Why "Good" Graphics Don’t Matter
Vložit
- čas přidán 24. 08. 2023
- Video Game Graphics or Video Game Art Style which is more important? I believe it's Art Style but this doesn't mean Graphics aren't important. Plenty of examples from the early 2010s had both like Witcher 3, Arkham Knight, Bioshock and more. Graphics Vs Art Style. Graphics Don't Matter?
Support the Channel!
/ novemberhotel
Second Channel: / @novemberletsplay
Follow me on Twitch: / thenovemberhotel
Follow me on Twitter: / novemberhotel2
Join the Channel to get access to perks!
/ @novemberhotel
Graphics New Video Game Graphics Art Style Immersion
Unreal Engine 5
Unreal Engine Games - Hry
I've been saying this for ages! My main big reason is that as games get more and more "realistic", they become less and less accessible, requiring more and more expensive machines to run on. I'd MUCH rather have a new AAA Game Release with a fantastic artstyle that can still run on old-gen consoles and less high end PCs than have a photorealistic experience that only people with $700 to spare.
Got the same problem, i dont have a bad pc at all, but with recent games i can barley run anything.
@@geoffreydegraaf9164 My major problem that stems from all of this is that with with how much better and better PCs are becoming with every year, game devs no longer care about any kind of optimisations at all. Before it used to be "what can we do to not lose quality but improve performance" and now it's all "you just have to upgrade to the best hardware on the market lmao"
$700 ? You dream ! Now it $1000 to $2000...
"Lmao gaming is expensive be rich or cope"
A successful company would optimize their games for all platforms, including cheaper PCs. People with more powerful PCs are just wasting money imo.
Very well said, art direction is FAR more important to a game than photorealistic graphics
mw2019 and mw2 2022 demonstrate this perfectly, 2019 was stylized and unique but 2022 looks generic and bad
@@mechmaster11mw2019 just looks and feels real
@@mechmaster11 true with MW visual style
True. This is why Nintendo is still kicking a$$ 😎
@@mechmaster11 for some reason old mw is much more appealing to me graphically than mw2022 lol maybe due to the art direction😃
I recently played the original Half-Life for the first time and felt completely immersed. It's almost like your imagination fills in the gaps where the technology falls flat.
While I actually see HL 1 as one of the most overrated games of all time, I still agree with you. it is truly an amazing game with its narrative style.
I still prefer me the original unreal. Well made levels, massive game with 50+ levels in length, etc. Lacks the narrative storytelling, but they are two totally different types of fps games from the same era.
@@pauls4522 I thought I was the only one who thought it was overrated. Not a terrible game, a solid 6 out of 10, but not great.
@@gilbert8162 Name a narrative-driven FPS that's leagues better then so your taste in games can be judged.
"It's almost like your imagination fills in the gaps where the technology falls flat."
That's the thing I miss most about video games. I used to lay in bed and think about the scenarios I encountered in games and make up little narratives because everything wasn't laid out in front of you to the tiniest detail like games are today. They do everything they can to strip imagination out of the experience.
HELL NO. I tried to play diablo 2 on a 55" OLED and almost had a seizure. The visual equivalent of nails on a chalk board.
Batman: Arkham Knight looks like a game that came out in 2025.
True
@@Just-a-fellow-league-enjoyeryeah I played it last week for my first time and I was blown away by how beautiful the game looks
The point about spotting enemies etc is very important. Overly detailed graphics will often make gameplay actively worse, and although art direction can alleviate this somewhat there's no real way around the fact that clutter is clutter and noise is noise.
I first started noticing this around the time that Dishonored 2 came out. The sheer fustercluck of detail in every room made it hard to see the items that were interactable. On top of that it started giving me headaches to squint and try to focus so hard on the details as I was playing.
@@SomeCanine That's when you start to get features like objective markers and 'detective vision'--an interpretion layer to clarify what you're actually looking at.
@@WyattStrange Yes, that was my point.
@@todesziege Yeah, it's strange. IRL you don't have that problem because nobody arranges their rooms the way that people in the games do. So it's never hard to find coins or documents IRL but in a video game it's damn near impossible unless they put a layer of sparkly around the objects. They clearly put TOO MUCH clutter in the rooms to try to look impressive.
Bullshit
Art direction over graphics has always been my go to. Like Sifu which isn't the most graphically pleasing game but its art style and art direction make the game something you'll never forget. In The Museum level, my favorite level in the game, you see all kinds of pieces of art that tell you something about the boss you will fight. And then before you finally get to her, you're surrounded in a red room with statues fighting each other to show her state of mind.
Something about that game's art direction blew my mind in ways I'm still trying to understand how it was fully done. It doesn't use traditional rendering and is kind of like Valorant and Stray with painted textures. It allows the game to be more expressive. The way they use colors for each level is mesmerizing and the environmental designs are stunning.
@@Drstrange3000 Every level was so beautiful to look to at, and every ounce of trash or clutter strewn about in a completely intentional way which makes the world feel real and lived in.
Slo Clap don't miss is why. (Ignore the state of kahlt in Absolver-)
Like psychonauts, everyone there looks interesting
@@nazarwardzyk3021 Exactly
So many games from 2013 - 2015 look better than games today. The Witcher 3, Arkham Knight, Wolfenstein the New Order. I just started replaying Alien Isolation and I am blown away by how incredible it looks. The lighting, the atmosphere, the unique, hand-crafted assets, the sound design. It makes you feel like you are trapped in Ridley Scot's classic horror film. Studios can't be bothered to put in that level of effort any more.
Totally. And of course, not only do those older games look better - they *perform* much better as well. It seems modern gamers are paying through the nose for hardware to play games that simply don't cut it visually. At best, the graphics are an incremental improvement on what we had 10 years ago. I don't really understand it ...
Yeah we are to a point where making good graphics, is not 100% the game engine these days, but rather the artist attention to detail.
With the right lighting, shadows, textures tone, and animations, a game from 10 years ago can quite easily look better than today.
Frankly ray tracing (as we know it at least) is mostly fraud by nvidia to retain market share. It can only look good if the dev put no effort in creating the lighting to a scene. With the tools already available on a lot of game engine, it was not really that hard to product a good seen without ray tracing.
@@time4tea99 games from
MGSV
Because they did not have DLSS, FSR or ray tracing to fall back on. They just let the GPUs power do all the work. Now that was all thrown out for DLSS, FSR, XeSS, AppleFX, and ray tracing.
There is a massive difference between graphics and art style. I will take a excellent art style everytime. Love hand drawn games such as Hades, Skull girls, Cuphead, hollow Knight. I feel like more effort goes into the game. It means more to me. I am usually more into the game play rather than the graphics anyway! Have we reached the cap then gone back to better times?
The only issue i got with some of those games is their almost frustrating gameplay (im talking about hollow knight and cuphead). Their art styles look really good but if they weren't as hard as they are they could be finished in much less time
@@lorexmusic1067 Yeah i get that!
@@lorexmusic1067 the challenge is the fun, if its too difficult for you then maybe give it another shot once you advance in your quickness as a player few years later
you *will* die over and over, everyone does, but you quickly learn the pattern and beat the boss giving immense satisfaction, they are souls-type games of 2D
@@alexo_pogAgain, i personally think that a good game shouldnt be skill based, cuz once i get to a more advanced level more games will come out and i will lose interest in that game
@@lorexmusic1067 nah I disagree with this the easier it is when its a game like hollow knight the less I would play it do you really think hollow knight would be as popular as it is if it was not as hard as it is
Visibility is such an important key point. There are so many games that feel incredibly overloaded with details and effects that it is often hard to focus and if everything "pops" than there are no real highlights anymore.
i.e. Starfield. Simultaneously overloaded/busy and last gen low fidelity graphics at the same time.
