• Log In | Sign Up

  • News
  • Reviews
  • Top Games
  • Search
  • New Releases
  • Daily Deals
  • Forums

Adventure Gamers - Forums

Welcome to Adventure Gamers. Please Sign In or Join Now to post.

You are here: HomeForum Home → Gaming → Adventure → Thread

Post Marker Legend:

  • New Topic New posts
  • Old Topic No new posts

Currently online

Charophycean

Support us, by purchasing through these affiliate links

   

Thoughts on Graphic Styles

Avatar

Total Posts: 5035

Joined 2004-07-12

PM

Edit: I was about to say something that was inappropriate. I couldn’t actually delete the post so this is what you get. Sorry.

     

For whom the games toll,
they toll for thee.

Avatar

Total Posts: 5035

Joined 2004-07-12

PM

Monn Krawczyk - 23 July 2015 06:59 AM

rtrooney - You’re not the only one who is sick and tired of retro looking games. Do people really want to play pixelated stuff for the rest of their lives? Where is the progress? This is 2015 not 1995.

We are currently working on a game that will prove that point and click games did not end in 90s.

There is so much more in the genre to discover…

Please post samples of your work as you progress.

     

For whom the games toll,
they toll for thee.

Avatar

Total Posts: 5

Joined 2015-07-22

PM

This is what I look like in real life:

Many of the comments in this thread have been highly offensive to me! Cry Cry

Of course I’m being facetious (though that actually does sort of look like me), but I think the driving force behind one person’s tendency to enjoy older graphics in spite of the available new stuff is one of 2 things:
(1) Nostalgia: I think for some people nostalgia is more enjoyable than for others. I, for one, really enjoy that nostalgic experience of playing a retro-style game.

I understand if it isn’t everybody’s cup of tea, but for me and many others, nostalgia adds a lot to the experience of a game for some reason.

(2) Preference for what one finds most enjoyable & important in a game experience: I think that graphics are simply more important to some people than others in terms of enjoying an overall game experience.

For me, gameplay is #1. I could be playing a stick figure game and if the gameplay is engaging and exciting, I would have no problems with it. Just personal preference, I suppose. It’s probably the same with looking at a Picasso painting or other abstract art.  All I see is nonsense—while someone standing next to me is in awe at the beauty.

Now is this a result of “nurture” in that I developed this while playing games throughout the evolution of graphics or “nature” in that it’s just a tendency I’m born with? The world may never know.

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 1279

Joined 2012-07-11

PM

Gameplay in this genre is pretty standard regardless of graphics.

     

Recently completed: Game of Thrones (decent), Tales from the borderlands (great!), Life is Strange (great!), Stasis (good), Annas Quest (great!); Broken Age (poor)

Avatar

Total Posts: 5

Joined 2015-07-22

PM

Tad - 25 July 2015 02:44 AM

Gameplay in this genre is pretty standard regardless of graphics.

Fair enough Grin, But of course when somebody makes a retro-styled game these days, the gameplay can be anything they can imagine.

But, ultimately what I meant regarding gameplay was “is the gameplay experience enjoyable?”, and whether the graphics get in the way of that depends on the gameplay experience that is intended AND the nature of the person playing the game. What some people find comical and/or amusing (which can be enhanced or detracted from by the graphics used to portray it), others find boring, lame, or even offensive.

Most good books I know of have the lamest graphics in the world (Though the estimable and world-renowned work known as “Everybody Poops” may be an exception), and yet they can be (depending on the content) extremely engaging. But what is engaging for one person (e.g. my high school English teacher and “The Scarlet Letter”) is an experience for another (me) that can only be endured through the heavy utilization of Cliffs Notes.

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 3200

Joined 2007-01-04

PM

I’ll go against my statement that I dislike 20th century retros in a 21st century world by saying that one of my favorite games in the last 10 years is To the Moon. Which is one of the most highly pixilated games I’ve ever seen. So I will agree that there are exceptions. But they are so few and far between that I don’t even consider them for the purposes of this conversation.

Yes, “To the Moon” is a fabulous game. Period, we must ALSO add to this list “Home” and “Gemini Rue” - which are also simply fabulous games.

I am sure others can chime in with their favorite adventure games with retro graphics, the three we’ve mentioned so far are but a few good examples.

Heart

     

I enjoy playing adventure games on my Alienware M17 r4 and my Nintendo Switch OLED.

Avatar

Total Posts: 52

Joined 2013-02-23

PM

Just saw this thread and wanted to add my two cents.

If I had all the time and money in the world, I would love to make an adventure game which was high resolution, 2d high fantasy style (sometimes also likened to photorealistic, but I wouldn’t quite agree with that term), or alternatively, well rendered 3d. And not just a game that looked good, but one that has plenty of depth, interactivity and gameplay. However, for small indie developers, doing a full length game at high resolution isn’t feasible unless you already have the technical capability and resources for that, and that usually means that someone is working for less than they should be (i.e. “labour of love” = working for peanuts, or not even that). That said, 320x200 can also be an aesthetic choice; the less pixels you have, the more you can infer / is left up to the player’s imagination. But personally, I do think that it would be great if more indie games were at higher (well executed hand-painted) res.

