Post by: theaveng on March 31, 2003, 05:38:07 AM
Post by: ResidentEvil on March 31, 2003, 06:30:51 AM
Post by: PorpoiseMuffins on March 31, 2003, 09:35:03 AM
Post by: Stimutacs Addict on March 31, 2003, 09:58:32 AM
Post by: mouse_clicker on March 31, 2003, 10:31:30 AM
Post by: Laser60 on March 31, 2003, 01:09:24 PM
Post by: Grey Ninja on March 31, 2003, 01:41:17 PM
Post by: Hostile Creation on March 31, 2003, 05:18:44 PM
Right on Grey Ninja. I haven't even played the game yet (oh, one more day I hope. . . accursed Wal-mart should have sent it to me long ago), but I still love the graphics. My passion, I'm sure, will be doubled when I play the game.
Post by: ResidentEvil on April 01, 2003, 11:36:11 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Hostile Creation
Yes, Resident Evil, and I'm sure the series you're named after is the epitome of good gaming. Gimme a break.
I never said it was, dumb@$$. But it sure as hell does a better job w/ the graphics engine
Post by: Bloodworth on April 01, 2003, 11:46:47 AM
Post by: mouse_clicker on April 01, 2003, 12:17:52 PM
Doubled is by far the wrong term- I prerfer the phrase quadrupled when referring to Wind Waker.
Post by: ThePerm on April 01, 2003, 12:23:03 PM
Post by: mouse_clicker on April 01, 2003, 01:20:54 PM
No it wasn't, man- it just had blocky graphics.
REALLY blocky graphis by today's standards.
Post by: Hostile Creation on April 01, 2003, 02:32:23 PM
You're entitled to your own opinion, but you should expect to be insulted if you disrespect people (especially Nintendo people, loyal fans, as you have noted yourself, and especially especially me).
Post by: mouse_clicker on April 01, 2003, 02:39:56 PM
Actually, the only reason Resident Evil had such good graphics was because only the characters, items, and enemies were done in real-time graphics while everything else, meaning all of the environments, were prerendered, aka FMV (hence 2 discs). Sure it looked great, but EVERYTHING in Wind Waker is done under the Gamecube's own power, and to me that's much more impressive.
Post by: Mike-OPN2000 on April 01, 2003, 03:10:00 PM
Post by: rpglover on April 01, 2003, 03:17:23 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Mike-OPN2000
People who arent videogame programmers dont realize just how difficult the cel-shaded visuals were to pull off. It does look like a cartoon. The animation is great, its runs steady at 30fps, and as always is fun to play. I know there has been some debate about nintendo using same game engine for the sequel on Cube, I personally belive that it would be a shame if they didnt use it. Just like Majora's Mask took the OoT engine and improved on it, the sequel to WW can do the same.
so true- but the zelda cel-shading did a little more
they dont have those thick black outlines on the characters
also i think that zelda also used some of the same animation techniques that is used in the show south park
personally i always liked cel-shading and i think this was a good technique used for zelda
Post by: Hostile Creation on April 01, 2003, 03:31:59 PM
Post by: zumpiez on April 01, 2003, 05:16:42 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: rpglover
also i think that zelda also used some of the same animation techniques that is used in the show south park
They used construction paper cutouts?
Post by: theaveng on April 02, 2003, 06:13:52 AM
Post by: theaveng on April 02, 2003, 06:13:54 AM
Post by: theaveng on April 02, 2003, 06:13:56 AM
QuoteEXACTLY. I've heard people say the the cartoon-look doesn't suit Zelda, but if you look at the designs of older games like Ocarina, Link to the Past, and Legend of Zelda the style was always cartoonish. Nintendo simply made the graphics match the cartoonish style.
Originally posted by: ThePerm
Zelda was always cartoony...hell i remember beign in toys r us playing majora's mask and soem one said it looked cartoony
IMHO, people who want an ultra-realistic look don't want to play Zelda (either this game or past cartoonish games). They should go play Final Fantasy or Baldur's Gate.
Troy (Sidles off)
Post by: mouse_clicker on April 02, 2003, 10:41:15 AM
No, no, no- that was just people who deep down *didn't* like the cel-shading rationalizing Nintendo's choice of the graphical style by saying that's the way it's always been when that's NOT the way it's always been. LoZ was a very early NES game, so I'm sure Nintendo was more focused on getting the graphics to look close to what they were, meaning they had very little room for any kind of "style". A Link to the Past had a pretty cartoony look- not full blown, but the style of the graphics were a big change. The Oracles had a more anime influenced style (that's anime, NOT cartoons), and Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask were both obviously pushing mainly for a realistic style. Granted the N64 couldn't convey that feeling perfectly, but with a few exceptions saying OoT and MM were cartoony is just a disillusion. Just face it- Nintendo changes the style of Zelda often and that's why *I* finally came to grips and accepted the graphical style, because I realized that all good things come to an end and it's important broaden the game's scope to other fields. Even so, there are many moments in Wind Waker that are decidedly realistic, despite the cel-shading (namely the Tower of the Gods).
