Ivanhoe last edited by
I don't think there really is objective context here. I didn't mean that just certain bad sprites make the graphics better but as the style overall that is kind of unrealistic.
@Ivanhoe I guess what you're saying is some of these sprites in the game are purposefully not what Bosman thinks it should look like. For example, the thief dude with no eyes and nose is just like that as its character artstyle, in comparison, Zelda has some really off-kilter characters like Tingle that absolutely don't match anything else in the game.
I guess I buy that.
I still don't buy the look of some of the sprites, like the rocks, and I really believe in what Bosman says about the perspective being confusing.
The stream was a lot of Damiani gushing over things and Bosman saying it's not that extraordinary because (reason), to which Damiani either says "you're wrong" or "how can you not like that?"
Points to Bossy for flipping it around and just saying "that's a bad sprite" after it became obvious Damiani wasn't listening to his reasoning behind the complaints that he has about the game.
Ivanhoe last edited by
@Whoaness I think that's it. Thing is I'm not completely sure my self about this or if I buy my own analysis. The perspective thing really does confuse when you start to pay attention to it.
trugs26 last edited by trugs26
I feel like people here are being unfair to Damiani. Sure he was very dismissive, but Bosman wasn't very insightful either (basically harped on the same issue for 90% of the thing: Bad sprites, we get it!). They both gave one off comments on why something was cool/bad while the other was dismissive. They weren't really there to negotiate (even though they said they would be), hence why there wasn't really anything "settled". So they were just as bad as each other, but I still think it was an enjoyable stream to watch. It was entertaining, not so much insightful.
They weren't really there to negotiate (even though they said they would be), hence why there wasn't really anything "settled". So they were just as bad as each other, but I still think it was an enjoyable stream to watch. It was entertaining, not so much insightful.
I really think Bosman at least tried. Either way, I definitely agree that it was a very enjoyable stream. I'd love to see Brad and Brandon do FFVII, but it might lead to Brad getting arrested for manslaughter. :D
flower_arrangement last edited by flower_arrangement
I have no horse in this race, I just wanted to see how episode one of Settle It panned out.
Entertaining enough stream, albeit peppered with deeply annoying moments - "are you having fun? are you having fun? are you having fun?" - but a failure as a show. Nothing was settled, there was little discussion or resolution. I'm not entirely sure what they intended to settle in the first place: whether it's a bad, good, or great game overall? whether Kyle or Damiani ought to change their opinion on the game? a hashing out of the merits and demerits of Zelda 1, 2 and LttP? If I wanted the latter I'd listen to a few episodes of retronauts.
The search for common ground at the end was forced, even Damiani wasn't certain about what was going on, Kyle had to remind him that he wasn't arguing a case, then proceeded to dive straight into how much he preferred Zelda 1.
Neither of them made a convincing pitch, I doubt anyone would be at their most coherent after a 5 hour session. There were no stakes or reasons for them to agree. Kyle hates it, Damiani likes it, that's more or less the sum of things. Kyle's "we working together" sign off rang false, there was little to no collaboration or compromise. For this to work it needs structure, some form of resolution, perhaps even some reward or risk. Huh, almost like ... some kind of video game ....
In the end Damiani was tired and Kyle was irritable. Not so jolly this time guys.
I'd love to see Brad and Brandon do FFVII
Oh god yes.
This could be a legit "every now and then" show if more attention is given to the structure, maybe one side presents their argument alongside parts in the game that they think emphasise what they mean and then they switch... Or even a point/counterpoint extended version of the Most Divisive Games vid with some gameplay. More polish and it's a really good concept.
@Mr-M Yeah absolutely. I'd genereally love to see more freeform one-on-one type shows. Like Brandon Plays Pokemon, or even like when they used to do Just Played.
There's quite a few divisive games they could cover, Galaxy 2, would be another one.
We have PLENTY of potential Settle Its...
