Support NeoGAF

[moozoom]

Not that hard to beat imo



All look consderably better than Overwatch or Zelda. I don't get the love for Overwatch's art style honestly, it seems kind of amateurish.

You have the right to not like this stylized artstyle, but saying it's "amateurish" proves you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, and no fucking sense of the work and artistry involved in the creation of video games, especially one as well designed as Overwatch.

As an illustrator, its kills me when people casually shit on well designed art...

It baffles me, but I guess people who can only appreciate ultra realistic games, must probably have a big lack of imagination, and culture - which makes them unable to perceive beauty in something that they cannot interpret as "real"... which is pretty sad. Stylization is a way elevating art beyond what our eyes can see, and for me it's the sign of a great artist to be able to invent a new way of depicting things, to surprise the viewer.

But then again some people don't like surprises, and prefer 4K bump mapped dirt textures to poetry.

 

[Peterthumpa]

I see your point, but that's highly subjective. Also, a little Obduction for you, courtesy of the PC screenshot thread:

 

[OrbitalBeard]

shitpost of the day

 

[StarSketch]

I think it's just harder to make 'realistic' graphics look good because if you do it wrong, it's easier to hit the 'Uncanny Valley', so to speak.

There's not really a 'just barely realistic' with stylized art, because by definition it's not realistic at all.

 

[Hypron]

Stylized and cartoony can age too. Low poly counts, lack of blend shapes on the face models, less than stellar keyframed animation, a lot of cartoony games have aged horribly, including some examples in this thread.

Yep, not to mention all the game that are stuck on consoles and won't benefit from technological advancements in terms of IQ or framerate. Say what you will about Mario Galaxy's artstyle for example (or literally any other Wii game), but unless you play it in an emulator it's aged terribly because of the Wii's technical limitations (and even on an emulator it shows its age).

I find these threads silly. I like good looking games, no matter the artstyle. Acting like cartoony games are objectively superior to realistic games (and that those are the only two categories), or that realism somehow requires less artistic flair is asinine and insulting to the artists making those games.

 

[OrbitalBeard]

Yep, not to mention all the game that are stuck on consoles and won't benefit from technological advancements in terms of IQ. Say what you will about Mario Galaxy's artstyle for example, but unless you play it in an emulator it's aged terribly because of the Wii's technical limitations (and even on an emulator it shows its age).

The Wind Waker transitioned to HD just fine. Super Mario Galaxy isn't going to have any trouble being brought forward.

I find these threads silly. I like good looking games, no matter the artstyle. Acting like cartoony games are objectively superior to realistic games (and that those are the only two categories), or that realism somehow requires less artistic flair is asinine and insulting to the artists making those games.

You're taking one man's personal preference far too personally. What I find silly is that so many people are incapable of dealing with a differing opinion. The op never put down realism and you put words in his mouth by claiming he said cartoony games are objectively superior.

 

[Calm Mind]

Not that hard to beat imo



All look consderably better than Overwatch or Zelda. I don't get the love for Overwatch's art style honestly, it seems kind of amateurish.

There is always one.

 

[Hypron]

The Wind Waker transitioned to HD just fine. Super Mario Galaxy isn't going to have any trouble being brought forward.

Way to miss the point entirely.

You're taking one man's personal preference far too personally. What I find silly is that so many people are incapable of dealing with a differing opinion. The op never put down realism and you put words in his mouth by claiming he said cartoony games are objectively superior.

The op is not the only person who posted in this thread though.

 

[Serenitynow]

Here's the BotW gif you meant to include, stolen from Crossing Eden in one of the other threads.

 

[Icyflamez96]

If only No Mans Sky or FFXV had gone this route, neither would have needed graphical downgrades over time.

No Man's Sky did go that route... Though, pre-release pictures/footage of it looked noticeably more vibrant than it does now. You can still get some cool looking views that are colorful and vibrant on its own right, but I haven't seen much that compares to the vibrancy of some of the pre-release shots.

Pre-release

Something looks more washed out or toned down with the color pallette as it is now.

In later trailers, the game has a bit of a different look to it. A little less of a pastel look and more "realistic". I wonder of the flood has something to do with that.

 

[OrbitalBeard]

Way to miss the point entirely.

Nah, you were just wrong. It's ok.

 

[Hypron]

Nah, you were just wrong. It's ok.

I'm talking about the Wii's technical limitations (as a additional example of a way cartoony games can age) and you say "well when you make the game HD by bringing it to another platform it looks good". It's got nothing to do with what i was talking about. What about all the games that won't be able to benefit from that?

