next »

[Bree]

What are you lot rambling about? Bottom line is that children prefer smooth graphics to boxy (pixellated). That is a fact. Period. There is no denying it, no matter how many monocles you pop. Pixel art is mostly domain of nostalgic gamers and artists.

I don't see why you lot have to keep arguing for this or that, it is like arguing whether kids prefer cabbage or chocolate milk.

Seriously, this thread... 

...Except that it's NOT proven, and that most of us have provided anecdotes about kids who do like pixel art. So please hush.

[Mipe]

Yeah, whatever.

A few anecdotes don't change the fact. Yes, some children do like pixel art. No, they don't prefer it to mainstream graphics. And no, no amount of fame, programming skill or novelty of game idea will sway the tide. Sorry.

[Pietepiet]

i think we've just different standards of high caliber. all of those examples look amateurish to me. they have good points, and the artists have potential, but they are nowhere near as polished as the stuff you see in, say, chrono trigger or ff6.

This made me laugh, because Chrono Trigger and FF6 aren't that good looking games to be honest. The tilesets are pretty nice, but the characters are godawful. Maybe you should take off the rose-tainted glasses, Paul?

Mipey, I like you. This thread is silly as hell :D

[poorwill]

They'll play whatever appeals to them.  I am positive that most would take a flashy 3D Pokemon over a flashy 2D Pokemon, but most would take Pokemon how it is over, say, Super Mario Galaxy.  Most can appreciate things on their own merits - one day they might want to watch Dora the Explorer, another day they might want to watch Monsters Inc., another day they might want to read Where the Wild Things Are.  And they can go from Where the Wild Things Are to Dr. Seuss like *that*.

[Eclipse]

This made me laugh, because Chrono Trigger and FF6 aren't that good looking games to be honest. The tilesets are pretty nice, but the characters are godawful. Maybe you should take off the rose-tainted glasses, Paul?

Mipey, I like you. This thread is silly as hell :D

yeah sure, Akira Toriyama character designs are truly godawful as always...

[aeiowu]

yeah sure, Akira Toriyama character designs are truly godawful as always...

I like it but I think the anatomy could use some work.

[Eclipse]

 

[Pietepiet]

yeah sure, Akira Toriyama character designs are truly godawful as always...

I was actually talking about the sprites, since, you know, we WERE talking about pixel art here and not character design. But if you want to get into this: yes, I think he's not that great of a character designer either.

[Eclipse]

i think both the sprites and the characters are awesome, Frog is one of the best videogames characters ever

Also i don't remember a lot of indie games with pixel art that looks better than Chrono trigger

[Anthony Flack]

In the SNES era people were using pixel art to try to push the boundaries of what was possible on the hardware. More colours! More detail! Higher resolution! They weren't interested in pixel art as an aesthetic or anything; they just wanted "AAA" graphics.

Nowadays people use it because, look, it's possible to push modern hardware so hard it's stupid. And it *is* stupid. We can't play that game any more. Stylisation is necessary to maintain sanity. You do NOT want your three month project ballooning into a five year one just because you've picked an art style that requires thousands and thousands of hours of work to realise adequately. It's basically the scratchware philosophy.

So why all the ragging on indie game graphics recently? Indie games are better looking now than they have ever been, and more importantly they are playing better.

[aeiowu]

In the SNES era people were using pixel art to try to push the boundaries of what was possible on the hardware. More colours! More detail! Higher resolution! They weren't interested in pixel art as an aesthetic or anything; they just wanted "AAA" graphics.

Nowadays people use it because, look, it's possible to push modern hardware so hard it's stupid. And it *is* stupid. We can't play that game any more. Stylisation is necessary to maintain sanity. You do NOT want your three month project ballooning into a five year one just because you've picked an art style that requires thousands and thousands of hours of work to realise adequately. It's basically the scratchware philosophy.