What I find funny is if people say a realistic Zelda would've been better, immediatly someone jumps out with the argument that they don't want Nintendo to do the same thing over and over again and wear it out. Yet those SAME people turn around and claim Zelda's ALWAYS been cartoony and so people shouldn't be mad that it's cartoony now. If they don't want Nintendo using the same idea over and over again, why, according to them, are they perfectly content with a cartoon style for all *9* Zelda games?
Post by: Bloodworth on April 02, 2003, 10:53:19 AM
....
!!
You know what I just realized? There are no chickens in Wind Waker - what a jip!
Post by: mouse_clicker on April 02, 2003, 11:02:05 AM
They serve the same purpouse as well- wack them enough with your sword and you die.
Post by: rpglover on April 02, 2003, 01:21:04 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: mouse_clicker
No chickens, but pigs, Dan!.
yeah that is true- they after you wack them enough they chase after you- fast and they take one whole heart away when they hit you
so if you want to die fast in ww- kill a pig
although i do like the cuccoos better though
Post by: thepoga on April 02, 2003, 02:01:40 PM
Post by: Koopa Troopa on April 02, 2003, 02:16:41 PM
Quote
EXACTLY. I've heard people say the the cartoon-look doesn't suit Zelda, but if you look at the designs of older games like Ocarina, Link to the Past, and Legend of Zelda the style was always cartoonish. Nintendo simply made the graphics match the cartoonish style.
Yes.
Quote
(that's anime, NOT cartoons)
I didn't realize there was a distinction to be made... I guess "cartoons" are written better... and have more depth.
Post by: mouse_clicker on April 02, 2003, 02:35:01 PM
So who's judging things NOW. Come on, man- this is not the place for bashing of anything. Supporting one plea on non-flaming only to turn around and flame something yourself is very hypocritical. Animated features can be divided into 3 loose groups to me-
cartoons, which are pretty much humorous and meant to make people laugh--Western animation, which isn't humorous and is more of a serious movie that has been animated--and anime, which is Japanese animation- they are largely serious (although include more comedy than American animation) and are in a distinc anime style.
I can understand if you're not a fan of anime- I wasn't and to a degree I'm still not (I really only enjoy things like DB/DBZ and the Gundam series), but don't bash things simply because you don't like them. That makes you just as childish as anyone saying Zelda is kiddy because it looks like a cartoon. You'd also be surprised by some anime series' depth, or movies, like Princess Monoke. Besies, saying they're poorly written is pretty ignorant of you seeing as the reason the dialouge is stiff is because all anime shown in English has to be translated from Japanese, which rarely produces a perfect English copy.
Post by: theaveng on April 02, 2003, 05:34:57 PM
QuoteI apologize mouse_clicker, but I do not understand your argument? Why make this distinction between "anime" and "cartoon"? Isn't "anime" simply a Japanese word which means cartoon? Anime, cartoon, animation... it all means the same thing: A movie made using hand-drawn frames.
Originally posted by: mouse_clicker
"EXACTLY. I've heard people say the the cartoon-look doesn't suit Zelda, but if you look at the designs of older games like Ocarina, Link to the Past, and Legend of Zelda the style was always cartoonish. Nintendo simply made the graphics match the cartoonish style."
...LoZ was a very early NES game, so I'm sure Nintendo was more focused on getting the graphics to look close to what they were, meaning they had very little room for any kind of "style". A Link to the Past had a pretty cartoony look- not full blown, but the style of the graphics were a big change. The Oracles had a more anime influenced style (that's anime, NOT cartoons), and Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask were both obviously pushing mainly for a realistic style.
Also, I have to disagree that Ocarina/Masks was realistic. The games had goofy-looking and goofy-acting characters all over the place. The *style* of the game was cartoonish (or anime-ish) even if the graphics were not. Both games had the cartoon/anime-style of humor.
QuoteWell... I'm not "other people". I have my own thoughts separate and often completely different from them. Please don't put other people's words in my mouth. Thank you.
Originally posted by: mouse_clicker
What I find funny is if people say a realistic Zelda would've been better, immediatly someone jumps out with the argument that they don't want Nintendo to do the same thing over and over again and wear it out. Yet those SAME people turn around and claim Zelda's ALWAYS been cartoony and so people shouldn't be mad that it's cartoony now.
Post by: theaveng on April 02, 2003, 05:34:59 PM
Troy (Sidles off)
Post by: mouse_clicker on April 02, 2003, 05:36:30 PM
And did *I* say otherpeople = theavenge? No. Don't put words in MY mouth. I was one the subject and adressed something that pissed me off- I never said you personally did that.