Reading comprehension 101.

 

[Exploding8]

I would say "hard to beat" isn't the phrase we're looking so much as "timeless". Games that go for a realistic look will inevitably be left wanting in the future when we have photorealistic games on display, but a well designed cartoonish art style is timeless. A cartoony game that looks beautiful now will look beautiful 10 years from now.

For example, compare Wind Waker and Battlefield 1942, which were both released in 2002.

I'd imagine most people would still find the Wind Waker visuals very appealing, but Battlefield 1942 begs to be compared to its current gen iterations which absolutely demolish it visually, despite it holding nostalgic appeal for many gamers.

 

[OrbitalBeard]

I'm talking about the Wii's technical limitations and you say "well when you make the game HD by bringing it to another platform it looks good". It's got nothing to do with what i was talking about. What about all the games that won't be able to benefit from that?

Technical limitations or "technical advancements"...which is it? I guess you're just talking about modding a game or something, which is an odd thing to bring up, but ok.

 

[Sanctuary]

The Wind Waker transitioned to HD just fine. Super Mario Galaxy isn't going to have any trouble being brought forward.

 

[OrbitalBeard]

Such a gorgeous game.

 

[Troubled Bat]

Guilty Gear Xrd, Wind Waker HD and Okami HD are the three that come to mind.

 

[batbeg]

Thank you to the posters that were so offended by the thread premise they had to post numerous examples countering it or just starting their dislike. It's nice to know you care.

 

[Crossing Eden]

Yep, not to mention all the game that are stuck on consoles and won't benefit from technological advancements in terms of IQ or framerate. Say what you will about Mario Galaxy's artstyle for example (or literally any other Wii game), but unless you play it in an emulator it's aged terribly because of the Wii's technical limitations (and even on an emulator it shows its age).

I find these threads silly. I like good looking games, no matter the artstyle. Acting like cartoony games are objectively superior to realistic games (and that those are the only two categories), or that realism somehow requires less artistic flair is asinine and insulting to the artists making those games.

Exactly, I like highlighting good looking games, on their own merits. Not categorizing them into two categories while ignoring everything in between as if 3D rendering is way more limited than it is. No one in their right mind would call Dishonored realistic even though it's using modern rendering techniques like PBR and SSS. When the characters are rendered like this:

 

[optimiss]

I can find merit in both cartoon and realistic games but I prefer cartoony.

That said, I don't find Ratchet and Clank to be appealing at all. From a technical standpoint it is a great but the art direction is so boring. It feels very generic. I think cartoony aesthetics break down when the lighting is too realistic.

 

[Hypron]

Technical limitations or "technical advancements"...which is it? I guess you're just talking about modding a game or something, which is an odd thing to bring up, but ok.

I can load up a PC game (well, most of them) from 15 years ago and play it at the full resolution of my screen at a bazillion FPS. In that aspect, it's exactly on par with games released right now. Any Wii game, regardless of art style will look like a blurry mess on the other hand.

To take another example, Mario Kart 8 is also held back by technical issues (the aliasing and anisotrope filtering are very bad), which will only make it age worse. Some games closer to the realistic side of the spectrum are way better on those aspects and won't suffer as much.

In addition to the issues that were mentioned by the poster I was replying to (low poly models, etc.), those are other factors that will prevent a game from looking timeless, regardless of their art style.

 

[Tavernacle12]

Stylized and cartoony can age too. Low poly counts, lack of blend shapes on the face models, less than stellar keyframed animation, a lot of cartoony games have aged horribly, including some examples in this thread.

True. I'd argue games that go for pure realism age worse on average than games that go for a realized stylization (is that word combo that makes sense?). The former is trying to imitate reality and is at the mercy of technological advancement and Uncanny Valley, whereas the latter is created to be viewed as a unique construct (though obviously, as you said, there are technical limitations that could still bring it down). There's a difference between 'let's make this human character look as realistic as we can on this hardware' and 'let's make this human character look like this art style we've decided to utilize.'

 

[PSqueak]

Just think of the posibilities, this is a model ripped straight out 3d World.

 

[Crossing Eden]

True. I'd argue games that go for pure realism age worse on average than games that go for a realized stylization (is that word combo that makes sense?). The former is trying to imitate reality and is at the mercy of technological advancement and Uncanny Valley, whereas the latter is created to be viewed as a unique construct (though obviously, as you said, there are technical limitations that could still bring it down). There's a difference between 'let's make this human character look as realistic as we can on this hardware' and 'let's make this human character look like this art style we've decided to utilize.'