True but I thought Bioshock: Infinite graphics were good and will still add up in ten or twenty years time. The only one I went far in. I love the story and Elizabeth is cool. She should have been playable in a DLC or something.
My biggest concern or more a feeling. In some games not from this year particularly i feel i do not game myself. More like watching something and moving a character slightly or a vehicle.
I feel a plague tale requiem showed really well how modern detail rich grafics are best used. In very slow and condensed gameplay where you spend time soaking in the scenery and have the mental capacity to process all these details.
High pace gameplay renders high details useless because at best you barely notice it and at worst it disables you to even process what's going on.
one of reasons i dont play FPS games as i just cant see whats kills me. And that is bad feeling.
What makes this even more frustrating is that game characters will never look "real" no matter how advanced graphics get. Our eyes/brains are literally programmed to recognize faces and instantly pick up on even the slightest unnatural movement or feature which results in that disturbing uncanny valley feeling, so this whole quest for realism is a wild goose chase.
Props for mentioning the demon's souls remake, that's an excellent example of art direction absolutely eclipsing graphics fidelity. What's funny about that game is that even though they had the opportunity to have like 100 times the detail they ironically didn't seem to pay much attention to said details, Latria prisoners having perfect pearly white teeth and looking like they're in perfect health, the blacksmiths lacking the scales of the original etc.
Ironically uncanny valley becomes more pronounced the closer we get to realism as the finest mistakes become more and more highlighted.
The more artistic the stylistic choices are the less we care.
I wouldn't say they'll 'never' look real, but I don't think they'll look real anytime soon.
One day tech will catch up, perhaps not in 10 years or even 20, but one day.
Assassins Creed: Odyssey looks great until any character has dialogue. Then it looks terrible.
Some games which held up exceptionally well are A Link to the Past, Super Mario World, Zelda Wind Waker, Metroid Prime trilogy and Super Mario Galaxy. I'm glad Nintendo has always put gameplay and art over graphics, as it makes their games so much easier to go back to and enjoy than ones from other systems.
The games that are more cartoony age well. While PS1 3d games look terrible.
@@sara.cbc92 It's the jagged edges that ruin it for me. Anything rounded or smooth is just easier on the eyes.
Here’s more:
Metroid Prime 3 Corruption
Zelda Skyward Sword
Kirby Epic Yarn
Yoshi’s Wolly World
SMW2: Yoshi’s Island
Wii Sports
Mario Bros DS
Mario Bros Wonder
Mario Bros 3
Zelda Breath of the Wild
DK Tropical Freeze
I couldn’t think of any other Nintendo games with gorgeous art styles.
This explains a lot about why older titles are just easier to get immersed in, thought it was just a personal preference. Can't believe borderlands was left out of this essay though. When speaking about distinctive art style those games I've always felt stood out.
Oh I though it would've been Halo that is timeless with its art style. Original borderlands is great and still my favorite tho.
Damn, I was really hoping he'd bring up Hi-Fi Rush. It's a perfect example of Art Syle taking precedence.
Yes that games style is amazing!
Agreed. I also can't believe he didn't even mention any Zelda games.
It's got a 3D anime art style with effects, which I personally really like, but stylistically isn't a good example.
or bombrush cyberfunk
I'll also add vanillaware games as well
Totally agree with you. Sometimes i feel the urge for graphics and performance is never ending and it always ends up costing more and more money to spend on new hardware.
Rather than hyper realistic graphics, i prefer as mentioned - the artstyle, story, good gameplay and a passionate developer.
What is the prob if you have all that and realistic graphics?
@@ericleal157exactly like what?
apparently we find someone that don't like realistic graphics
@@ericleal157he literally explained how that’s not what’s happening though, or on rare occasion
“You can just buy” maybe I don’t want to drop 2 grand on a computer because shitheads like you can’t stop supporting devs that do the bare minimum optimization wise. God.
I think its very interesting how at the same time, the animated movie industry is also in a shift from prioritizing photorealisitc animation to more sylized animation
A lot of movies release in 2023 used stylized animation such as Spider Verse, Mutant Mayhem, Elemental, the Mario movie, Migration, Wish, etc.
One example I think you missed out on is Ghost of Tsushima. It showed that you can do both great art design while also having really good, readable graphics.
exactly what i thought about game developement these days. Pursuing realism is going to limit your ability to get creative in a way. Games like Elden ring stands out because of the incredible art styles and the perfect portrayal of the fantasy element, plus the attention to details in building the environment. Games nowadays are more like art pieces to me. The more elements of exploration and uncertainties there are, the better the games
Realism has its place and there's nothing wrong with it per say. But there has to be a rational decision somewhere defining whether it's needed or not and if it'll add to the game. Stylization is fine too, despite there being a million games cloning the World of Warcraft art style. It's not the art style that's wrong in itself. But maybe copying an art style to get some audience recognition doesn't necessarily produce good results.
Also exploration isn't always needed and can detract from other game mechanics. It's part of the tendency to add a bit for everyone in modern AAA games which waters down the mechanics themselves. There's a bit of crafting, exploration, collectibles, looting, action, base customization... But not too much so that no one is put off either. Maybe it's fine if Tomb Raider doesn't have a crafting system and maybe a high pace shooter doesn't need to have exploration phases.
i was really into medieval paintings and when i first time saw world as i left the crypt i instantly get blasted with feeling that i saw this colors and style somewhere. And after some search i find this ''Raphael, detail of Saint George and the Dragon, 1506. Oil on panel. 11.22'' the trees the colors. Whole game is like traveling through medieval dark fantasy painted world.
Its masterpiece.
Elden Ring also happens in a fantasy world, something like cod doesn't. The correct comment here would be: I prefer fantasy games which give you more roomph for artistic expression. I don't like games that are based on a realistic setting....
Deadline dude, how else those shareholder could get 100x return on their money if
those worker didn't finish those unrealistics deadline and expectation imposed by an inexperienced shareholder?
they McDonalds-ify game development because their business textbook said they should do it
therefore the Art, story, and the gameplay, lost along the way. in order to
be able to earn more money for those greedy pigs
False. The problem with realistic graphics in todays gaming environment are that the “realistic” graphics only appear real at the surface level. Unreal engine 5 and it’s competitors offer visually stunning landscapes and models, that can’t be interacted with, altered, or destroyed in any way. What’s the use of a hyper realistic mountain without a single moveable rock? Or a forest full of trees and shrubbery that behaves as if they were made of steel? It’s the surface level realism that’s the issue
They always get brought up in discussions like this (for good reason) but Deep Rock Galactic and Valheim don't have the "best photo-realistic graphics" we've ever seen, but I'd still say that Valhiem is an absolutely beautiful game to look at and Deep Rock has an incredibly charming art style. A game with "the most photo-realistic graphics" will eventually become dated as technology improves, while games like Valheim, Deep Rock, even Minecraft and TF2 will stand the test of time because of their unique art style.
ROCK AND STONE!
Rock and Stone.
Yeah.
On a side note, old (like over 20 years old) 2d games looked great (and still do).
Then came the 3d craze... And things looked kinda shit until the technology developed, so it could actually handle better models in game and people got better with the relatively new medium. And while "ultra realistic" of say fifteen years ago now looks like complete garbage, stylised, cartoony or "wacky" visuals still hold up.
@@Drejzer In the wise words of Ray Narvaez Jr, during his playthrough of Pokemon Scarlet and Violet: "The best part about a new generation [of Pokemon] are the fan games that take all the new pokemon and mechanics, then put them in a 2d game that looks and runs better than the actual games"
Minecraft looks like garbage, terraria too But they still are great games especially terraria
Also rock and stone
I'm only a hobbyist, but what always gets to me is that the game engine is actually separate from the graphics. The engines tells the model to "follow these instructions when event happens", but what it doesn't quite do is actually create the assets. That's what something like Blender, Maya, or ZBrush does. So, you can actually produce great graphics in Unity and trash graphics in Unreal. It really depends on the skills of the artists and coders.
