• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Technically impressive games with terrible art style

lazygecko

Member
Sudeki:



Sudeki kinda felt like the devs wanted to imitate japanese anime characters, but somehow made them look like "my first deviantart anime copy".

That description sounds about right. I remember reading a magazine preview/interview for this game where they spent a lot of time shitting on CRPGs and talking about how much better JRPGs were.
 
Crysis 2 and 3.

crysis3_2013_02_19_01brs9w.png

crysis3_2013_02_19_01pvs2q.png

crysis3_2013_02_19_05inspd.png

26580700935_f731e4766b_o.jpg

26307417420_e30b336144_o.jpg


Sure thing, pal.
 

RoadHazard

Gold Member
Commander Keen

commander-keen-1-marooned-on-mars_6.gif

Was that actually impressive technically? I guess it kind of was for PC platformers at the time. But yes, I agree that it has always been ugly as sin. The same year as the first Keen game came out we had Super Mario World on the SNES (well, Japan did).
 
Was that actually impressive technically? I guess it kind of was for PC platformers at the time. But yes, I agree that it has always been ugly as sin. The same year as the first Keen game came out we had Super Mario World on the SNES (well, Japan did).

Yeah, it was the first use of adaptive tile refresh.
 

watchdog

Member
Crysis 2. While it's not "terrible", it does leave a lot to be desired. Take this screenshot as an example:

crysis2.04.lg.jpg


The designs of the aliens aren't all that great and the humans look like generic video game military characters that would fit in with a Modern Warfare game. There was a lot of technically awesome stuff going on in Crysis 2 but the art style just wasn't there.
 

mattiewheels

And then the LORD David Bowie saith to his Son, Jonny Depp: 'Go, and spread my image amongst the cosmos. For every living thing is in anguish and only the LIGHT shall give them reprieve.'
I think Chronicles of Riddick wins this.
 
I can maybe see where some people are coming from in regards to the original Crysis, but 2 and 3 can be quite lovely.

Every Platinum games

I agree that the art direction in their games (outside of a few characters and enemies) is generally poor, but they're definitely not technically impressive. : p
 

sobaka770

Banned
Every Crysis game. (Yes, even the first one) Everything looked technically perfect but it definitely lacked variety and soul.

Dragon Age: Inquisition - looked like generic fantasy even more so that Origins. Technically though probably better than Mass effect: Andromeda.
However, Andromeda does seem to have some form of art style at least
 

KKRT00

Member
Every Crysis game. (Yes, even the first one) Everything looked technically perfect but it definitely lacked variety and soul.
You have counter examples even on this page ...

I dont think people really do not know what 'terrible' means, its like only awesome and awful exists in their scales and definitions...
 

Twiforce

Member
You have counter examples even on this page ...

I dont think people really do not know what 'terrible' means, its like only awesome and awful exists in their scales and definitions...

Or maybe what constitutes good art is entirely subjective, and people with different opinions than you aren't infantile strawmen who are incapable of knowing what the word "terrible" means.
 

Zakalwe

Banned
What? The Art in Gears was amazing at the time. And still is today.


Art does not mean colorful.

The art style of gears has always been deadful. It's dude-bro edgy teen appeal at its worst.

The bland colours didn't help.

Good games, terrible art design.
 

pbayne

Member
GTA 4 felt like a huge step up to me in open world game design. But jesus it was bland to look at and something about the whole package just felt sterile.
 

nOoblet16

Member
Crysis 2. While it's not "terrible", it does leave a lot to be desired. Take this screenshot as an example:

crysis2.04.lg.jpg


The designs of the aliens aren't all that great and the humans look like generic video game military characters that would fit in with a Modern Warfare game. There was a lot of technically awesome stuff going on in Crysis 2 but the art style just wasn't there.

But that's not even from the game, that's a pre release material and the game looks different.
 

KKRT00

Member
Or maybe what constitutes good art is entirely subjective, and people with different opinions than you aren't infantile strawmen who are incapable of knowing what the word "terrible" means.

There is difference between terrible and average. You can be generally objective about how the art is constructed, even though its not up your tea personally.
Otherwise this thread doesnt have any purpose, because there will always be completely polarizing opinions on the same stuff.
 
Most AAA western games, honestly. Especially Bethesda games. I loved Fallout 3 but I beat the campaign in 14 hours and never touched it again because I couldn't stand to look at it.
And I'd take Wind Waker's gamecube graphics over Crysis any day.
 
Golden Axe on the PS3
golden_axe-423131.jpg


Technically what its doing was impressive for the time. But the art style just killed it

? The PS3 port was unplayable in the latest levels. The game relies heavily on timing and the sub 30 framerate (when the game is supposed to be running at 60!) completely breaks the experience.
 
GTA 4 felt like a huge step up to me in open world game design. But jesus it was bland to look at and something about the whole package just felt sterile.
Yep. Technically impressive on every level... but it was so brown. So ugly compared to GTA San Andreas and V.
 

petran79

Banned
Combat Mission is one of the ugliest and clunkiest turn based strategy games, but surely deserves the title for the most complex
 
These threads always end up with playstation fans defending their exclusives while criticizing every other game.....