Realism is an art style, there's no lack of artistry when it comes to modeling a character realistically. I wouldn't agree with this as a lot of games that are purported to be the best looking on a technical level are usually those that aim for realism. While I love stylized when it's done well, I feel that it really doesn't work unless it's done incredibly well, compared to realism in the gaming space. And ofc there's context as well.

 

[OrbitalBeard]

I can load up a PC game (well, most of them) from 15 years ago and play it at the full resolution of my screen at a bazillion FPS. In that aspect, it's exactly on par with games released right now. Any Wii game, regardless of art style will look like a blurry mess on the other hand.

To take another example, Mario Kart 8 is also held back by technical issues (the aliasing and anisotrope filtering are very bad), which will only make it age worse. Some games closer to the realistic side of the spectrum are way better on those aspects and won't suffer as much.

In addition to the issues that were mentioned by the poster I was replying to (low poly models, etc.), those are other factors that will prevent a game from looking timeless, regardless of their art style.

Well yeah, I don't think a "cartoony" game is inherently timeless (I'm not sure any game is literally timeless), but I do believe games that aren't aiming for realism have a better chance of aging more gracefully.

Not that I really care, as I personally have no real preference when it comes to how a game looks.

 

[Zia]

I'm never be impressed by BoTW visuals tbh. If you want great cartoon graphics, look at Ratchet&Clank.

Ratchet and Clank

Barf. Looks like DreamWorks character design and is directly opposed to what the OP is getting at.

 

[Icyflamez96]

Barf. Looks like DreamWorks character design and is directly opposed to what the OP is getting at.

Not at all. R&C is a cartoony game with good lightning. That's the only designation the OP gives. Overwatch is another game with a Pixar-y style, and that's one of the examples given in the OP.

 

[JordanN]

Both 3D Cartoons and Realistic look like ass.

If you want real timeless art, you play 2D games instead.

 

[optimiss]

Barf. Looks like DreamWorks character design and is directly opposed to what the OP is getting at.

Haha, I almost cited DreamWorks in my critique of R&C as well.

 

[Sanctuary]

I can load up a PC game (well, most of them) from 15 years ago and play it at the full resolution of my screen at a bazillion FPS. In that aspect, it's exactly on par with games released right now. Any Wii game, regardless of art style will look like a blurry mess on the other hand.

To take another example, Mario Kart 8 is also held back by technical issues (the aliasing and anisotrope filtering are very bad), which will only make it age worse. Some games closer to the realistic side of the spectrum are way better on those aspects and won't suffer as much.

In addition to the issues that were mentioned by the poster I was replying to (low poly models, etc.), those are other factors that will prevent a game from looking timeless, regardless of their art style.

Funny how I just posted a screenshot of a "blurry mess". Imagine that, it's on PC too. But I guess that somehow doesn't count since we're not talking about graphics or aesthetics, and only hardware now.

 

[Akainu]

Yes, I too prefer the artistry of Illumination Entertainment over that of Studio Ghibli.

If botw is being compared to ghibli that's a huge misfire.

 

[Hypron]

Funny how I just posted a screenshot of a "blurry mess". Imagine that, it's on PC too. But I guess that somehow doesn't count since we're not talking about graphics or aesthetics, and only hardware now.

You guys are hurting my head. I just added one bullet point to a list from another poster and you're all acting like it's the only thing that's ever been mentioned.

That, plus you're not even reading my entire posts.

Wii games probably weren't the best examples since they can be emulated right now and could be emulated very soon after release, but games on other consoles that aren't as easily emulated will not benefit from the improvements for a long time.

 

[Sanctuary]

You guys are hurting my head. I just added one bullet point to a list from another poster and you're all acting like it's the only thing that's ever been mentioned.

That, plus you're not even reading my entire posts.

I'm not acting like anything, and directly replying to what I quoted TYVM. Jesus, maybe you should actually reread it yourself.

 

[OrbitalBeard]

If botw is being compared to ghibli that's a huge misfire.

Nah.

 

[Geist-]

Not that hard to beat imo



All look consderably better than Overwatch or Zelda. I don't get the love for Overwatch's art style honestly, it seems kind of amateurish.

I agree, cartoony visuals can look great, but just as often they don't, just like how grounded, "realistic" next gen graphics can look like shit, but can also be stunning.

