No. The difference is in the art style. Remember those games for stuff like the Genesis that tried to be really detailed? They look like ass now. And on the other side, there are PS2 era 3D games that look good because of the high detail but low poly designs.
Depends. Most of my favorite games are 2D. However, stylistic 3D or tastefully minimalistic 3D can age really well.
A lot of people would disagree, but I feel like MGS on the PS1 has aged really well with the dithered textures and thought out polygons. In addition to that, I think that Crash Bandicoot still looks really good too. Mega Man Legends as well.
There are definitely some 3D games that have aged like shit though. Most anything that went for realism is now completely off the radar and looks awful.
I want low poly to be the new pixel art; at least until it gets done to death.
Realism is a style that's impressive when done well, but which ages very quickly, because there is always a concrete barrier against which it can be measured: reality. Games get more and more realistic every year, and all the previous "realistic" games that came out, look dated.
Games that go for detail, but not realism, age best. Early PS1/N64 games "feel" like games to me, because it's like playing a cartoon. The texture work is there, but not shaders or other stuff used to give it more realism.
>>275463654 Both of them aged badly mainly because of the gameplay mechanics have been improved by later installments. Go play say, MM and Sunshine, then you'll see how hard it can be to go back to OoT and 64.
>>275463654 OoT hasn't aged at all in terms of gameplay. It's just as fun to play now as it was in 1998. Mario 64 still aged pretty well, even though the games that came afterwards improved upon the gameplay. Sure, they look like shit now, but if you ignore that they're both perfectly fine.
>>275463967 MM's gameplay is literally identical to OoT's. You MMfags are on drugs, its exactly the same (aside from the masks, obviously). When I say literally identical, I mean they use the same engine and no changes were made.
Go ahead, explain to me how MM's existance made OoT age poorly.
>>275462783 It's because pixel isn't something that isn't rapidly evolving, and as long as you've created the visual content with a pleasing style/aesthetic, you've created something that is timeless. You'll date your work if you try to push it to it's limits and make it look REAL, instead of staying simple and clean is the way that you're making me feel to tonight
>>275464101 >>275464225 Shit like this will age fine. You can go for style over substance visually and get away with it, despite your limitations. Megaman Legends is a good looking game despite it's incredible visual simplicity, and while obviously aged, doesn't look bad NOW.
>>275464039 >OoT hasn't aged at all in terms of gameplay.
It certainly has. All the mechanics of attacking, jumping, moving, have aged better. The very fact that modern games have dual analog sticks makes it aged. There are games that have aged much worse, (like MGS, which was always shit), but you sound like a really moron with such obtuse nostalgia.
HA! No! You can't just scan in HDR photos, volumetric scan, and mocap sprite art. Stylized art, be it 2D or 3D, will always take actual talent. And I'm not just talking about indie sprite game of the month.
>>275462898 This anon gets it. The reason 2D games age better, is for the fact that the low technical requirement allows artists to take full advantage of their tools to create super refined imagery. Plus the fact that 2D art had been an established industry for many decades prior to video games. Artists honed and refined their craft. Methods were developed in teaching new artists quickly.
Now that the technical requirements to create 3D imagery is reaching a negligible level, the same thing is happening to 3D art. The artists can now fully focus on creating super refined imagery. And the industry has been around long enough for 3D methods to become common knowledge.
>>275465401 Technical inferiority does not equal an impossibility of aging well. It's the same thing that can be said of this fag's >>275464867 response where because better exists since then, the two are still very playable and have weathered age very well.
>>275462783 stylised visual schemes age better in the long run and its just easier to stylise 2d graphics than 3d and its not that either ages better its just that more people choose stylisation in 2d because its cheaper and easier while 3d has always mainly focused on realism
I'm not shitposting unless you think having opinion offends you.
3D and 2D are just one and the same, just tools to render out something to convey. It's really dumb when 2D purists come out of the woodwork to shame 3D like it's some objective emotionless form of art.
>>275466052 But neither OoT or Mario 64 have aged in terms of gameplay. Ignoring the framerate, they play and control better than most games today. Moreover their sequels pretty much play the same, if not worse.
>>275465619 >The reason 2D games age better, is for the fact that the low technical requirement allows artists to take full advantage of their tools to create super refined imagery. We largely haven't seen super refined imagery. 2D mostly has never hit it's actual technological peak. In the early era it was able to 3D pretty much has taken over. So we never saw 2D at it's best or even near best.
>>275466292 A game, outside a handheld, that would not allow the player to move the camera with a control stick would be unacceptable by today's standards. Forcing the player to use single buttons for basic camera control to is a sign of age, regardless of the control limitations.