My own experience is working with low res art; I don’t have any formal art/graphics training so I learn as I go. Slowly getting better at higher res art with time, but doing high-res art is more time consuming for me, and animation at higher resolutions takes even longer than the environments.

As an idea of time frames (and using Heroine’s Quest as an example): I know it took Corby 20+ hours to do one 320x200 background - so for the 100+ backgrounds in the game, he spent up to 2000 hours on them. If we scaled up to, say, 640x400, it could take up to twice as long (4x the number of pixels), and it still wouldn’t be the high resolution most people are after. 2000 hours = 83 days, but consider the fact that most indies don’t have decent working budgets to support someone working on it full time, and it means that a lot of game dev work needs to be done in one’s free time. So… if Corby had decided that Heroine’s Quest should be high res, the game probably would never be finished. Now, the time for doing a 320x200 background could be less - it is normally 5 - 10 hours for me, but it’s still a significant amount of time and commitment. Add animations on top of that, and even a “retro” project could end up having way too much scope.

So what I’m trying to say is that doing high res, well-executed art can be prohibitive for a lot of indie game developers. It would be nice to see more indies aiming for higher res, but if all of them did that, you’d probably see less games, or you’d see games with higher quality art that compromise on gameplay.

Also, most retro games which are released for sale aren’t making the developers rich! (and I’d even hazard that some high res games don’t make developers a lot of money either as it often comes down to how well it is marketed). Some retro games may make a decent enough turnover, but often the developer really does end up working for peanuts. I don’t think anyone should accuse developers of being greedy or lazy because game development really is a lot more work than most people would think, and the pay-offs from sales are also not as great as what a lot of people would think.

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 7109

Joined 2005-09-29

PM

Monn Krawczyk - 23 July 2015 06:59 AM

rtrooney - You’re not the only one who is sick and tired of retro looking games. Do people really want to play pixelated stuff for the rest of their lives? Where is the progress? This is 2015 not 1995.

We are currently working on a game that will prove that point and click games did not end in 90s.

There is so much more in the genre to discover…


I dont mind retro stuff, but getting burnt out is an issue.
As i said elsewhere, there is a limit for pastiche, mostly games immitate same retro, Lucas/Sierra stuff, again and again and not all hit the mark or quality of the past.
Even if it does, i would rather have experimental aesthetic choices like Armikrog or KZ0,
to push the envelope and discover new expressions.
Its essentially creative death of art component in AGs.

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 259

Joined 2004-03-09

PM

The whole premise of this thread is flawed in that it assumes that artists choosing pixel art do it either because they lack resources or blatant laziness. Nothing could be further from the truth as more often than not it’s a question of personal taste. Moreover, I would argue that good pixel art can be just as difficult to produce as photorealistic renders. There are dozens (if not hundreds) of remarkable artists pushing the format to its limits every day. Case in point:




If you can’t appreciate the talent and artistic sensibility invested in those images, there’s not much else to say.

It’s also quite shortsighted to assume that pixel art is a “thing” exclusive to adventure games—Hotline Miami, FTL, Sword & Sworcery, VVVVVV, and I could go on all day have used an exquisite retro presentation to great effect. They were all solid hits so chances are the style is popular.

Of course, you’re absolutely entitled to dislike pixel art and let the world know if it makes you feel any better, but to write it off as lack of progress or laziness? Well, I think I’ve made my point.

     

Senscape // Founder // Designer | Working on: Asylum | Twitter: @AgustinCordes

Avatar

Total Posts: 45

Joined 2003-09-09

PM

I am hardly unbiased, but as someone who has made a living from pixel-art games for the last decade (i.e. this isn’t a hobby. I support my family on these games) I thought I’d clarify a few things.

Pixel art is not retro. When so many games use the style - and so many of them become great critical and financial successes - labeling them as old/dated/whatever seems a bit silly. Plus, the pixel of art of 2015 is leagues better than the pixel art of 1992. You can use as many colors as you want. You can use as many frames as you want. You can use alpha blending, transparencies, and all sorts of other visual bells and whistles that the pixel artists of the 90s only WISH they had. There is absolutely no comparison.

I admit that when I first started Wadjet Eye, I used pixel art for budget reasons. I had very little money, so it seemed like the best (and only) option. But as we’ve done more and more games it’s become kind of our “thing” and I’ve learned to appreciate the style.  Yes, it’s cheaper. It’s cheaper to make, quicker to produce, and in the hands of the right talent can create a much more effective mood and atmosphere than other styles can.  That is, when it’s used effectively.

The problem with pixel art is when it’s used as a crutch instead of as an enhancement. If you’re going to go with the style, you need to know how and when to use it. I’ve learned that pixel art can add a lovely texture of grittiness to a world. A world of clunky machines like Primordia suits it really well. Likewise the dystopian scifi futures of Gemini Rue and Technobabylon. Dark urban environments like the New York of Blackwell/Shivah are also really enhanced by the style. Bright sunny locales like Golden Wake’s 1920s Miami, we have learned, are not. Smile

By the same token, we’ve published and developed games with much higher resolutions and they have always been thought of as ugly. So we stick with the pixels. Each pixel-based game seems to sell marginally better than the ones that come before it, so we see no reason to stop.