You’re right just compare half life 2 with Team Fortress 2.
My thoughts exactly. As a bit older person, playing Final Fantasy 7 when it was new, those very simple graphics the game provided were all your brain needed to create the 'movie' inside your head. Characters on screen didn't even had mouths or noses, only eyes. But the emotions they went through were felt is they were my own...
Then in newer games, more detail and realism kicked in. But the more realistic the game tries to be, the more irritated it feels when still something isn't. Like they spend tons of time to make the characters' hair react to gravity when the person bows down, but you see the necklace he's wearing still glued to it's chest.
It's been said by your grandparents, but remains true: Books are better then movies. Nothing can beat your own imagination and put it in words. Ofc, this is only 1 part in games. Gameplay is a whole diferent story and can easily make or break a game as well.
not just FF7, but even more basic stuff like the original Pokemon on Game Boy, or Zelda on Game Boy for that matter. Of course, Pokemon didn't even have unique colours with everything being black and green! Your brain had to fill in the missing details.
FF7 is a bit of a mixed bag. It was one of the first games that used pre-rendered cutscenes, which were extremely expressive at the time. But nowadays they just look bad. Even back in the day, there was a disconnect between the (relatively) high quality character models in the cutscenes compared to the extremely simplified models used elsewhere in the game. In games like Zelda Ocarina of Time everything was in real time graphics and thus looked more coherent.
Books are not better than movies. Sorry. Movies are more enjoyable
Final Fantasy 7 released constant CG of what the characters were "supposed" to look like. And FF7 Remake enables that. And FF7 looks bad compared to remake
If you are an older person, you probably spend more time commenting online than socializing. Iphone games dominate realistic console games. On console, Minecraft, Roblox, and Fortnite is more played than any 1st party Sony or Microsoft game. As in over 100 million daily players.
Nintendo Switch owners are happy playing stylized game
Devi May Cry 5 is a great example of a game that went for real graphics while still keeping the unique look its suppose to have, the game is set in environments that are Gothic which pop in combat because of the super colorful abilities the characters have.
Spot on this. My only gripe about that game is that I wished it was longer. Otherwise, it was a pretty flawless experience.
@@DaRkPlUm I see, but did you beat the game on the other difficulties?
@@DaRkPlUm there's alternate difficulties and a separate mode which has a new boss fight at the end and more cutscenes.
There’s nothing graphically impressive about DMC5… Just tentacles and blisters… They have good gameplay style but absolutely not art style.
I hard disagree, when you're good at the game you can make so much spectacle its crazy.@@quangluong388
Dishonored is such a badass game and it's art style is timeless. You can tell a lot of passion went into the design of that world
Lol that games $4.99 right now on the Playstation store until 8/31/23, I just got it.
@@FoxySpartan117 Enjoy it!
The graphic are really good in that game
Thief>Dishonered
@Hightower2804TP you take that back you godless heathen....
This comparison is absurd
Good point about not being able to see long distance enemies. I thought I was going crazy in recent years for having this thought myself but couldn’t figure out why it was the case. Great video man
Also an important aspect for immersion is the music. I've recently watched a play through of return to castle wolfenstein just to see why I still find that old game better than many new ones. Games like far cry 3, bioshock are very memorable for me.
The Source Engine always feels special to me. Games created in it have a timeless look. The facial animations in particular have actually aged better than a lot of recent games.
As a kid I yearned to live in a Source generated world (especially after discovering Hammer/Worldcraft). It's so firm and tangible.
Looking at left 4 dead,those facial animations still hold up.
Damn right. Alyx Vance in HL2 became one of the most beloved characters in games for a variety of reasons. Mainly her good writing and voice performance, but also the excellent facial animation that, despite not being totally realistic, reaches close enough to that threshold without taking the plunge into the uncanny valley.
Hell, Source still has better physics than games nowadays. Says a lot about the gaming industry when Gmod npc addons like VJ base have better AI than modern games.
The Source Engine games always were the epitome of an "uncanny valley", "stale" and "soulless", even at the time of release - let alone ten, or twenty years later.
Those games have no style, the ugliest UI imaginable, most generic visuals...
The problem I have with realistic graphics is that at a certain point they all look more or less the same, making the visuals interchangeable in many ways!
With a more cartoonish artstyle you have a bit more freedom in terms of colorvariety and contrast while also not aging as much depending on the artstyle that was chosen for Project XY!
It baffles me that there are not many games that tried to emulate the comic style in a 3D environment while also having interesting mechanics!
(Hi-Fi Rush, Borderlands & Persona 5 are the only ones that come to mind from the top of my head)
this is exactly correct. specially the "samey looking" part. in fact, i've showed a bunch of screenshots of "fields" in a screenshot thread for a game (i think it was battlefield?) and i mixed in a bunch of screenshots from different games (including the witcher 3 and final fantasy 15) and no one noticed.
And cartoonish artstyles never age. NEVER. even super nintendo cartoonish games still look gorgeous. jet set radio still looks great, so does zelda wind waker.
but "gritty" artstyles don't have to age badly either. i was just playing diablo 1 again with a friend last month and the game still looks good despite being like 30 years old and in a gritty style. i think it looks better than all of its sequels (subjectively), but it's objectively better looking than diablo 2.
Comic book style in 3d? Try Void Bastards
That reminds me of Unreal Engine games due to how accessible it is and the saturation of the games coming out of it. IE: how we can tell if it's a UE fan made tech demo
We've had over 25 years now of game companies touting their game's "realism." Sure, back when technical advances were much more noticeable this made sense, but at a certain point people stop caring when every game looks "realistic." The question these days should be "What actually makes my game special or memorable?"
Seems like 20-30 years ago there was a much wider variety of animation styles among both games and cartoons. Even if the animation wasn't always great it still ended up being memorable in its own respect. Now everything feels samey.@@GraveUypo
problem is that people just use "graphics" to describe resolution of textures. 8:27 is a good example. sharp textures is one thing, but colors and details of a texture are also part of graphics.
To me, HL2 is the peak of the graphics I need.
If I need "realistic", I can watch a movie.
I need fun, and I need to keep my video card.
I use UE5 for my games, and yeah, it doesn't limit you to any style really. The main reason you see a lot of games looking the same these days, is because of Quixel Megascans. If you use UE4/5 you can use those assets completely free, and a lot of a big companies have deals with Quixel(Epic actually owns them now) because they're bigger.
Same
UE is a game engine, art style come from the art director. UE will gives you that distinctive motion blur out of the box though, which I hate so much.
@@Kabodanki Ah, motion blur mostly sucks. I just wish that per object motion blur, (Which exactly exists irl. Just wave your hand in front of yourself very fast.) would come to UE5.
This statement is inaccurate. UE5 with free megascans assets has only been around for about a year while many of the games mentioned don't use UE5 and/or are over a year old. This issue is so much more complex than that as well. There are many reasons for why games look the way they do - free Quixel assets are by no means the "main reason" for that. Not to say it won't become an issue in the future. I fully believe will will have a several-year-long period where numerous indie titles are built entirely with the same asset kit - that asset being Quixel Megascans.
