Bricky - Graphics are Temporary, Art Direction is Forever

[Musubi]

Not exactly a point that hasn't been covered before but still a good video on the topic. Covering how fidelity in games is way less important than solid memorable art direction.

This REALLY speaks to me as some of my favorite games are kind of bland mechanically (looking at you No More Heroes) but I adore them because the style they put forward is so memorable that any shortcomings the actual game has are carried by how unique the game looks.

 

[wafflebrain]

Agree with this overall sentiment wholeheartedly. Many psx era games, especially horror ones, hold up very well today. Early 3d games that lend themselves to that abstract style due to low polys still look great to me.

More recent examples of lo poly, art over graphics style that stick with me far more than your average AAA title are things like Abzu, The Witness, Manifold Garden, just to name a few. Also still in love with build engine style shooters with 2d sprites for weapons and enemies. Post Void is just bananas visually and looks fantastic.

 

[Dragonyeuw]

I tend to agree. While technology has been slowly creeping closer towards photo-realism, imho games that went for a 'realistic' aesthetic a few gens ago start looking dated against today's 'realistic' aesthetic and that cycle will repeat ad nauseum( though we are also at the point of increasingly diminishing returns). By contrast a near 20 year old game like Windwaker ( ironically the subject of much initial controversy for its artstyle) released 8 years ago, could drop again today ( paging Nintendo) and come off as a modern produced game with just a few QOL touches and other minor nips and tucks.

It's also why 2D sprite-based games especially from the 16 bit era holds up much better than the early 3D consoles( PS1/Saturn/N64). Games like SMW 1/2, Super Metroid, ALTTP and the like are gorgeous to this day. Something like Hollow Knight will likely be enjoyed in the year 2040 as much as today, along with many other ( mostly) Indie titles that apply these kinds of timeless approaches to artwork. The 2D sprite Bloodstained titles will likely hold up better than the main course Ritual of the Night ( speaking of which, I'd love if they created a third 2D sprite title using a 16-bit aesthetic).

 

[Deleted member 87246]

There is no greater example of this than the rumour they're already remaking The Last of Us. Going for realism ages games so quickly due to how quickly technology evolves.

 

[thevid]

What is the point of discussing a video when everyone incorrectly boils its premise down to cartoony = great, realistic = bad?

 

[LostCauseUnite!]

What is the point of discussing a video when everyone incorrectly boils its premise down to cartoony = great, realistic = bad?

Click to shrink...

Because you can have a bad cartoony game and a good realistic one when it comes down to art direction. Colors used, shapes and figures used, etc., are part of the art direction for a game. For realistic games, I find that the horror games tend to hold up better than one would assume.

 

[catboy]

art direction is graphics so the title is already 😶

i guess what they actually mean is photorealism not a target > photorealism a target. because even studios like naughty dog are doing cartoon-esque things like characters with big eyes

 

[thevid]

Because you can have a bad cartoony game and a good realistic one when it comes down to art direction. Colors used, shapes and figures used, etc., are part of the art direction for a game. For realistic games, I find that the horror games tend to hold up better than one would assume.

Click to shrink...

What I'm saying is that the video itself points to things like Saving Private Ryan and Spec Ops: The Line as examples of good art direction and all the comments are about pixel art and how realism is bad. Did people even watch the video or did they assume that the video was confirming their belief that realistic graphics = bad art direction?

 

[LostCauseUnite!]

What I'm saying is that the video itself points to things like Saving Private Ryan and Spec Ops: The Line as examples of good art direction and all the comments are about pixel art and how realism is bad. Did people even watch the video or did they assume that the video was confirming their belief that realistic graphics = bad art direction?

Click to shrink...

I mean, it's a YT comment section, the amount of acceptable discussion found there tend to be a drop in an ocean

It's almost always filled with hot takes

and cringe

 

[Host Samurai]

Been saying this since the PS2 era.

 

[arsene_P5]

He is not wrong. Art direction can be basically timeless in a way realistic games simply can't. At least in rare cases like this one...

Rayman will still look good in 2040 whereas realistic games (Uncharted 4, Gears 5, ...) and even games like Zelda Breath of the wild or Mario Kart 8 simply won't.

 

[EvilBoris]

I stopped watching when he got to the bit about the "graphics" of bioshock sucking.
Then I really wasn't sure what point he was making anymore.

