Author Topic: Gaming's Graphical Future  (Read 9284 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline KDR_11k

  • boring person
  • Score: 28
    • View Profile
Re: Gaming's Graphical Future
« Reply #25 on: September 23, 2008, 01:50:39 AM »
Why does art or innovation have to be experimental? Experimental tends to mean "we thought we had a cool idea but couldn't really get it to work so you guys go appreciate the coolness of the idea".

Mario 64 isn't just ugly, the levels suffer from lowpolyness, there are slidey surfaces that look no different from regular ones, the whole thing feels like a mess.

Offline Stogi

  • The Stratos You Should All Try To Be Like
  • Score: 18
    • View Profile
Re: Gaming's Graphical Future
« Reply #26 on: September 23, 2008, 03:46:56 AM »
This

Mario 64


And this:

Quote
the whole thing feels like a mess.

In the same sentence....

is....

is....

FAAAAAAAAIIIIIIIIILLLLLLLLUUUUUUUUUURRRREEEEEEE

and so is this:

Why does art or innovation have to be experimental? Experimental tends to mean "we thought we had a cool idea but couldn't really get it to work so you guys go appreciate the coolness of the idea".
« Last Edit: September 23, 2008, 03:48:56 AM by Boomshakalaka »
black fairy tales are better at sports

Offline Plugabugz

  • *continues waiting*
  • Score: 10
    • View Profile
Re: Gaming's Graphical Future
« Reply #27 on: September 23, 2008, 06:11:34 AM »
Okami + Headache-inducing blur = SUPERFAIL.

If games are increasingly about style, then ensuring they don't wreck my head is a good start.

Offline KDR_11k

  • boring person
  • Score: 28
    • View Profile
Re: Gaming's Graphical Future
« Reply #28 on: September 23, 2008, 09:31:44 AM »
M64's level design constantly felt like the lack of system power forced them to shape the levels as horrible to navigate as they did. Huge slopes, areas where one polygon was slippery while another wasn't, no real path that didn't feel like breaking the physics system in some places, ... Maybe that happens when you play a game like that for the first time after having already had a Gamecube but if it decays like that I wouldn't say it stands the test of time. Sunshine may have been a tedious gmae but at least it felt like the designers could do what they wanted to do. Many NES games also massively suffer from the memory limits and the level design limitations that brought.

Offline Stogi

  • The Stratos You Should All Try To Be Like
  • Score: 18
    • View Profile
Re: Gaming's Graphical Future
« Reply #29 on: September 23, 2008, 02:56:35 PM »
Your whole argument is that technology is restrictive. That doesn't make what comes out of that restriction innately bad; Mario 64 is a great example of that.
black fairy tales are better at sports

Offline Caliban

  • In Space As Always
  • Score: 32
    • View Profile
Re: Gaming's Graphical Future
« Reply #30 on: September 23, 2008, 05:52:15 PM »
Okami + Headache-inducing blur = SUPERFAIL.

Was it that bad for you? I hardly noticed it.

Offline NinGurl69 *huggles

  • HI I'M CRAZY
  • Score: 28
    • View Profile
    • Six Sided Video
Re: Gaming's Graphical Future
« Reply #31 on: September 23, 2008, 06:27:40 PM »
It's real bad.

Worse than Mega Man 9's lazy ugly graphics.

Sophisticated games like Okami: Zeldog are supposed have qualities that bring the medium forward, not awful.
:: Six Sided Video .com ~ Pietriots.com ::
PRO IS SERIOUS. GET SERIOUS.

Offline Caliban

  • In Space As Always
  • Score: 32
    • View Profile
Re: Gaming's Graphical Future
« Reply #32 on: September 23, 2008, 06:52:53 PM »
hahahahaha wow

Offline Halbred

  • Staff Paleontologist, Ruiner of Worlds
  • NWR Staff
  • Score: 17
    • View Profile
    • When Pigs Fly Returns
Re: Gaming's Graphical Future
« Reply #33 on: September 23, 2008, 07:45:06 PM »
Did...uh...NinGurl seriously just say that the graphics of MM9 are lazy and ugly? Does she not realize that the entire point was to recreate the look and feel of the old NES games? Does she have no sense of history or artistic achievement?

Again I say--not every game needs to look like a photograph. Wario Land: Shake It! has very stylized graphics, it looks like a cartoon, that's the whole POINT. Mega Man 9 looks like an NES platformer from 1990. Again, that was the intent, and Capcom succeeded wonderfully.
This would be my PSN Trophy Card, but I guess I can't post HTML in my Signature. I'm the pixel spaceship, and I have nine Gold trophies.

Offline DAaaMan64

  • Winner of the Most Terrible Username Award
  • Score: 10
    • View Profile
Re: Gaming's Graphical Future
« Reply #34 on: September 23, 2008, 08:04:20 PM »
Did...uh...NinGurl seriously just say that the graphics of MM9 are lazy and ugly? Does she not realize that the entire point was to recreate the look and feel of the old NES games? Does she have no sense of history or artistic achievement?

Again I say--not every game needs to look like a photograph. Wario Land: Shake It! has very stylized graphics, it looks like a cartoon, that's the whole POINT. Mega Man 9 looks like an NES platformer from 1990. Again, that was the intent, and Capcom succeeded wonderfully.