Here are a few *actual* reasons. 1) Hyper-realism is very popular, and sells well, to most casual gamers. 2) AMD and nVidia strike deals with developers to use the latest tech available on the latest hardware which is geared toward realism. 3) The console and GPU arms race pushes companies to make more powerful, more expensive hardware and developers want to see how hard they can push that hardware for the graphics arms race. 4) As technology becomes more powerful, developers try to lean on it instead of finding work arounds; the work arounds of old are a big part of older games' unique charm. 5) Many AAA studios have bad art directors.
ah, hte parable of marty odonnel has been spoken, too many people want 4k graphics and sound, but that takes away how many "in-game" assets you can put into it.
I forget who said it, but a good adage to follow is "If you want to be creative, limit yourself". A big reason older games often had a timeless look is because the technology couldn't do everything like it can now. Photorealistic lighting and effects can be as easy as a few clicks in UE4/5, but 10+ years ago it was either ultra difficult to fake, or downright impossible for the hardware of the era. So, in order to deliver a visually pleasing experience, they had to work around their limitations, and many games focused on art direction and plenty of faked realism effects.
One of the best examples is Vagrant Story on PS1. It's one of the best looking games in the entire console's life cycle, and clocks in at less than 100MB install size (which includes a pre-rendered CG intro cutscene). The art team also had limited experience with a 3D workflow, working mostly with 2D sprites, but they were able to utilize their 2D knowledge to make the most out of the 3D space. There isn't a single dynamic light effect in the entire game, with all the "lighting" being handles through vertex colors, allowing them to curate more natural-looking soft light and shadows in every area.
They even faked rim lighting by simply duplicating a character model, brightening it up, and offsetting it slightly to take advantage of the PS1's odd z/depth-buffer quirks (that signature wobble effect present in any 3D PS1 game). In fact, playing the game in a modern emulator like SwanStation with RetroArch, you can "fix" the wobble effect, but it messes with how the game renders models in close proximity, and the rim light duplicate model looks weird.
Old games have look good _now_ because they are old enough to look retro. As much as I love Quake 3, in 2004 it looked like ass, and then started looking fine again by ~2010.
Oh man. I still got a copy of Vagrant Story, just reminded me. But well said though
Funnily, and also quite disappointingly, I've seen people try to justify censorship with this.
Of course, such people probably don't understand the difference between:
"I want to make a great-looking game that could run on a PS2"
and
"I want to make a game about stuff I would literally get fined or even arrested for even saying"
This is true only up to a certain point, as what we now see as limited hardware was at the time seen as cutting edge or at least modern to some degree.
In the same way they had to make certain choices then, they could be doing them now, but they are not for *reasons*.
So yes, it's true that now they can do a lot with few clicks, but things need to be discussed in relative terms to make it fair, without trying to romanticize the past more than we need to.
This is why I love games like the Shelter series by Might and Delight, Firewatch, or Deep Rock Galactic: the art style is unique and interesting. I’m a huge fan of the low-poly art styles.
Games like Ark: Survival Evolved Ver. 2 (aka Survival Ascended) focus too heavily on impressive graphics rather than a art style and abandon being unique for realism
Back in the day of LAN gaming and my first tournaments, I reduced the graphics of Quake 3 Arena way below low settings using custom configs to see the enemy perfectly (high res model in front of a wall that was almost 1 color) It definitely gave me an advantage!
I mean, to go even further back, competitive Quake1 has reduced all the game's fancy ambience and lighting to single color fullbright model textures for the sake of "clarity" which could be accounted for as one of the earliest examples of "competitive gamers ruining games for the sake of advantage", if you will. Which would be its own can of worms as to why competitive multiplayer and immersive single player don't quite mesh in a single game.
Man you literally told my thoughts. For some time now, I'm talking completely separatly about - as I called it - 'artistic graphics' and 'technical graphics'. This first one is becoming more and more important IMO, as the second one almost stopped progressing, and even if - it won't do the job only itself. I have extremely similar conclusions to you. And I love artistically beautiful games.
Maybe some odd example: flooded cave from FC Primal is THE most memorable scene that remains in my memory from all the modern parts (3 and newer). The whole FC Primal I remember as pretty good artistically, and I still have in mind despite being medicore technically AFAIR.
Ultrakill is also a very good example of this, it literally has old gen ps2 graphics but it fits so well with its gameplay and its one of the best modern games ever made
this game looks like shit.
even older, ps1
Fire Watch and Bioshock:Infinite might be the games I would think of if it came to "most coherent art style". They both just created a living, shining world that perfectly set the foundation for an awesome adventure to come.
Great video!
I think cohesiveness (and ofcourse great gameplay) make a game really immersive, regardless of graphics, if everything feels like it belongs to that world I can get lost in a game for hours.
I totally agree that a lot of games from the 2010s look much better than current ones. The one that comes to mind for me is Arkham Knight which released in 2015 and looks better than most games now
gaming industry somehow managed to create arkham knight and call it "lacking"
but at the same time pushing "better graphics" that look like plastic
while stylised games have their own soul
Just started Arkham Knights yesterday and I was thinking to myself how good the game looks even though it's from 2015.
Looked at Mad Max also from 2015 and thought the same thing.
Mostly they had gameplay = graphics perfectly, now the spend all budget on graphics and marketing
@@SL4PSH0CKya actually think they didn't spend tons on marketing back then? 😂
I mean if u want too look at the absolute best graphics from that year to the best of this year its not even close
I'm currently working on a VR hardcore survival game passion project within UE5. From the beginning I had this idea that gameplay needed to prevail over appearance, so I chose a low poly retro game design to form the Montana wilderness. It makes me happy hearing and seeing people uphold a similar viewpoint that this approach to graphic design isn't wrong or ugly, but different. I very much hope to release the game one day, and it be a testament to this idealogy!
Both gameplay and graphics matter. I personally disagree with his view and clearly, based on what sells a lot of other people do too. As you state, "retro" graphics are just an excuse for devs to cut costs and time, its BS that it's a "style" choice. I say this as someone who started with an NES/Atari and I like seeing graphics getting better, not worse.
@@Cruor34 I agree - there are far too many PC games knocking around which use 2d pixel art , like it's 1992 or something. Pixel Art might not be so bad with handhelds but it does not translate well to larger high res displays at all.
@@tourmaline07I mean, I can think of celeste off the top of my head, and it feels pretty well to play, I rather have that than a pretty, but boring game.
@Cruor34 then don't play games with graphics you don't like 😂 the gaming world isn't just for you fam
@@buycraft911miner2 You are allowed to like games with bad graphics, but DO NOT call it "stylistic" it absolutely is a cost/time cutting move that they market as a "style."
I really like Arkane's stylistic approach to graphics, quite cartoony but very stylised.
I appreciate this video! It hits on whats good and bad about modern graphics. Dishonored lives and breathes in a way that some other modern high fidelity graphics don't. keep up the good work!
Been playing Sonic Unleashed lately, and it blows me away how good it looks for a 2008 game. It doesn't just look better than any Sonic game since, but it looks better and more realistic/believable than a lot of recent games, because it has REALLY strong art direction. Its lighting and how effectively it's used especially- they put a lot of effort into convincing the player that Sonic is running literally around the planet, jumping from rooftop to rooftop. Most modern games fail to convincingly make me feel like I'm so much as walking around outside.
Oh man I was really surprised to find out that game was released in 2008 recently. The lighting on that game was really ahead of it's time.
Still the best looking sonic game imo. Didn’t run well on og hardware but it’s amazing on my series x
Sonic Unleashed has a big budget than newer Sonic games. Of course it looks better than AA Sonic titles
Most modern games have graphics similar to Fortnite. Most Nintendo Switch games have stylized graphics. Mobile games are by far more popular than any console game and they dont use realistic graphics.
There is virtually no reason for you to believe that most games go for realism, unless your understanding of the world is limited to rage bait CZcams channels. Nintendo Switch has an eshop as well
Sonic Unleashed is a terrible game compared to the Sega Genesis Classics and Sonic Mania. Graphics dont matter, and Sonic Unleashed proves that. The game is bad compared to Classics
Fromsoft and indie games have taught me this. Art direction is sooo important to make a game not only look charming, but stand the test of time!