I want to see the Kingdom Hearts Settle It... but Brad just finished the game LOL
@Whoaness Oh man, yeah, I forgot about that video. Thanks, mate. And, jeez, Brad sure used to curse alot.
GeoFlame last edited by
Ive never once thought the graphics of alttp looked bad. I don't know what everyone is seeing, all the sprites look right to me and never once considered the perspective to be off or not match the sprites. Also have zero problem with identifying what a sprite looks like, every-time Kyle couldn't tell what a sprite was I knew it before he asked. I love sprites and 2D, its my preferred style. I personally would have been fine with A Link Between Worlds looking like alttp, would have had just as much fun.
Fun to me overshadows everything else, Ive played many of games with not so good graphics but its fun to the core. Most everything else to me is way more important than looks.
Maybe I'm just an old guy but hate when the only thing your ragging on is the way a game looks makes it bad suddenly . The funny thing is I could grab a game Kyle loves and shit on it in the same way with similar arguments, not that id do it. Most games have flaws you can find if you really look for it.
@GeoFlame That's not criticism if you just having fun and aren't objectively analyzing a game for all its elements.
We're talking about video games, not just games. The video graphics is a part of bringing the player into the world of LTTP and suspending their disbelief. You may be able to suspend your disbelief and ignore all the awkward sprite-work, but to say Bosman is purposefully looking for flaws when an unrealistic hexagon rock with an 8 marked on it is littered everywhere to break his suspense of disbelief, then you're too focused on what Bosman is saying rather than seeing what he's talking about in the game.
Take a look at LTTP rocks compared to three other games around its time:
There's really no excuse for LTTP to be lazy and draw rocks like that. Even if you say Mystical Ninja and Secret of Mana's art style doesn't fit Zelda's semi-cel shaded art style, the game I mentioned many times in this thread, Neutopia, a game preceding the SNES, has great looking rocks with that art style. You cannot look at all sprite-work of LTTP and say, "Everything looks likes what it should, just like those rocks." You just can't.
trugs26 last edited by
@Whoaness I'd refrain from declaring that the artist was lazy with their rock design. Especially when the choice of perspective for ALttP is clearly a game design choice, thus the design of the rock comes back to matching the game design, rather than "laziness". The artist had to accommodate for the fact the the game used a weird perspective.
I just went around to colleagues and friends of mine, and they said that the rocks and general look of ALttP looks fine (note, this is a mix of people who are amateurs, non-gamers, and experts on graphics. I showed them various images which illustrated multiple perspectives between walls and sprites, the rocks, etc. Most of these people had never played this game before, so they aren't tainted by bias for it specifically either.). I pointed out the problems with the look, and we came to a census that non-realistic styles allows us to buy into non-realistic effects. Most people are just okay with this look. So yes, people can say "everything looks likes what it should, just like those rocks.", as I've literally just asked people this question. I went around and asked people because I wanted to illustrate that it wasn't because "played it as a kid" when we played this game which is why we didn't see the problems with the look of the game. Non-gamers and people without bias were able to suspend disbelief for ALttP to the point where mixing perspectives is okay.
And generally speaking, video games always make short cuts. Including orthographic 2D ones. If I were to put on my "critical eye", I'd point out things like the lighting in most pixel art is wrong, or even the orthographic projection itself does not match what I would expect looking down on this world. I'm sure there are many other issues in 2D games. But the world is presented in such a way that it's enough to suspend disbelief.
But, again, this is subjective. So if you have an issue with the look, then that's fine. Some people might dislike the look of orthographic projection too, and that's equally fine. In my opinion, I think Bosman is being genuine. As I've said before, I could imagine that it'd be difficult to "unsee" this effect, and that is unfortunate since it ruins his personal experience.
One final thing I'd like to add, is that I think it's really awesome that ALttP experimented with this design. It's not like they didn't know what they were doing. They had made many 2D games prior to this. Orthographic projection is the standard way of going about it. But they deliberately went about it a totally different way to give the player a different experience (both visual and functional), and for that, I commend them.