>>275466410 I wasn't referring to SM64, and control aren't any more precise than Super Mario Sunshine and even if they were, it doesn't justify the primitive control scheme of using individual buttons to move the camera. It would be unacceptable today and therefore, it has aged.
>>275466581 Are you kidding? Just look at OP's image. Minish Cap is one of the most beautiful 2D games ever. Unless of course, you don't count pixel art as being refined. You're not one of those "we need hand drawn sprites!" people, are you?
There's more to art than just pixel density you know. Just like there's more to 3D art than poly count.
>>275464524 everyone always sucks this thing's dick so hard, I want to be a contrarian and say that it's not nearly as impressive as you think.
It's all just parts moving around like a flash animation. The segments of the crab, the pieces of the gun, they just rotate and move but are still the same "cut-out". Sure, the smoke, firing cord thing, and sand are fully animated, but the rest of it is "flash-tier".
And it ends up looking fucking gorgeous, but once you know what to look for you see this sort of stuff in every metal slug animation.
which is why I think SFIII has the best sprite animations of all time, because for the most part those are truly fully animated, each frame unique
>Minish Cap is one of the most beautiful 2D games ever. No it's not, but it's fine. And no pixel art isn't the definition of refined. You could have actual high resolution art for shit, we never see it.
> You're not one of those "we need hand drawn sprites!" people, are you? A lot of 'pixel art' (erroneous terminology as well) is hand drawn. Pixel art is low resolution art. All fucking game art relies on pixels. And no just being high resolution doesn't make it good.
>There's more to art than just pixel density you know. Ironically the very argument you're backing, that low pixel density makes good art. No it doesn't. But increasing the resolution allows for more detail and improvements. Similarly 2D shaders could be used as well.
You would have to be a retard to argue that decent low poly 3D is better than decent high poly 3D. Same applies here. Except for 2D we'll likely never see anyone attempt true high resolution 2D and most of it gets shifted to low quality vector work in flash.
>>275465718 Mario 64 visually aged well. Good use of color to hide the fact that the textures were super low quality, kept poly count down as much as it can without being too noticeable, kept a consistent framerate. I think it's the nicest looking game on the 64. Not the most technically impressive, but it just looks nice. It appeals to the system's strengths.
OoT has a wildly inconsistent framerate, tries to be more detailed and falls flat (seriously, the texture work in that game is almost the opposite of Mario 64, emphasizing the fact that the N64 is really bad at it), and ultimately shows its age as a result. It seems to appeal to the system's weaknesses.
>>275467052 >flash-tier I vaguely see your point, but unlike most flash animation, they put actual effort into each of the component parts. Even the bits that mostly just sit around and rotate have shifting lighting added.
also, I'm a sucker for multi-part sprite animation anyway Fucking Seven Force gets me wet.
>>275467915 >OoT has a wildly inconsistent framerate No it doesn't. The engine is 20fps capped. That's a low framerate, but consistent. It does sometimes drop, but very infrequently. >tries to be more detailed and falls flat (seriously, the texture work in that game is almost the opposite of Mario 64 OoT tries to go for a realistic look, so obviously it's the opposite to Super Mario 64. There's no Zelda game (not even TP) that tries to go for realism as much as OoT. And this thing about falling flat is garbage, OoT looked great in 1998 and part of that was down to the textures.
The reason it has aged is just down to a realistic style, any game that attempts to look realistic will age quickly, because a new benchmark is always being set for that style. It's hardly unique to OoT.
>>275467915 I just think it's sort of funny how most of the games that /v/ jumps to when they think "glorious 2D animations" are not actually impressive on a technical level at all. For instance, all of Vanillaware's stuff is distorting images to hide their lack of frames.
But I mean, it ends up LOOKING amazing, so I guess that's all that matters in the end.
>>275467961 They say it's somehow more precise, but that's not true. The same precision is available in Super Mario Sunshine, only a second stick is able to turn the camera. Super Mario Sunshine doesn't allow for first person view, but the camera is given an equal arc, if not more because Mario can turn 180 degrees. Super Mario 64 actually gives far less precision while not solely directing the camera, as the camera can only be detected with individual button presses. If anybody prefers individual button presses to a control stick in moving a camera, they are probably retarded.
>>275468845 I find that's the case with so many games, and the control were even tighter in SNES games. I tried the free-to-play version of Uncharted 3 and the character responds to control stick inputs about half a second after they're made. I find the New Super Mario sequels frustrating because of the input lag.
1. No pixel art isn't the "definition" of refined art. DUH. Pixel art can be refined. Any art can be refined. Even low poly art. hell, you can make taking a shit into a refined art. Ever see a perfectly coiled piece of poo with a clean taper on the end? That shit is a refined piece of art.