Post by: theaveng on April 02, 2003, 05:47:10 PM
Now please answer my other questions.
Post by: RahXephon on April 02, 2003, 08:09:56 PM
About WW, it is ANIME STYLE. Dont any of you know Hayashi Miyazaki. He won an oscar this year for spirited away. The graphic style are the same almost. And the new WW look is the best thing i have ever seen in a game. If they go back to "more" realalistic, which basically means pixelated characters that move funny and act like lifeless zombies instead of people, then i will be quite angry. Ninetndo has put a new technology to the greayest use it has ever seen. It is perfect. I cant stand to play OoT because WW is too nice looking.
"my friend says, why is the water only one color, i said becuase you are playing an animation in motion. Then he saw the snot kid on Offset and started laughing hysterically."
Post by: ThePerm on April 02, 2003, 08:27:59 PM
anime vs cartoons
There really is no difference between cartoons and anime. Anime follows more similar styles set by Osamu Tezuka who was actually inspired by disney and betty boop and has devloped in a way that makes for continuous storylines wheras american cartoons always seem to reset with each episode. American cartoons dont follow a similar stlye at all. They pretty mcuh all look different. Most Anime is usually based after a manga(a japanese version of the comic book most commonly in black and white) and very few mangas become cartoons. I really like anime...its a thing that entertains me. I think pretty much they have devloped to be superior to american cartoons because the way their method has allowed hem to get more done. The only series of american cartoons iv seen are disney, loony toons, and the simpsons when i talk about style. Everythign else is just way out there.
Post by: mouse_clicker on April 03, 2003, 02:35:16 AM
As for OoT, I guess it's all a matter of perception. I thought nearly all of the locations were realistic and only some of the characters were cartoony (King Zora, the townspeople, that guy on Lake Hylia). I'm not saying the game was ultra realistic, but in my opinion it's not cartoony, either.
Post by: theaveng on April 03, 2003, 07:46:18 AM
Zelda was always anime-ish. Goofy characters/ oddbal humor/ strange coloring of faces and hairstyles. Zelda was always anime-ish. Nintendo simply made the graphics match the style.
Troy
TRIVIA: I remember when "anime" was called "Japanimation".
Post by: Bloodworth on April 03, 2003, 07:59:04 AM
And also, Miyazaki/Studio Ghibli films are on a completely different level. I know people that won't even refer to it as anime.
Post by: Hostile Creation on April 03, 2003, 02:52:10 PM
While it's a good arguement, and it does make a point, I don't think it really matter if OoT was cartoony or not. WW is cartoony no matter what, and it's still a good game regardless, whether the old ones were similar in style or not.
Post by: rpglover on April 03, 2003, 03:20:57 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Bloodworth
Heh...well Anime was only called Japanimation in America. Actually...I'm fairly sure that in Japan anything animated, including American works, is called anime. So all this silly bickering is kind of pointless then.
And also, Miyazaki/Studio Ghibli films are on a completely different level. I know people that won't even refer to it as anime.
yeah its so true
and miyazaki's works are pure genius its just not right to call them a cartoon or anime
if any of you have not seen princess mononoke- do it now- you will not be dissapointed
they got many high quality actors and actresses to voice the characters
and the story and animation is so good- its god like
its one of my favorite movies in animation form
also- akira was really good but i dont think he made that one
his new one- spirited away- looks damn awesome- i cant wait to see it
animation movies are just a way to express yourself- as they did with zelda
just because its a different style doesnt mean you have to deprive yourself of it
like zelda- the style is different but the gameplay is still unmatched and almost perfect
anime movies may be drawn but they can be just as good as your regular movies with real actors
Post by: Hostile Creation on April 03, 2003, 03:57:23 PM
Post by: theaveng on April 04, 2003, 02:26:47 AM
Post by: theaveng on April 04, 2003, 02:26:49 AM
Post by: theaveng on April 04, 2003, 02:26:50 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: theaveng
Zelda was always anime-ish. Goofy characters/ oddbal humor/ strange coloring of faces and hairstyles. Zelda was always anime-ish. Nintendo simply made the graphics match the style.
Post by: rodtod on April 08, 2003, 03:13:35 PM
The very title of this thread is flame-bait. Don't bash ResidentEvil for thinking WW looks "above average", that's his opinion.
You know what's ironic? The fact that a good deal many of you all hated the look of this game when it was first unveiled, and yet you are now bashing people who behave similarly. I remember that PGC chat during the Spaceworld unveiling. The chat had to be put on hold because so many people were bitching about Nintendo ruining everything, that the graphics looked terrible, and that you'd never forgive Miyamoto for what he'd done.
Well guess what, you bought the game anyway, and it turned out to be possibly the best Zelda ever. Who's complaining now? Maybe people who are able to avoid being hypocritical.
Just my $0.02
Post by: GoldShadow1 on April 12, 2003, 10:23:37 PM