A games graphics impresse you but you fall in love with the artsyle.
Geuss you can look at it like an intemate relationship. The graphics is the initial physical attraction. The looks and beauty but the artsyle is like a part of a persons personality that nakes you fall in love and is the reason the relationship works and is so special.
Great points. I was just looking at some videos of old games, and there are quite a few cases where old games look better than new ones, due to the focus on art style. You can even go back 20 years and find examples of this - Elder Scrolls III Morrowind and Warcraft 3 are examples of decades old games that still look good (once you don't look too closely) due to their style.
Games from a few years later like C&C3, Bioshock, Dishonored, Supreme Commander and Starcraft 2, then sure. Polygon and texture quality was high enough for those games to age reasonably well. But Morrowind and Warcraft 3? You really need to get those Cataracts dealt with.
i think people may bawk at the morrowind example but i think youre right actually. the game looks pretty fucking decent especially for what its trying to do and the time it was released. individual elements taken on their own arent good, like the original resolution is quite shit even if its cosy, the assets are low poly, the textures arent super high res. but together its VERY cohesive, very alien, and the water and sunsets are really nice. together with its good gameplay and the way you traverse those graphics through deliberate (initially slow) movement and high fog makes it one of the games that ive been the most immersed in, ever.
sometimes in openmw i switch off my graphics mods and turn the res & view distance down and its still pretty cool to experience the game that way. even with my normal improved graphics settings & mods, i play with view distance only at 1x-2x of the original game because the increased clarity of further locations with high view distances detracts from the way the nearby features are framed against the fog at 1x-2x. and it adds to the mystery of exploration! very cool.
Well done man this was all so well said that I immediately subbed. I find myself play older games not because of nostalgia but the visual style used just felt more distinct and memorable than recent releases. They tried to pull you into the world rather than try to be "real". Even GTA 5 didn't go completely realistic and instead op for a more stylistic look.
I agree with everything. I really love color and how the usage of it can create a lot of emotions. I dislike how modern media in general just uses filters ane everything looks blue, yellow or red
An audio treat is you using Cod4 menu music. Wow, that instantly took me back to happier days,. Great stuff, subbed
I think thats the original black ops music but yeah
It's easy to understand your comparisons and I agree with you on almost all points. good video, I hope we get games that put more emphasis on quality again.
That's a big reason why Blizzard kept pumping out success after success for so long. Their character artists were masters of using distinct art styles that made things look great within technically primitive models. Simple styles and vivid colors on top of low poly models with enough pop out features to make them visually distinguished from each other. It let them produce some amazing looking games that still ran great on lower end hardware.
It's good that people like that style. Me personally, No.
And what they become now
Depends what were talking about.. Diablo 1 & 2 were good. 3 was 'meh' at best.Diablo immortal was insulting, criminal. Diablo 4 was a JOKE. Blizzard was good many years ago now. After all, they aren't even blizzard anymore - that's how far they've fallen. After diablo immortal, they deserve to - ironically - rot in hell.
I like to think of hollow knight, a game that leans heavy on its art style and is a blast to play. Also with a great art style you can do sooo much more with less when it comes to “great graphics”
"a blast to play" that is debatable. for me it feels like a student passion project witch considering the size of the studio it probably is. as much as I don't like the ori games stories you can tell that artistically and in the game feel that it was made by a team of professionals vs hollow knight that doesn't have the budget or man power to truly blossom.
@@daninogil The irony of this post in this kind of video.
@@daninogil you're telling us the game was too hard for you, without saying the game was too hard for you
hard is the wrong word uncomfortable is. I finished the ori games including the bullshit finial boss in the second games. i got through hollow night just fine until the third boss but the was a point that I just didn't wanted to. jumping arcs that always felt off, simple abilities that bore me, tiny attack range and more polish issue prevented me for enjoying the gorgeous art style, music and the good map design (which ori does not have). I don't want to play game that the controls feels like "my first 2d platformer " from the unity asset store but considering the size of both the team and the game it is understandable just not for me.
@xArsVivendi
Hollow knight isn't even hard some aspects are just not polished
The music at 9:12 gives me such nostalgia for Kingdoms of Amalur, a game I don't see much loved - so kudos!
Being born in 1985 and having witnessed a lot of the graphical evolution over the years, I'd say the graphics and technical capabilities only need to be good enough to match the game's ambitions. Art style can do a lot indeed.
For Grand Theft Auto, I feel like only with GTA IV did they finally have the technology to match what they wanted to do, finally able to put a decent amount of cars in the streets and make the city come alive.
Earlier attempts where good for the time, but the earlier 3D games just don't hold up that well. A lot of early 3D games don't hold up well, but some do, mainly due to an appealing art style and solid gameplay.
Dungeon Keeper 1 is one of the oldest games (1997) that I could still play for an entire evening, also a great example of how important art style is. It has this gorgeous classic dark fairytale art style that does have room for plenty of colour without becoming super bright. Every creature and hero is very easy to tell apart from each other.
The sequel was an alright game, but to me aged a lot less good due to the art direction and early 3D graphics. The 2D sprites of DK1 look better and more varied, the whole tone became more goofy in the sequel and sadly all spiritual successors (Dungeons! and War for the overworld) pushed that goofy cartoony style even more.
So none of those have ever been able to replace the original for me, DK2 is still fun to play though but I prefer the first.
And I feel the spiritual successors are too bloated with options making it less intuitive, and the monsters aren't that interesting either.
Even the animations of the first game where pretty great and memorable. Like the muscular barbarians strutting around with their hammer over their shoulder, vampires floating around with their arms folded in front of them, and spellcasters really giving it their all in a flurry of spells the moment combat starts. By the time a DK2 warlock casts one spell, a DK1 warlock has already cast his entire arsenal. And they had more spells too.
Games like fallout, dishonored, bioshock, outer wilds, were not just graphically impressive, but performance wise ran smooth like butter on older hardware and had had great mechanics too.
Got Fallout New Vegas two months ago and couldn't agree more. Gave me hope for my potato in the gaming sense 😂
Yes and it looks to me we stopped getting more nuanced, deeper gameplay, in favor of graphics.
How is enemy AI still so dumb?
@@lostpoet3125fr, ran fallout 3 and New Vegas,Dishonored and Skyrim on my Potato with intel HD graphics.
Could only do medium graphics with 40fps max outdoors and 60 indoors for all of them.
I was a little reluctant to play them given the graphics are no where near the best and other games from that time period has batter graphics but because my potato was all I had I gave it a shot and man I can tell you the moment you start playing the graphics don't even matter anymore.
The game is so good and the art style fits each game very well.
@@maskedlibrarian1483 Especially borderlands 2, jesus the memories I made that literally stemmed from two guys just knowing the opening song lmao. The soul and craft will forever trump graphics anyday.
I think I am the only person who got bored almost instantly with Dishonored. Lol
I love watching videos that articulate feelings I have that I couldn't do myself. You have done this masterfully thank you. The fact that I can't see anything in new "realistic" games drives me NUTS.
Man I have to say, seeing your views going crazy in the past videos is truly amazing! Really happy for you!
Man, I couldn't agree more.
I'm replaying F.E.A.R. from 2007 (Playstation port) and I'm like, "I don't actually need games to have 'better' graphics than this."
Oblivion, Dishonored, all 3 Bioshocks, Infamous: Second Son (all the Infamous games, really), so many games from 10, 12, 15 years ago remain totally replayable and enjoyable despite "better graphics" being the standard of today.