And lol @ ppl mentioning World of Warcraft.
 

sobaka770

Banned
You have counter examples even on this page ...

I dont think people really do not know what 'terrible' means, its like only awesome and awful exists in their scales and definitions...

If you refer to the screenshots posted, then these "counter-examples" just prove my point. I, personally, do think that it's terrible that such technical prowess is wasted on bland forest, generic jungle, generic military and, frankly, uninspired messy aliens.

It's all so forgettable, I finished the first game and could only remember that first half was in jungle and second half was in snow. I can't remember memorable enemy designs, environmental features, some scene with great lighting and view. The levels all mesh together and nothing stood out.

There's a thread on how Horizon uses lighting to create a beautiful picture. Even a simple walk through a forest is screenshot-worthy. Crysis does go for realism but end up visually boring, even when it shows you an ocean island view with impressive draw distance.
 
If you refer to the screenshots posted, then these "counter-examples" just prove my point. I, personally, do think that it's terrible that such technical prowess is wasted on bland forest, generic jungle, generic military and, frankly, uninspired messy aliens.

It's all so forgettable, I finished the first game and could only remember that first half was in jungle and second half was in snow. I can't remember memorable enemy designs, environmental features, some scene with great lighting and view. The levels all mesh together and nothing stood out.

There's a thread on how Horizon uses lighting to create a beautiful picture. Even a simple walk through a forest is screenshot-worthy. Crysis does go for realism but end up visually boring, even when it shows you an ocean island view with impressive draw distance.

Remember when people used to bitch about bloom? And speaking of Crysis, Assault didn't stand out? Core didn't stand out?
 

danmaku

Member
If we're talking about contemporary games from major studios I can't think of any instance of bad art direction. Sometimes bland, sure, but always decent, at least. Even stuff like Mortal Kombat is campy on purpose. You have to go back to the 8 and 16 bit, when it was still possible to make a game and not have a single professional artist in the team (coders did everything), and even then it only happened in B tier games.

In other words: people are just naming games with normal or even good art direction because they simply don't like what's rendered on the screen.
 
Horizon for me. The characters look unintentionally dumb and creepy, plus the mixture of unspoiled nature with the machines doesn't feel right at all. Particularly because the overall look gives off a pretentious atmosphere, which is the last thing a game with robot dinosaurs should have. Though the biggest bane are definitely the horrid characters, which is why I haven't bought it yet.
 
Horizon for me. The characters look unintentionally dumb and creepy, plus the mixture of unspoiled nature with the machines doesn't feel right at all. Particularly because the overall look gives off a pretentious atmosphere, which is the last thing a game with robot dinosaurs should have.

Are you sure it's unspoiled nature?
 

TheMink

Member
Even if I don't enjoy a particular art style I think I got to give points for cohesion on things like Arkham Asylum (which admittedly grew on me). I think when I think of "terrible art styles" I tend to think of games where certain things stick out as breaking the mold in weird ways.

Like realistic textures in cartooney games which was probably more of a technical limitation like bugs life on N64.
 

Anarion07

Member
Horizon for me. The characters look unintentionally dumb and creepy, plus the mixture of unspoiled nature with the machines doesn't feel right at all. Particularly because the overall look gives off a pretentious atmosphere, which is the last thing a game with robot dinosaurs should have. Though the biggest bane are definitely the horrid characters, which is why I haven't bought it yet.

You should play the game. I can't say anything without spoiling stuff. But play it.

My vote goes to Oblivion
edit: Oh and Arkham Knight. I mean it looks great, but something about the art style just turned me off.
 

bosseye

Member
Horizon for me. The characters look unintentionally dumb and creepy, plus the mixture of unspoiled nature with the machines doesn't feel right at all. Particularly because the overall look gives off a pretentious atmosphere, which is the last thing a game with robot dinosaurs should have. Though the biggest bane are definitely the horrid characters, which is why I haven't bought it yet.

What does the bolded even mean? Pretentious atmosphere indeed!

Now, I'm not sure how technically impressive Yooka Laylee is (probably not very), but I really dislike the style of the main characters. They just look a bit ordinary to me, the proportions don't appeal
ce0cf5c062933f721071fa456c4c7b37_original.png
 
Regarding the Arkham games, I love the look and feel of Gotham in those but some of the character designs are fairly poor. Batman himself being the worst example. Arkham Origins is actually the superior game by far in that area. Everyone looks so much better.
 
Are you sure it's unspoiled nature?

What I'm sure of is that white barbarians with rasta hair and creepy clean doll faces weird me out, let alone don't fit into a world with machine monsters.

What does the bolded even mean? Pretentious atmosphere indeed!

That I barely need to look at it to know that it's gonna drown me in some pseudo-serious story, instead of being the silly fun that a game about robot dinosaurs should be.
 

Anarion07

Member
What I'm sure of is that white barbarians with rasta hair and creepy clean doll faces weird me out, let alone don't fit into a world with machine monsters.



That I barely need to look at it to know that it's gonna drown me in some pseudo-serious story, instead of being the silly fun that a game about robot dinosaurs should be.

Ok wow. You clearly have no idea what the game is about.
 
Top Bottom