Comment by overgard

So I understand what he's saying and it makes sense for him: he's got a style and an audience and there's a lot of risk to try to change up what he's doing.

That being said..

What he's saying works for him. If you don't have an audience yet, and you don't really know what numbers your game is going to pull in, it makes sense to focus on having a more coherent art style. And the thing is, I think you could do the same style games he does with much better art without it costing much more, you just need an art style that isn't, for lack of better way of putting it, pseudo-photographic (I don't want to say "realistic" because it's obviously not going for that, but, there's no specific "style" to what he has other than "smaller versions of real things"). I think if you were to do a much simpler/more cartoony style, with an emphasis on choosing a nice color palette and nice lighting, you could actually make something nice looking without breaking out the bank. (Again not saying that's what he should do, he has something that works, just that I'm doubtful that "make games that look like they're from 1995 shareware" is a viable strategy to follow).