That is why I love so much Dishonored 2. The art direction of the franchise peaked with the second game, and will age well whatever the time passing or the tech evolution, because it's a remarkably believable world with a very strong visual and atmosphere identity.
Same for borderlands 2 art style wise it’s the best tho bl3 has better combat
I never could beat Dishonored 2. One specific mission wouldn't let me.
@@abellewis3062Which one?
It peaked in the second game of the two-game "franchise"?
@@tyranmcgrath6871 The one with those stupid robots. I hated that one.
The cool part about that is that you can pick up any game made from say around 2010 to today and will have mostly great visuals and a known control sheme. No need to do any wierd ports, figure out an emulator or anything. Thats a DECADE of games that you can play. And the graphics are no issue at all heck yes it even runs good on your pc
100%. My PC can rust most games but those games from the 2010s always run perfectly at max settings with great framerates. And they’re still gorgeous games.
And that, is why I love my steam deck ;)
bro the reckoning soundtrack in the video hit me with so much nostalgia
When I look at games that aged well graphics-wise, it's art direction that makes the difference.
I'm not an artist. I've never worked on a video game or a movie. Therefore, I don't notice art direction unless it is really, really good.
Agreed! I'm tired of developers sacrificing actual good gameplay for microtransactions and skins. AI has come to a point where I don't even believe devs are even making the skins they are selling in microtransactions, most of it can be and probably is done with AI
Your are giving too much credit to AI. It surely contractors from china
Props for mentioning Kingdoms of Amalur! It's such a fantastic game and I love the atmosphere of it. I think I've played it at least 3 times. Lorestones telling the story in the background while you're fighting enemies is just a great idea.
played it for 20 minutes almost fell asleep lol
@@susanthejew6351 And? I like it. Random person on the Internet being facetious about something I like doesn't affect my enjoyment of the game. I never said somebody else should like it.
Truly a one of a kind game, battle and spell casting is extremely fun.
Incredibly fun game with some great ideas! It just lacked something, I don't know what, but I didn't fall in love with it when I thought I should have.
My pc doesn't even have a graphics card but I can still enjoy rdr2 because it's not just about graphics as some people make it out to be
Congratulations November Hotel been subscribed since day one when you shared my opinion on how destiny 1 graphics are much more visually appealing than destiny 2 and knew that with your effort and voice you would end up with crazy exposure to the internet like now keep going thank you for the content we need what a great video conversations like these need to be out there to provoke change from AAA developers regardless of whether or not people agree with your opinion it gets the wheel turning
In my mind Halo 1 proves just how much a good art style can carry a game even 22 years later.
Sure, graphically it’s dated, models even a few years later had more than tripled in poly counts but it’s art style holds up so well that a few months ago when I showed some gameplay to someone that had never seen Halo CE before they still went “hey this looks cool for how old it is”
Fr. OG HALO CE looks better than the REMASTER imo
I think that some of the most immersive games I've played are those that aren't necessarily going for realism. I've gotten lost in No Man's Sky and in Dying Light just because the environments and other systems in the game worked so well together.
NMS does kinda have realistic graphics.
Immersion has very little to do with graphics. As the guy in the video points out, immersion really comes from a consistent experience.
Consistent artstyle/graphics, consistent audio, consistent gameplay/systems and consistent writing makes a game immersive.
Most modern games don't have that, they tend to be good in one area and terrible in another.
My personal favorite era of graphics and immersion were 2005-2014 or so. After that it felt like devs overused a bunch of post processing effects and lighting effects which makes the games look awful. Every objects reflects light in modern games which is very visually annoying. Same with the fog effects, every modern game for some very strange reason think it's good to implement a distant fog effects, even if the sky is clear.
I have been waiting for this, the fabled graphical plateau and the doom it spells for the major publishers.
Player visibility is a huge factor to me when playing an online FPS. As someone with bad eye sight, I appreciate you mentioning it.
In my theory of digital entertainment (im a videogame programing mayor) my teacher talk about this trend of top graffics beeing the gold standard. In the past old games and consoles due to the technical limitations every time they developed a more powerfull hardware it was their selling point, like discs in the ps1 or the 64 of mario 64 (64 bits of "processing power") became the thing that sold more games, when the time passes tho gamers as a community and game dev as an artform has developed and more and more the mentality of hyperrealistic grafics to good artstyle is changing for the best. Its just an old trend that will eventually die just like hyperrealistic paintings are not very welcome in the art comunity due to be boring and non expressive, also it has to do with the fact that tech nerds (usually so blindly delutional about "better hardware better everything") are so like obligated to talk about not peak performance that miss by a long shot. So dont worry hyperrealistic elitness will die eventually.
An idea I've had for these military shooters to help with visibility without compromising the realism of camouflage is to make enemies start to "glow" in the sense that it's like someone turned the brightness setting up on their sprite but only for the player spotting them, and it would slowly increase the longer you look at them but the moment you stop looking directly at them, the glow dissipates a bit faster than it ramped up.
This way, it simulates camo while helping players keep track of a player once seen, while giving the exposed player the ability to find cover and lose the other player over time. The intensity of the glow could also be limited to different intensities based on distance between you and your target, allowing snipers more cover from the less perceptive and giving players in more urban zones incentive to use cover and corners more often to lose tracking.
5:50 the beauty of the old FPS games was just the fact that it was focused on what the genre means "Fast Paced". Remove a set of edges and polygons, lower the resolution, all in favor of the game running super smoothly on older systems and play well (also bc game design was far more superior than it is these days). This is the reason why I keep coming back to the older games and why COD: WAW is my favorite game of all time.
The past was better, especially for videogames.
Great video :) One small request/suggestion, when showing us video from the various games you are talking about, could you please have the name of the game displayed on screen? Off in a corner or someplace where it isn't intrusive would be great. There were games in here that captured my attention, and knowing exactly which one was showing on screen at any point in time would make it simple for us to check out purchasing that game for ourselves :)
I just finished playing Metro 2033 Redux a few weeks ago, and even though the graphics may not be the best today, I felt greatly immersed in the world due to the atmosphere and storytelling which is much more important to me than graphical improvements!
It baffles me people think graphics are more important in gaming and still going crazy for it. It's like saying acting in movies is more important than a script or screenwriting. I played Final Fantasy 7, The Legend of Dragoon, Megaman X4, Kingdom Hearts 1 & 2, Metroid Prime, Klonoa 2, Metal Gear Solid 3, Dirge of Cerberus, Resident Evil 5, Dead Space 1 & 2, Crisis Core, Alien Isolation, and Fallout 4 countless times not only because of the graphics but story, gameplay, musical score, and art style. The same goes for movies like Alien, Nightmare on Elm Stress, Nosferatu (1922), Parasite, The Godfather Pt 1 & 2, The Dark Knight, The Lords of the Ring trilogy, and Before Sunrise.
Innovation and good writing over graphics and acting! Always.
I can't even describe how I felt when playing metro
@@Sajid-lp9ssplay the whole series to even get the story.
Classic metro is really a horror game the sequel metro last light is still a horror game but somewhat not scarier than the first game.
metro exodus became an open world adventure game that has horror elements.
Man… Metro 2033 original and Redux are fantastic games!!! Incredible atmosphere and game world!
@@TheRecklessMetalheadHmmm strange how you mention MGS3 and leave out the superior MGS1 on PS1 and mention one of the least Resident Evil games with RE5 and leave out the original RE1-3 and RE1 Remake. All much superior games!
About FromSoft art direction:
Art direction is not just mapscaping and architectural design (in those fields, they are the best in the videogame industry no doubt), but also, critically, photography (meaning the presentation of the image before your eyes through processes like color grading, etc...) and in that regard, you could leave your 8 year old cousin, that never have seen a program like Reshade before, alone with it for five minutes, messing around, and you'll get a 10 times better looking image that any out of the box FromSoft game. That, paired with the bizarre limitations that their games have technically for a studio so successful, made it clear to me that, yeah, gameplay is king and a lot of people really don't care that much about graphics or presentation in general.