TLDR version: any style can work as long as you use it to your advantage. Also: alpha channels rule.

-Dave

     

Website: Wadjet Eye Games || Twitter: @wadjeteyegames || Currently working on: Unavowed

Avatar

Total Posts: 601

Joined 2014-11-29

PM

Yeah, even we as gamers tend to lump everything non-hd into the same category. There is stuff about some pixel art games that bothers me, e.g.inconsistencies in “pixel”(well, square)  size, etc, but you can’t really even compare your average “programmer art” with for example Ben Chandler’s work - all they have in common is the low resolution and that’s about it. Give a kid a watercolor set and he’ll come up with something cute and maybe decent, give it to Turner… Well, he’s dead, so maybe if you moved his hand for him, although I imagine it’d be difficult what with all the decay and lack of ligaments, but you know what I’m getting at, it’s the same point made above.

I never thought I’d really enjoy a really pixellated, lo res adventure, but then along came the last door and blew me away. Great color use and great sense of just how much is to be left to the imagination - just like impressionism, your brain does half the work. Sometimes as an artist it’s more challenging to take out than to put in - no sexual innuendo there whatsoever.

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 5035

Joined 2004-07-12

PM

Agustín Cordes - 27 July 2015 01:01 PM

Of course, you’re absolutely entitled to dislike pixel art and let the world know if it makes you feel any better, but to write it off as lack of progress or laziness? Well, I think I’ve made my point.

Some of what you say, was likely picked up from some comments made in the middle of this discussion.

However, my comment, and I started the thread, said something a little different.

But this also misses the point. In my initial post I not only questioned the Why of this type of game design, but also the reviewer’s apparent opinion that “retro” was a design choice that should be applauded.

I don’t think that pixelated graphics are good or bad. Some can be quite good, and some can be unbelievably horrible. But the reviewer didn’t talk about beautifully rendered pixilated graphics. He used the term retro graphics. Which, I think you must admit, has become the catch-all phrase for just about everything that isn’t, or doesn’t resemble photorealistic HD.

Personally, I don’t mind retro/pixilated graphics. BUT…I prefer them in the games in which they originally appeared. How can you not like Freddy Pharkus Frontier Pharmacist? But if Sierra, if it were still alive, tried to put out a game today using that graphic style, I’m sure it would die a slow death. (See Himalaya Studios and Al Emmo.)

I also don’t particularly care for the way retro is used as an excuse for poorly-executed graphic design. It’s as if the phrase, “Well, we were trying to pay homage to the style of LSL2.” covers all the sins committed in the creation of the game.

BTW, loved the Scratches conversations. Something similar happened there. That is, in the end you provided the definitive answers as to what actually happened to most of the game’s characters. But, prior to that happening, a few of us had very different opinions as to what happened.

You, and others who design games at the highest level may think that a “revolt” against retro/pixilated graphics is totally unfair. Some of us who have played games designed at the lowest level still think it’s the maid that is buried in the crypt.

(Sorry to everyone who hasn’t played Scratches....Buy it/Play it....It’s a reference to how people can look at the same set of facts, but will come up with totally different conclusions.)

     

For whom the games toll,
they toll for thee.

Avatar

Total Posts: 7432

Joined 2013-08-26

PM

Mr Underhill - 27 July 2015 05:27 PM

I never thought I’d really enjoy a really pixellated, lo res adventure, but then along came the last door and blew me away. Great color use and great sense of just how much is to be left to the imagination - just like impressionism, your brain does half the work. Sometimes as an artist it’s more challenging to take out than to put in - no sexual innuendo there whatsoever.

There’s far too much left to the imagination in The Last Door. I’d rather call the graphics a caricature of impressionism or pointillism, where distance does the trick. See here. Your brain tries to do half the work and fails. Objects are unrecognizable, you need the text to know what it is you’ve picked up. It’s like groping around in the mist all the time. Might be interesting at first, gets boring and frustrating pretty soon.

     

See you around, wolf. Nerissa

Total Posts: 930

Joined 2004-01-06

PM

rtrooney - 27 July 2015 07:17 PM

Personally, I don’t mind retro/pixilated graphics. BUT…I prefer them in the games in which they originally appeared. How can you not like Freddy Pharkus Frontier Pharmacist? But if Sierra, if it were still alive, tried to put out a game today using that graphic style, I’m sure it would die a slow death. (See Himalaya Studios and Al Emmo.)

I wouldn’t use Al Emmo as an example.
Even though I liked the game’s graphics, I refused to buy it with that HORRIBLE voice for the main character.
It set my teeth on edge. No way was I suffering through that voice.

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 5035

Joined 2004-07-12

PM

wellll…..the title of the thread was graphic styles, not voice acting. But I know from where you come.

     

For whom the games toll,
they toll for thee.

You are here: HomeForum Home → Gaming → Adventure → Thread

Welcome to the Adventure Gamers forums!

Back to the top