Many things can be said about the simplified, print-style design prevailing in app icons. On one hand, it has made design a lot more accessible as it doesn’t require intrinsic knowledge of texture and lighting to create a stunning and platform-acceptable icon. On the other hand, it has also opened up the floodgates of mediocre icon design. Where everybody with a copy of photoshop and 10 minutes to spare can create something that could pass as an app icon. Just because something looks simple, doesn’t mean that making it is simple. In fact, as most icon d…
I don’t get it: if it could pass as a platform-acceptable app icon, what does “mediocre icon design” even matter?
What’s the downside of the “mediocrity” you’re referring to? Is it simply pixellated under a microscope, or is it an altogether ugly logo?
In other words, if a startup’s minimally viable app icon is pixellated, who cares!? If it’s an ugly logo that users will associate with the startup’s brand, then that’s a bigger deal.
A minimally viable app icon is just that: minimally viable. If a startup doesn’t have the chops to design a minimally viable icon (i.e. the ugly logo), then the output is not minimally viable: it’s sub-minimally viable, and they should hire a designer.