large as either of the other words, which is contrary to what Phil wanted in the first place. (Games should have been secondary, if at all.)
21 is the one that jumps out at me.
2,3,4,6,7,8,9,10,15,16,17,19, etc... An amazing amount of logos with nothing to do with the company name, and the immediate visual hook it provides. If the authors had been charged with designing the Apple Computer logo, they probably would have used the Nike "swoosh", combined with some "edgy" font.
My vote goes to 13, 21, 29 and 34.
And the Sega Dreamcast-esque spiral needs to die. Now.
What a load of bullsh... Omega... if you are the professional you claim to be [ so far all I have seen is a lot of hot air ] you would know that good logos have to work in all different sizes and coloursettings [ from monochrome small letter head on a fax to full screen promo splash screen with vibrant rpg colours ]. Just spare us your excuses on why you might not win this competion.Originally Posted by Omega
Just going out on a limb here, but I daresay Omega is just messing with your heads... Seriously, doesn't his logo entry remind you of any other logos out there?
LOL. I took the popcap logo and made it into a retro64 logo. Then, since Phil liked that parody of a logo for retro64, I submitted it to him in his own contest. This time he didn't like it for his own use. It's basically the same exact logo I submitted to retro64 that he did like.. for Mike B.
Actually, logos are different depending on whether they are made for a 32x32 icon, a button, a banner ad, or a full-screen image, or for embroidering. You would have different versions. A good logo that looks good full-screen would need to be adjusted in its button-size version. Plus, you would want several different logos for different markets for the same product. I already said what my serious picks were. Since Phil is dreaming of the edutainment market, I think #69 is the best one with that in mind.
Once again, why would I not submit the exact same logo Phil liked for Mike B. that I made, for Phil's own contest? Of course I would.
The logo is what it is because that's the same one Phil liked in the retro64 contest, so I thought maybe he would like it if I made a top-down view. Only took me 5 minutes. That's why it's the #1 logo. I was just trying to be nice. It's SUPPOSED to be the same logo that I entered in the retro64 contest, that phil liked. And that logo it's based on is a parody of popcap anyway. If I was a pro I would have entered something else. But what I did do is post my logo early on in the thread and posted many times, bumping Phil's contest up to the top so that it would receive a lot of entries.
Last edited by Omega; 08-18-2005 at 02:37 PM.
I like #12, it immediately grab my attention.
Yep, a vote for 12 from me as well, since it really does jump out (to me, anyway). 21 and 41 are also good.
I like them all.
Good job guys
13 & 81
The only ones I think translate well to ingame, and inprint.
My vote goes on #61...Simple, elegant and you could use the logo without any text too....
Digriz - www.psychotoad.com
Crayola. A lot of the crayons in these entries look like Crayola crayons (stripes at each end, oval in the middle). Regardless of the legal implications (if any), I don't think I'd want to reference someone else's well-known brand in my company logo.Originally Posted by Phil Steinmeyer
I agree with Rob about 29 -- it gives a good impression. However, it looks like the actual crayon was added as an afterthought. I think a crayon needs to be central to your logo.
Kudos to 42 for incorporating both "crayon" and "new", but I'm not too crazy about the overall look of that entry. I wish someone had entered a sunrise icon, with a crayon tip in place of the sun.
My pick is 81. The crayon looks great. The logo is simple and professional.
Weird sidenote on 81: I actually like how the jpeg compression noise breaks up the solid pink of the crayon -- it kinda looks like the pink was painted with watercolors or maybe printed with some crude 50's technology.
a prisoner of the cause
I like the logo number 15. The top one is good for site and color print while the bottom one is good for two-tone print. I also like the simplicity and it is very eye-catching with its simple shapes. I could not find any other that is that eye-catching as this (Except number 16 which is quite funny! )
I'm very picky myself
It seem that many people think that a logo MUST say what the company does, but, this is not an obligation i belive, just think on the people that will buy your games, wouldnt they know that you make games allready?, so, i belive that a logo is for personallity and identity purposes. Think about some succesfull computer logos, like "Apple", what has an apple to do with computers????, or LucasArts, what has a golden doll holding a stripe to do with games?????, or the EA logo to do with games, or the Raven software to do with games, or the rockstar logo to do with games, so, the important thing about logos is to communicate a unique personallity, to communicate the values of the company.