For example, these 4k screenshots from the Star Citizen gamescom demo is one of the most impressive visuals I've seen from a video game:

However, the exaggerated designs from the OP, and for example the art designs from the Bioshock games are just as impressive in my opinion. Good is good, regardless.

 

[SOR5]

For example, compare Wind Waker and Battlefield 1942, which were both released in 2002.

Please stop comparing photos you took yesterday to cartoony computer games okay?

 

[Hypron]

I'm not acting like anything, and directly replying to what I quoted TYVM. Jesus, maybe you should actually reread it yourself.

Yeah, I think I made my point clear enough and I'm being met with dismissive/passive aggressive comments like "but I guess it somehow doesn't count".

It wasn't even supposed to be a big point to begin with... Like, just another bulletpoint why games can age. Now after having to explain myself three times it sounds like it's my main argument but it's not.

 

[Neoleo2143]

If botw is being compared to ghibli that's a huge misfire.

In a sense, I don't think it's too off the mark. In terms of believability which is pretty much the entire point that Miyazaki wanted to express in all of his works, BoTW does better than most games out there in part because all of its elements behave in a logical manner. Animation wise, Link tends to behave logically in regards to his environment through a combination of the physics and canned animation. Character wise, it is implied that this link is a Veteran, and therefore is familiar with the ways of survival and combat.

 

[katsubento]

Not that hard to beat imo



All look consderably better than Overwatch or Zelda. I don't get the love for Overwatch's art style honestly, it seems kind of amateurish.

Art is opinion. Both are good.

It would be like saying which genre of film is better. Action or Comedy?

 

[Dremorak]

Not that hard to beat imo



All look consderably better than Overwatch or Zelda. I don't get the love for Overwatch's art style honestly, it seems kind of amateurish.

The difference is that these will likely look like garbage in 20 years time, the more stylized games are much more likely to hold up. Just look at "realistic" games from 20 years ago

 

[GiantBreadbug]

Okay all the weird R&C artstyle hate is fuckin funny.

Like, it's just a touched up version of what they had to begin with, which was over the top cartoony on purpose and it was/is totally great.

 

[Venom Fox]

Wind Waker looks like ass just as BF does in those screens.

 

[ncslamm]

I was just thinking about this the other day. I seem to enjoy playing games with the cartoony look to them more than others. It's been this way for me since World of Warcraft came out.

 

[potatohead]

Though, there is something to be said about great graphics and great art.

I mean, I think Bloodborne will look good forever. It's seriously awe-inspiring in how cohesive its visual style is, while still maintaining grandeur, giant bosses, huge buildings, and vast spaces.

Unfortunately, it's the game's performance that will hold it back. The things I would do for a 1080p/60fps (or hell, unlocked 4K on PC). Sigh...

Beautiful.

Better be a NEO version.

 

[Troubled Bat]

Just think of the posibilities, this is a model ripped straight out 3d World.

...I can't stop watching this.

 

[Toxi]

The difference is that these will likely look like garbage in 20 years time, the more stylized games are much more likely to hold up. Just look at "realistic" games from 20 years ago

20 years ago? On consoles everything that wasn't 2D aged like ass.

 

[paragonpro]

Gravity rush 2 might stand the test of time in a few years if the trailera are anything to go by.

 

[Slaythe]

Both 3D Cartoons and Realistic look like ass.

If you want real timeless art, you play 2D games instead.

"Look like ass".

You know how opinions are a thing, and everybody has one ? Well not here. See if you say the sky is green, it's not your opinion, it's you being factually wrong.

This doesn't shy away from 2D.

But 2D games ARE gorgeous, for sure.

I'll throw this game too :

Gravity rush 2 might stand the test of time in a few years if the trailera are anything to go by.

The shadows cast are really bad, so I highly doubt it.

The art will save it for sure and it's gonna be gorgeous, but it's technically weak in a lot of departments. (Compared to Ni no Kuni 2 and Persona 5 that managed to avoid those artifacts. )

 

[BigEmil]

Yes, I too prefer the artistry of Illumination Entertainment over that of Studio Ghibli.

Saying Botw is like Studio Ghibli is a huge exaggeration. Not even close. They tried but doesn't look as good enough yet or much resemblance maybe they'll get it after 5 more Zelda games

 

[jroc74]

"Realistic" games can have excellent art design as well, they are not mutually exclusive

Yup.

Why not both.