That not everyone can have a computer to use Daz, I'm sure that we all agree to this. As much as we surely all agree that it's not everyone who can build good enough scenes with Daz or Illusion studios. But there's still many choices left:
- Searching an artist (2D or 3D) to team with ;
- Doing average/poor quality drawing ;
- Using Sims for the CG ;
- Browsing the web to find collections of photoshots made with the same girl ;
- Downloading random pictures for their game.
Fair enough. While I was more referring to solo developers, any of these could be an option. Though, I'd hard-pressed to do the first as, like you said, there's a bit of sketchiness there unless you know the person (in which case, you'd assume they'd be working with said person in the first place.).
Yeah, there are a lot of HTML games with some lazy image use. But I do think there are a fair number out there that, despite their. . .let's just say 'erratic' use of images, are balanced out by above average to very good writing. Stuff like College Daze, Perverted Education, Transfigure, Incubus City (which got away with using different images as there wasn't a sole LI). I think even something like Student X-Change Program gets away with never using the same model because of the way it writes. Again, lot of bad. But there's also a lot of good.
I think it's also fair to argue that a ton of them are people just sticking their toes in the water of adult gaming/developing, seeing if this is something that they want to dive deeper into. It's easier to download pictures, drop in a bit of code, and write a story than it is to learn lighting, spend money on assets Daz/UE/Unity stores, or get someone/a partner involved in what is little more than a test run. Hence too much being expected for a format that is mostly used by beginners.
Look again at the answers, we all said that it's not with HTML games that we have problems, but with the way the majority of them are made.
Again, fair enough. I wasn't specifically talking about anyone in here, but fair enough, nonetheless. A lot of these Twine/HTML projects are slammed or thrown into the same pile as the trash heap of bad HTML projects before it can get its feet off the ground, which was more of what I meant when I said "nor is it exactly fair to measure their effort via medium.". Just because the medium, in reference to downloading images, might be 'low effort' doesn't mean the actual writing itself is low effort. Yet, you see many on the newer projects say something like "Oh, another (insert fetish) realporn game that'll be abandoned in two months" (usually in reference to those who are much too early to have fully played it.). And on one side of the token, it's deserving of that reputation (myself included). But on the other, it's driving away/gatekeeping what could be a potentially good project.
I, overall, mostly agree with you, for sure. But at the same time, grouping them all up and avoiding the minority because the majority aren't good/are low effort isn't exactly a fair judgement (again, not necessarily referring to anyone here. I'm speaking with a wider scope as to the general view of said format.). It's like someone avoiding going to a restaurant that makes great food that they might enjoy because the building is painted with colors they dislike.