Thanks for all the feedback so far. It helped me trim out a few that had been among my own favorites, made me take a closer look at a couple that hadn't been on my original list, and suggested tweaks to further improve a couple that I liked.
Now I've cut the field to the 6 finalists.
Some tweaks to a few of these - a color change on one, an alternate version (minor change) that the artist had provided on another, and for #19, I took the font from #29, which I liked better (if I go with this composite #19, I'll reward both artists).
Last edited by Phil Steinmeyer; 08-19-2005 at 07:21 AM.
Number 29 looks the best out of those... but then, it depends on what you're after. It might look the best to me, but it's nowhere near as dynamic as some of the originals.
#13 all the way! The only other one I would consider from the final 6 is #29, though it bothers me how far apart the crayon and the words are, and it's not nearly as fun as #13.
I vote a strong NO to #19, #29, and #81. The others are excellent and fun, but those are bland, not fun, and barely anything more than fonts.
EDIT: A nice feature of #74 is that the circle could easily be animated for a really nice "feel".
Have you made a competition research?, i did, i think that 81 is the most original one, most others look nice, but they are more for other stuff, not for a logo.
81 gives you the image you are looking for, it has visual impact, its simple, its original, its easy to reproduce anywere, follow my advice! im a graphic design student!
Out of those 6 I like #29 best too.
Number 71, IMHO. Look nice.Originally Posted by Phil Steinmeyer
#29 is the one to go with!
13 or 29. If I had a gun to my head, I'd go with 29.
Unless the person holdoing the gun wanted me to choose 13
Definitely #29. ( @ sonicron) Although I would tweak the colors just a bit. Or you could use them all and your motto could be "The company with 81 logos with mixed degrees of crapiness or a lack thereof."
I agree, it should have used the vibrant colour scheme used in the Solari logo *chuckle*Originally Posted by soniCron
twenty nine for me too, because I like it..
Of the new selection, only 29 and 13 are any good. It's important to realise that it must serve a purpose and that is why 29 is better than 13.
Lets look at what a logo does: it says "This is who I am and this is what I look like and this is what I can do for you."
A logo isn't: "I am very pretty, very good to look at. I am funky but I don't give you anything else."
And ultimately a logo must work on: a splash screen, a website and also inspire confidence with publishers and customers. It must not be an introvert nor be so extroverted to alienate people. It must provide security and be positive and also say "This is who I am".
Why I like 29: It's smart, very smart. It's going to work with the mac (aqua) people and the pc people. It's open, friendly and fun, yet it promises that it can deliver. I like it, it feels expensive but it doesn't feel like it'll mess me about. Friendly but purposeful colour. It manages to side step "red and green should never be seen" by using pastel colours. Crayons also are pastel. You can get away with illegal colours doing that.
Why I like 13: It's great and it's daring! Can't fault the colours, I would be wanting to experiment a bit more with this. Ultimately it doesn't work because it looks like a cross between a logo for a flash cartoon and a something you would find on a kids toy. It isn't really a product logo because it doesn't offer security. The reason it doesn't offer security is because of the chaotic design. It's too all over the place. Great fun though.
Why I think the others aren't suitable:
71: It's just like jewel quest in crayons. It's nice to look at but it does not tell me it is part of a good company I can trust. It is just cool and nice to look at. It is a great design but ultimately it looks too shabby. I know it's supposed to look like crayons... but at the end of the day crayons are a metaphor used to indicate creation and creativity. Crayons actually look fairly rough so why do we want a rough looking logo? That is why I don't think it works.
81: Nice, it gets the crayon right, but the colours are not emotional. The colours will turn you off. You will not buy from these people if you use that shade of Blue, it's a colour which has it's guard up. It is also too rigid, formal. I feel the artist is formal or technical.
74: Good to look at, nice design, not inspiring enough. Tries but doesn't get the colours right. Again, Orange and Blue: it's a nice colour combination but it just isn't a friendly combination. Also too loose.
19: Close but no cigar: it tells me that it's a playroom or acting school. Or performing arts. Blue is a bit deep. Use light blue or pastel Dark Blue. Lovely idea with the hands though. I can see where the artist is coming from... Nothing to do with crayons apart from perhaps playschool hands on.
Thats why I like 29. But don't take my comments seriously: and ignore what we've all said: ultimately, from that list, pick the one YOU like the most