So why all the ragging on indie game graphics recently? Indie games are better looking now than they have ever been, and more importantly they are playing better.

amen

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

So why all the ragging on indie game graphics recently? Indie games are better looking now than they have ever been, and more importantly they are playing better.

i think this is debatable actually. the polish of indie games hasn't really gone up over the years. i mean, just look at the igf winners:

2009: Blueberry Garden
2008: Crayon Physics Deluxe
2007: Aquaria
2006: Darwinia
2005: (Open Category) Gish and (Web/Downloadable) Wik and the Fable of Souls
2004: (Open Category) Savage: The Battle for Newerth and (Web/Downloadable) Oasis
2003: Wild Earth
2002: Bad Milk
2001: Shattered Galaxy
2000: Tread Marks
1999: Fire And Darkness

of those, i'd say the best graphically was aquaria, but there's no obvious trend upward. tread marks and shattered galaxy still look better than most indie games today, and they're from 2001 and 2000.

let's also take the excellence in visual art category:

2009: Machinarium
2008: Fez
2007: Castle Crashers
2006: Darwinia
2005: (Open Category) Alien Hominid and (Web/Downloadable) Wik and the Fable of Souls
2004: (Open Category) Spartan and (Web/Downloadable) Dr. Blob's Organism
2003: Wild Earth
2002: Banja Taiyo
2001: Hardwood Spades
2000: King of Dragon Pass
1999: Crime Cities

again, no obvious trend upward; indie games from 1999-2003 can still compete graphically with indie games from 2009

as for the sprites in ff6 and chrono trigger not being great, i think the sprites in chrono trigger are pretty great (especially all the frames of animation), but i admit i wasn't specifically thinking about the sprites in ff6. i was more thinking of the tile graphics in both cases. besides, i can't exactly pick a game which doesn't have some particular part that someone could criticize, now can i? every game has its weak point

[aeiowu]

like i said with the green beans bit. It's all a matter of taste.

Personally, i think Blueberry Garden is absolutely beautiful (visually).

[Anthony Flack]

no obvious trend upward; indie games from 1999-2003 can still compete graphically with indie games from 2009

Of course they can; the hardware was already mature (for 2d games at least) by 2000. Your own estimations of which games look best, to me, only serve to illustrate how subjective this all is, but I reckon if you take only the very best looking game from each year, they're probably all going to look pretty decent.

I'm saying the general quality has improved. And competition has certainly improved, MASSIVELY. I've been following the indie game scene since the late 90s and part of the reason I got into it back then was because most of what was coming out at that time was such dreck, I figured I couldn't do any worse. People were making a living selling shit you couldn't give away for free now.

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

i don't think the general quality has improved, but rather the number of indie games has gone up drastically -- typically back in the days of the dexterity forums you'd see a new game released once every few weeks, now you see several indie games released per day, even if you don't count freeware (which is easily a dozen a day or more)

[moi]

I agree with Paul that under the pretense of "high art" there has recently been a move toward lazier and uglier graphic design, and blueberry garden is one of the worst recent example. This game is really too ugly for me to even imagine playing it, let alone buying it.
I'm not asking for SNES quality graphics because this is very difficult, and this was the result of decades of skill refining within a huge prosperous industry (that is now lost forever) but if indie game devs can't make anything better than this, then there is no hope.

thanks god there are games like the blackwell convergence for example.

[team_q]

I agree with Paul that under the pretense of "high art" there has recently been a move toward lazier and uglier graphic design, and blueberry garden is one of the worst recent example. This game is really too ugly for me to even imagine playing it, let alone buying it.
I'm not asking for SNES quality graphics because this is very difficult, and this was the result of decades of skill refining within a huge prosperous industry (that is now lost forever) but if indie game devs can't make anything better than this, then there is no hope.

thanks god there are games like the blackwell convergence for example.

I don't think thats what Paul said at all.

[moi]

I think it is.
Anyway that's what I say now.

[team_q]

I have yet to see a dev claim their minimalist graphics a refinement of games as an art form. The only people that hoist the moniker of "high art" are those that are trying to attack games they don't like. It's ok not to like them, but pointless hyperbole isn't going to make a one man team a better artist.

I like the design of Blueberry Garden, it has a nice non offensive atmosphere.

[moi]

Yeah it's nice, it reminds me of 1970s soviet cartoons, which is nice but it doesn't make a very attractive game.