From soft got amazing presentation. And color balance is on point. I will use Elden Ring as it is magnum opus. For example when finish Stormwail castle or walk around it and approche ledge witch bonfire with view on Academy of Lara Lucaria and the Lucaria lake... It was planed to the point. That every time you get there first time. It always would have good weather and day time. To present you with best views of the game. And the checkpoint there just guides you there so you would not miss it. That is visual presentation. And even the most of bosses of game are not as challenging mechanically as DS3 bosses but visual spectacle of the fights is just on new scale. For example Rodan and its epic battle field that is size of the whole zone. Even last boss. The feeling of scale of fight and The visual impact of hes attacks had feeling of Epic proportions. I doubt you can pull of Fantasy with hyper realistic visuals. As fantasy should not be realistic.
Color balance is not on point. Color balance in Elden Ring is GREEN. Like literally GREEN. If you can't see that, I don't know what to say. There is other problems of course, but that one is so obvious is painful to discuss. @@snazwonk2066
Love that you used the music from Age of empires. Great video and I agree.
I totally agree regarding too much blending, I felt it in GTA 5... In older games, there was a thrill and rush in recognizing the police cars. Enemies were visible from far away and it felt incredible.
I saw a documentary about Godzilla movies once. They raised the point that Godzilla allways looks so unrealistic. Someone in that documentary said: "If you order a painting of your grandmother you will not complain, that it looks unrealistic. Things don't have to look realistic to look good."
Yeah I've noticed this for a long time. It's kind of hard to explain sometimes. More cartoony graphics usually look a lot better. So it's better to mix cartoony with realism which all comes down to art style because it can look like total shit too. That's why it's hard to pinpoint why it doesn't really work sometimes.
That makes me think of the PS2 games era
@@ARStudios2000 yeah. Like kingdom hearts and shit.
Yes, this is why The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker looks great even this day, its cartoony artsyle has aged very well, unlike its contemporary games that sought realism.
Skyward Sword was also stylized as a watercolor painting.@@leodefine86
Stray deserves mention here. One of the big reasons it was such a hit was because the art style and vision was unique.
true
It's funny how in game development, you can make anything, literally anything at all. Your imagination is the limit. Yet they choose to shackle themselves with the obsession over real life that they see everyday.
I don't mind games being tied to real life, but you can still make the visuals more interesting like how a photographer can take a picture of an ordinary moment and transform it into something much more interesting. Even adding a touch of stylization would help immensely in a lot of these games. You could use limited color schemes or exaggerate some of the character features and animations ever so slightly. I think Ghost of Tsushima is the closest example I can think of where the game is still realistic looking with some slight stylization.
A game with realistic graphics (might) look good for a few years at most. A game with stylized graphics and a distinct aesthetic looks good forever.
I was playing Viewtiful Joe on the GameCube not too long ago and even though it's 20 years old the graphics still look fantastic.
Was just playing Borderlands 2 the other day and was shocked how well the graphics in that game held up. As far as AC goes, I found AC Odyssey to be stunning. It was fun to just get on a horse and ride through the world. As far as more modern games I think the Horizon games are freaking stellar.
bl2 is peak artsyle>graphics, The cel-shaded design is almost timeless! take a look at Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker. They also went with the cel-shaded design and it has aged like a fine wine. The game came out in 2003 and 20 years later is still playable and looks AMAZING. Graphics simply cannot beat style IMO.
Yeah I love Wind Waker. When I saw the game, I knew this graphics would never be outdated. @@droseras3002
Eww Borderlands is so boring and overrated. I could never get into that game.. And no my taste doesn’t suck. I could name dozens of classics that I still play to this day so I know it’s not a taste issue.
@user-qe7bt9dz1l for one, we are not even talking about gameplay. We are talking artsyle and graphics. So don't interject your opinion that was never asked for nor wanted. And for two, you are objectively wrong about it being a boring or bad game. 9/10 IGN, 10/10 steam and 9/10 euro gamer. These are just a few of the scores from critics. And three, just cause YOU don't like it don't mean shit games are not made to please 3vey single person on the planet, but majority will agree Bl1&2 are fucking classics and play extremely well in today gaming sphere.
@user-qe7bt9dz1l yes it is taste issue, you either don't like borderlands or you don't like looter shooters. That's on you. Taste issue and skill issue.
Digital Foundry got folks thinking if it ain’t 60fps 8k with HDR and Ray Tracing and Dolby Audio a game is mid or worse because the corner pixels look shiddy
I think the problem is companies try to be as realistic as possible. Sure it can look good but not all games have to be realistic looking, they can be stylized which also looks great and doesn't require newest quantum computer to run on 30fps. I also hate how dark games are, on my laptop my screen dimmed almost entirely to conserve energy and I have no trouble seeing anything that's on my screen.... unless I play games
A very informative video, I now understand the importance of Art Direction in a video game.
It is pretty much like the video game graphic looks like a beautiful digital painting poster.
As opposed to being generic when the scenes are simply rendered by the game engine.
I guess that's the importance of having concept Artist for a video game, and a art Director.
Very insightful video indeed.
Not informative, its rage bait. The most popular games (in real life) are Fortnite, Roblox, and phone games with stylish graphics.
"Realistic graphics" is something few studios can afford. And even big budget Sony game studios stick to PS4 graphics
Nintendo Switch is the best selling videogame console, and even that is topped by the popularity of mobile games with simple graphics.
Its the Western gaming community that prefer to clickbait and rage bait. This is a non-issue in real life where Asian MMOs, often free2play are played by more gamers globally. Westerners create drama
Graphics and immersion becomes a very interesting topic when you realize that Zork is more immersive than most new games
"Want some _RYE?!"_
wow fable,dradgon age, kingdoms of amalru is my all time fav and have the smae opinion and someone saying those exact things man this is something
you made my day bro
must recommended to give a try they still holds upto this days
This is why modern games all have these detective modes or obvious yellow paint for example. so you don't miss things in the hyperrealistic environments.
Yes. As if without Scanners we get our eyes back in our sockets which is so True. Like a photo with a one colour filter
This is a case where being an older gamer allows you to see this clearly. Younger gamers grew up in an era of ultra graphic, ray tracing, wide monitors, uncapped frame rates, etc. its something they EXPECT. GO play SKYRIM, BORDERLANDS 2, DISHONORED...they have an 'art style', which gives them a timeless quality. And you can not discount the immense fun factor. I honestly cant think of a single game where having amazing graphics was the reason why I loved it so much. I literally remember 20 year old games in my head in 4K 240 fps when they weren't even close. I loved the game so much that my brain reinterprets them that way in memory.
It’s nothing new people worshiped graphics always
Graphics simps are a bane on this industry, making games bloated, boring, restrictive and uninspired because of them, all these devs focus on graphics and nothing else
Ive never turned away a game for not having amazing graphics, but Ive turned away many games myself for having terrible visuals. Battlebit is an example, a severe lack of environmental detail/clutter and a otherwise overly blocky roblox look. And I know many Battlefield fans who have also refused to play Battlebit because of that.
For some of us having nice visuals is important. Sure you can use Roblox engine but how you design your map also matters.
Those games that you listed, they used environmental design and detail very well, so they presented themselves nicely even if the engine wasnt the most photorealistic.
I think the most important thing a game should convey to the player is what is happening on screen - are you in danger? are you damaging enemies? are you doing what you think you're doing? The graphics come second to that. Check out how many games we have that are back to lower graphics that still look great. I'd like to contrast Death's Door (which I love, go play it), and Diablo IV. Both are isometric ARPGs. DD is more action like an old Zelda, and D4 is more based on gear/stats. They both play quite the same though IMO.