2. Pixel art is art is art that is restricted to low resolutions. The pixels are large enough to be noticeable.(if only barely in some occasions) Pixel art is a type of pointalized art.
3. Low pixel density doesn't "make" good art. Just the same as high pixel density doesn't make good art. They're both negligible to the point that matter: The impression you are trying to create with your imagery. If a low pixel game like Minish Cap can create the best impression possible in a 2D form. Then that makes it a great 2D game.
4. You would have to be a retard to THINK that I'm somehow implying that low poly is better than high. What I am saying, is that lower poly games are capable of being highly refined. Take Wind Waker for example. Wind Waker didn't need a high poly count and a high texture resolution in order to be claimed as a great looking 3D game, even 10 years after it's release.(Of course the HD release helped a lot) But then you look at a game like Twilkight Princess in comparison, and you can see that game's style needed better hardware. They could not polish it to the degree that the artstyle demanded. Thus, everyone remembers WW more fondly.
You sound like that faggot I was arguing with in the drawthread. If you're that anon, then I still stand by what I said. You're a massive asshole.
>>275468947 I'm not the only one who thought SMS controlled absolutely perfectly and every other Mario game is kind of a shock that the turn radius isn't as tight, I can't side-somersault as quickly, the run speed doesn't feel quite right, wall jumping doesn't feel like it has enough control, etc
>>275468539 Technicality is just one aspect of something. To say that they are somehow lesser because they aren't technically adept is not a stance, it's wrong.
Vanillaware is not impressive just because someone thinks it has technical prowess, though there does exist a certain amount of trailblazing with it being one of the only developers around doing a handpainted sprite style, but because of the overall cohesion of the artstyle and its wonderful execution.
Getting caught up in technical achievement is tantamount to whining about jaggies and framerates.
>>275469190 As polite as you're being, it's becoming easier and easier to insult your intelligence. You actually equated preferring the control of the camera by a control stick to single button presses. In that, you are in the tiny, undefendable, minority. You're trying to maintain that a game whose controls have been universally discarded for more than a decade on consoles somehow has not aged, and it is a losing argument. Stop it. Either consider reevaluating your beliefs, or keep your blinding nostalgia to yourself, but no longer keep expressing such ridiculous opinions.
>>275468334 >looked great in 1998 even back then I thought it looked like a mess (there are admittedly a few places that do look nice, but and it'd hit sub-10 at times, that's pretty bad
>>275469363 I love SF64, but that game has hilariously awful texture work. Just look at it. http://a.pomf.se/xdchge.jpg
I want to say F-Zero X looks great, but that's only because everything is moving so fast that you can't pay attention to it, it looks like dick in stills.
Man, I wonder what the fuck Nintendo was even thinking when they designed the N64. There really isn't a valid reason for the system to have any of the issues it does, not for the time when it was designed.
>>275468876 Garou's fucking pretty. The characters frame count isn't Third Strike-tier, but they're all well animated and the backgrounds are mostly gorgeous (except for fucking Kevin's stage).
SNK really does great background work. I fucking love KOF2002, but Eolith can't even compete in that regard. KOF '98, '99, 2000, even 2003 and then SvC Chaos have amazing backgrounds.
>>275464863 the angle and look of this makes it seem right out of DoDonPachi
>>275463968 I want to like this, but I still have to say that the cars from Ridge Racer on the PS1 just look nicer. The first two games, not even R4 (which is still the prettiest looking PS1 game of all).
>yes, this screenshot is blurry and a bit shit, I know, can't be arsed to find a nicer one
That's exactly what aged means. For video games, there's nothing inherently antiquated except what is improved in later games. When some aspect of a game loses its comparative quality because of games that have released after it, that why it would be considered "aged."
>>275467814 Except that you can literally just walk in the opposite direction and press one fucking button to have the camera reset to your orientation. Alternatively you could hit two C buttons. Did you even play the fucking game you mongoloid or did you rent it and give up after 10 minutes?
>>275471514 >2d has developed just like 3d >early 2d looks like shit >early 3d looks like shit Pretty much. Early 3D happened around the pinnacle of 2D sprite art, so it's true that comparing the two as technological "equals" could be rather misleading.
>>275469861 Borderlands, The Walking Dead sold very well. Less stylistic would be Naruto: Ultimate Ninja Storm, Street Fighter IV, Tales of Vesperia, . Dragon Quest VIII, the Sly series, Bastion, Grand Theft Auto: Chinatown Wars, all of which sold very well.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at [email protected] with the post's information.