NinGurl's aka Pro666's poasts are witty satire. I wouldn't take anything he says seriously unless it's longer than 1 paragraph.
FREEEEEDDDDDOOOOOMMMMMMMMMM!!!!

Marvel Heroes - Marvel Heroes
Frozen Shoe Games

Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil. For I am with me.

Offline Stogi

  • The Stratos You Should All Try To Be Like
  • Score: 18
    • View Profile
Re: Gaming's Graphical Future
« Reply #35 on: September 23, 2008, 08:07:39 PM »
He does have some 1 liners that are impeccable.
black fairy tales are better at sports

Offline Hostile Creation

  • Hydra-Wata
  • Score: 2
    • View Profile
Re: Gaming's Graphical Future
« Reply #36 on: November 12, 2008, 01:02:01 PM »
I have problems with this argument, the division between artistic style and photorealism.  As many of you are probably aware, I'm an avid supporter of interesting and radical artistic styles in games.  Aside from merely liking them, aesthetically, I think they're philosophically integral to the art or style of gaming: games are, in large part, a visual medium and I think varied and dynamic art styles are essential to fully exploring the possibilities of the medium.  I've been outspoken about Wind Waker since its visual design was revealed, and I still feel the same way: it's one of the most visually inventive, fluid, fun, interesting, and overall appealing experiences I've had SEEING a game (that is, the part of playing a game which consists of seeing it).  The game was great but artistic design managed to elevate the game.  This applies to many other games, and I think it's interesting that people are pointing toward retro games: they're a magnificent example of a distinctive art form that developed as a result of limited technology -- and I wouldn't have it any other way.  Those games mean worlds to me, and a large part of that is the visual sense I associate with them.

At the same time, I think those technological efforts which press toward photorealism and expanding the possibilities (in a purely technical sense) of graphics are also admirable.  As dated as some games may look, they were essential stepping stones to where we are now (and where we'll be in the future).  I think some people take these things too seriously, and rely too heavily on mere technical specs, but these games have opened up new possibilities in gaming and the ways games are played and seen.  And the technical achievements in turn help those productions which may not be as technically/financially savvy, but which have an artistic vision which will be broadened by the technical possibilities introduced by more mainstream games.  Of course, I really admire games that push the technical qualities of a system but which also have a great visual design/art direction.
I think a good example of that might be Twilight Princess.  The game adopts a much more realistic style than Wind Waker (akin to OoT), where the color scheme, proportions, and movement roughly reflect those of reality.  At the same time, though, it does have many visual flourishes and shows a clear influence from Wind Waker: caricatured characters, exaggerated movements, some purely unrealistic elements (for instance the walking cannon), and many distinctive details.  These traits have long been a staple of the Zelda series, a certain visual leniency and charm (which could be attributed to the childhood exploration/fantasy element of the game; it has storybook elements).  It's an admirable balance of the two styles, and while I prefer the bolder, more radical style of Wind Waker, both appeal to me very much and their visual styles very much compliment the atmospheres they develop as individual games within the same series.

Art direction in games can be traced along a lengthy timeline of artistic achievement.  For a long time, visual artists (painters, sculptors, filmmakers, etc) have tried various styles and have gone through various movements in accordance to these styles.  They are often split between more realistic depictions and expressionistic depictions.  For instance, the Impressionist painters were very much concerned with the dynamics of light and how it shone on things, reflected off of surfaces, the shadows it made; this is not so different from game designers nowadays, trying to make the lighting effects as realistic and interesting as possible.  On the other hand, you have surrealism, or expressionism, or any number of artistic styles, which present things as exaggerated or altered forms, reality filtered through some level of the artist's perception.  Surrealism is meant to evoke the images from dreams and they are not realistic, but strange, elongated, morphed, or logistically incoherent.  If a game strives for the same effect, why should its visual style be realistic?  Isn't that counter-productive?
I am drawn to stop-motion animation, illustration, puppetry and make-up effects, rather than 3D modeling and CGI.  Even if those things show their artifice sometimes, they are more interesting, more dynamic and unusual, than the "flawless" efforts of computer generated images.  They are visceral and unique.

Miyamoto once said something I agree with wholeheartedly.  He talked about puppetry and how the heart of something lies not in how it looks, but in how it moves -- how it expresses itself.  It is not so important, I think, that a game mirrors reality as closely as possible.  What is important is that a game is expressive of reality, or some version of reality, or of an idea or a mood, and by expressing that it draws us into its world and makes us a part of the game.
HC: Honourary Aussie<BR>Originally posted by: ThePerm<BR>
YOUR IWATA AVATAR LOOKS LIKE A REAL HOSTILE CREATION!!!!!<BR><BR>only someone with leoperd print sheets could produce such an image!!!<BR>

Offline KDR_11k

  • boring person
  • Score: 28
    • View Profile
Re: Gaming's Graphical Future
« Reply #37 on: November 12, 2008, 02:53:03 PM »
Now where did you copypasta that from?

Offline Hostile Creation

  • Hydra-Wata
  • Score: 2
    • View Profile
Re: Gaming's Graphical Future
« Reply #38 on: November 12, 2008, 09:06:31 PM »
From mah brains.
HC: Honourary Aussie<BR>Originally posted by: ThePerm<BR>
YOUR IWATA AVATAR LOOKS LIKE A REAL HOSTILE CREATION!!!!!<BR><BR>only someone with leoperd print sheets could produce such an image!!!<BR>