@trugs26 You see that tree beside it. It looks realistic. Then look back at the rock. It's not realistic.
The artist could have took their time with trees but said "screw it" with the rocks. Who knows?
What we do have is proof that it just looks bad right now. We've already have proof of bad and confusing art (Agahnim) that has been criticized for ages, so saying this it's impossible to see this as anything but a rock is naive.
Bringing anecdotes isn't going to prove your point. I could say all my friends think the rocks are absolutely terrible to counter your point, but what does that even prove? Go outside, take many rocks, look at it from every possible angel, and you will not see what's in LTTP. If you do find a perfectly shaped orthagonal rock, send a picture to prove it.
GeoFlame last edited by
@Whoaness I'm more talking art style though. Your picture examples are good but a clear difference in style. The three other pictures are much more messy with its sprites, Zelda is much cleaner and crisp. Really not a fan of the grass or the colour of that Neutopia game, its not my style. But probably cause it has the RPG Maker look.
I can say that cause its the art style, I'm not looking for realism, in fact rarely play 3d games that just try to look realistic. Even sports games id rather it have interesting and strange looking characters with a cool art style.
You shouldn't compare game manual art to sprites, that's basically all the games. I remember all the character art for Final Fantasy hardly looked like the sprites, or the weird versions of Mega-Man. Though I did look through the Zelda manual many times, as more gamers should have.
I can point out what I think are off sprites in both Secret of Mana and Mystical Ninja, proportions of sprites are off and so on, if you want?
But I wouldn't call them bad cause its part of the art style. I love 2D games most of all and make my own sprites in my spare time. So I may seem more defensive then I mean to be, but I'm just very passionate.
My point was you see this rock from Zelda that I never gave a second thought about and ill point something just like that in tons of other games new and old but it doesn't make it bad, lazy or anything.
Look at movies, people will point out flaws in certain shots that you may never have noticed but it doesn't make the movie bad. People always make mistakes and you never catch everything no matter what you're creating.
flower_arrangement last edited by
This thread is fucking hilarious.
@GeoFlame Art style only makes sense if the art follows the same style. It doesn't.
Trees in LTTP look like trees, flowers look like flowers, grass looks like grass, even the cactus looks fine. They aren't blocky with a basic shape. They are realistic looking, rounded, have proper detail to what it is. The rock is an octagon with some shading on the side and an 8 in it.
It's like when I talk about how some characters have eyes and other characters don't. An art style defines the standard of how all the art in the game, or any art, should follow. The lack of consistency is the lack of art style. Those three other games I picked are consistent in their art visuals, but not LTTP.
trugs26 last edited by trugs26
@Whoaness This whole thread is pretty subjective, and anecdotal studies are pretty good for getting a hypothesis or an intuition behind something. After all, I doubt anyone here is willing to figure how to do a proper study on such a matter. So I'd encourage you to ask your friends about the mixed perspective matter. See if they notice, and if they do, see if it breaks their suspension of disbelief. I find it quite interesting that most people (it seems to me, in my opinion) are okay with a style which blatantly mixed perspectives.
Regarding the art style, while I disagree with you, I don't really want to get into this as I find it less interesting to talk about. I'm sure I could go into all of the games you listed and suggest that the sprites look like something else, or don't look like the art booklet. Again, very subjective and it's a common thing for pixel art back in the day to not resemble the art book. And the consistencies issues seem like they're grasping for straws, since the other sprites you listed follow pretty distinct basic shapes too (trees=circles, flowers=5 rectangles in circle, cactus=cylinder, etc - it's not like they're really deviating from their primitive shape.). And even if we do conclude the rock is inconsistent, that's just one sprite example. Sounds tedious to go over this for all "out of place" sprites as it doesn't seem like there's many of them.