Diablo IV is visually stunning, but you cannot tell what the heck is going on. Why did I die so fast? Why am I not doing more damage? Am I stunned right now? There are actual answers to these questions, but there is so much going on at any given moment on screen that the information is communicated so poorly to the player. That poor communication is a result of the "good" graphics being prioritized over clueing the player in to the fact that they're almost dead or stunned or even where they're located inside that horde of enemies.
By contrast Death's Door is sort of bland graphically, but charming and follows a fine theme. It's basically timeless because it will always look as good as it does. Moreover, I can always tell what happens in a fight, even if a lot is going on. I can always tell what hit me, what killed me, and whether I am doing damage to a boss or not. The game is challenging but far more fun to play because the game communicates everything to the player that the player needs to know to succeed. If you die in Death's Door, you'll know why. You'll know where you went wrong and every death is earned. Then you'll respawn, learn from your mistakes and take the boss down in the next life (or 2... or 5). It's just classic video game fun.
Back to Diablo IV, when I'm getting punched out by a boss time and again. It will take me ~10 deaths and an online guide to realize why I was dying: I was frozen, then knocked over, then mobbed by enemies, and without my shield up, I die in two hits. But there was just so much going that I couldn't tell at first. So, while Diablo IV succeeds graphically and can handle all the animations of dozens of enemies at once, it fails to use its superior graphics to communicate to the player what the player needs to know.
I shouldn't have to record my footage and review it frame by frame like an MLB batter to see where I went wrong. It's a video game - tell me what I need to know so I can fail or succeed on my own terms/effort. I would gladly take the graphics downgrade for better information on what is happening when I engage enemies.
Just stumbled onto your channel, thought you had like 500k subs, you deserve more recognition, love ur voice and content big man keep it up
I feel like there are two (at least) distinct eras to this - like the start of computer based games to about mid PS3/360 is the first era, wherein everything was just trying to look more "real". During this time, it was much easier to compare and rank things since they all had essentially the same goal.
Thenn between roughly 2002 to 2006, it started shifting to more interpretive and "artstic" themes being the focus, and as this progressed, it became MUCH less of a straight ranking and more of a "personal taste within a group that are all at a level of basic fidelity such that considerations of 'good' graphics mean practically nothing".... but we never updated our assessment or conclusive language.
By the time the PS4/X-ONE and latter GTX/early RTX were happening, it was completely in the realm of artistc expression, and we still didnt update our assessment or conclusive laguage.
So now we talk about "good" or "bad" like they mean something, when in reality that hasnt been a workable metric for at least a decade.
modern gaming to me as of right now is a competition on who can produce the highest resolution floor rust possible
From the day I can remember I felt a strange negative sensation towards newer games but couldn't name it back ten... now I know exactly what it was: I now call it "scaling dissonance" - the difference between game's graphics becoming better over the years VS game's programming, mechanics and complexity stalled or even dumbed down from the previous releases
Even physics and live environments became worse which you can say are graphical things.
Around PS3 era just after Half-Life 2 developers started trying to make games were physics and destructive environments worked. Now they stopped bothering. And live nature is another matter. Far Cry 4 with 5 here is a good example., Ghost of Tsushima is very artistic while also managing realistic type graphics and the environment moves and feels alive while some like Starfield that just game out is completely dead.
The environments feel like still images and nothing more.
Honestly i think that currently Ghost of Tsushima is the best looking title in the last 2-3 years because it combines art style with detail graphics and living breathing environments.
Btw i lately put Killzone and The Order in my PS4 and those games honestly could be released right now and no one will feel they are outdated. And those where launch titles of PS4 back in 2013-2014.
Also if you put Killzone 2 into a PS3 it still looks absolutely amazing. It is crazy.
Ive always railed against realism because it kills the magic. It NEEDS to look like a game not a sterilised version of life.
Interesting. I sometimes feel like newer games just throw so many mechanics at me, that I don't realy know what the actual game is. I especially felt this when playing Horizon 2. There were so many new weapons and mechanics that I did not really use, so now I feel like I missed half of the game. Recently I played more indie games with a lesser mechanics that clearly told me what I can and cannot do and that's it. For example Carrion and Cloudpunk. There's no overly complex RPG mechanics, not loot, no crafting, no weapons that can be upgraded, no relationships or companion system, no fast travel or house building. Just a few mechanics, that look and feel awesome and my wish to explore and that's all a game needs in my opinion.
As I mentioned elsewhere, I am currently playing Skyrim (for the first time) and it is absolutely full to the brim with mechanics. In a typical Bethesda game I sit down at the beginning and ask myself "What do I want to experience in this playthrough" because there is so much you can do, that in the end I do nothing, because I always get distracted from everything.
And sometimes I feel like this is because game devs don't ask themselves what their target audience is. "Everyone" is the worst target audience you can pick. So they make every game like it is every game ever made into one game so there's something for everyone, but nothing is really thought through and I guess this is the point where you and I meet: it's just too much mechanics, so all of them are boiled down and stupid.
If you just entered the gaming scene, this could be a groundbreaking, mind-blowing idea.... or... you could not be a tween and understand that some art styles are timeless and some show their age. If you do a cartoon style and compare it to a "realistic" style..one will age better... because one isn't going to be restricted as much by the power of the hardware... I know it blows the mind.
At best, this has value because the people who run across this video may not care or know about...google...or search.. we have this deep thinker to regurgitate already known and well-thought-out ideas on art styles and their reliance.
Well you’d be surprised how many comments I’ve received telling me I’m wrong and don’t understand the basics of “art style versus graphics”. I don’t pretend to be a philosopher on this concept, just trying to bring more attention to it because so much discourse is spent hyping realistic graphics even though the games have no artistic integrity besides that.
i rarely play PvP games but have got into the playtests for The Finals and quite enjoyed it - however, the first thing i noticed was how overboard they went with the graphics for basically no reason. Everything defaulted to the highest settings and it was affecting my performance (but it was also a beta so i excused it due to that). Turned them down to medium (but with max render distance) and the game played a lot better.
i don't get why a PvP game would try to be super realistic - especially since it's meant to be a VR gameshow in-universe. It just makes everything way less playable.
The ability to play older games upscaled has made me replay those classics again. Modern consoles like the PS5 and the Xbox Series X are awesome for (re)playing games like Skyrim SE. The same can be done with modern gaming PCs with technologies such as DSR or the newer DLDSR for those having an Nvidia GPU.
I completely agree with everything you said in this video and it is how I have been feeling this entire new “next generation!!”
It is why I have yet to get a PS five or a series X and instead went back to playing older games that immersed me much better, with the lower quality graphics but much higher quality for the capability of the consoles they were built on-
And even when it’s not about graphics, games on handheld like the 3DS and the PlayStation vita still satisfy a part of me that modern day gaming can’t even come close to touching!
The last most recent games I actually got a good immersive feeling from word games like the Witcher three wild hunt, the Witcher2, fallout Vegas, fallout three, fallout four, Skyrim LA noir, and red dead redemption two?
Oblivion, Skyrim, and Fallout 3 & 4 never fail me to impress. I play them on one walkthrough from time to time, and they are still amazing games.
what i loved about older games with their bad graphics seen from today is, that it lefts way more room for imagination how it could look in reality. with nowadays good graphics there is not much room for that anymore.
Graphics is just good moving pictures. Good visuals is important in a movie because a movie is not interactive therefore they need to focus on visuals in order to not bore their audience but since game is interactive they need to focus on character movement & running the game as smooth as possible because it is interactive you push a button then something happens