 

[Deleted member 41520]

some of my favorite games are kind of bland mechanically (looking at you No More Heroes) but I adore them because the style

Click to shrink...

That isn't the video's point though is it? You could argue mechanics can also trump style AND fidelity

 

[ShinUltramanJ]

Um…Bioshock was stunning at launch. What's this guy on? It was easily one of the best looking games technically and it just was off the charts in style.

But getting to his Battlefield comparison, I think it's low hanging fruit when you consider that Battlefield was never known for campaigns. It was a multiplayer focused game, where they arguably tacked on a single player element. So yeah, it's not going to be memorable. But we're talking videogames here, so given the choice between Battlefield 3 and Spec Ops the Line - I'm going Battlefield 3. Spec Ops may have a more memorable campaign, but playing it again recently on my PC, it just lacked any sort of oomph to the act of blowing away enemies. There was no sense of feedback, so yeah - art direction only takes you so far.

Warhammer…I know nothing about it, but I've got several Warhammer games and I like the style a great deal. Warhammer Necromunda Hired Gun I will go to bat for every time. It's a great combo of fun mechanics, beautiful art direction, and punchy weapons. Love it!

Prey…yeah, I really need to get back to that one. Fantastic immersive sim.

Edit: Just wanted to bring up Cyberpunk. It's a shame that management dropped the ball with that, because the environmental artists knocked it out of the solar system. I mean, the tiniest of details that they considered whether it was the signs above a bridge or tiny details at a restaurant table - just stunning.

 

[trashbandit]

art direction is graphics so the title is already 😶

i guess what they actually mean is photorealism not a target > photorealism a target. because even studios like naughty dog are doing cartoon-esque things like characters with big eyes

Click to shrink...

Yea, otherwise the style vs. graphics argument gets a bit more complicated. Graphics age, style doesn't is an oversimplification of the argument, because it ignores how technical limitations can themselves be an artstyle, which is what we see in games emulating the look of the PS1.

 

[Sanka]

There is nothing bad about art being temporary. I'm perfectly fine with beauty that is fleeting.

 

[threi]

Not just art direction, but music as well.

Also game mechanics.

To be honest graphical fidelity is pretty low on the totem pole.

 

[MrWindUpBird]

He is not wrong. Art direction can be basically timeless in a way realistic games simply can't. At least in rare cases like this one...

Rayman will still look good in 2040 whereas realistic games (Uncharted 4, Gears 5, ...) and even games like Zelda Breath of the wild or Mario Kart 8 simply won't.

Click to shrink...

People really be going out of their way to shout from the rooftops with how wrong they are. Putting Breath of the Wild and Mario Kart 8 up there with photorealistic games as somehow going to age badly sure is a take.

 

[Cygnus X-1]

I agree. In a way, this is not too different from what happens in the film industry - there, art is defined not only by video recording but also by scenography. Films like Spider-Man 2 or the Polar Express aged very badly, while artistic, niche games like the Dark Crystal stood the test of time.

 

[Nere]

Wind waker the thread.

 

[spam musubi]

Eh, feels like a false dichotomy in some ways. People are nostalgic for "art directed" games from a few gens ago but modern audiences would not necessarily consider the visual style of those eras to hold up. Art direction does make nostalgia goggles easier to wear, sure.

 

[Guinguin]

Very few games reached a bar where the art direction makes the old graphics still appealing. Vagrant Story comes to mind.

 

[Odesu]

Prime example for me will forever be The Order 1886. Incredible technology that serves the blandest, least interesting art direction I could possibly imagine. You spent most of your time very slowly wading through the same grey-dark subway tunnels and alleyways, they somehow even manage to make a zepellin uninteresting (the camerawork while climbing its outside is just...so fucking bad. That's not even art direction anymore, just an utter lack of competence on how to direct tension or give the audience a sense of speed. You are moving down a flying fucking zepellin and it's the calmest scene in the world, utterly devoid of energy.)

I remember that one vista on the harbour. That was nice. But most of the time it's incredible technology wasted on nothing worth that effort.

 

[SirKai]

I hate the distinction between 'graphics' and "art style," like they're not one in the same. Tons of the games that strive for photo realism can still be extremely stylized and distinct from one another, even if they're all set in approximately modern day.

Plus, some highly unique and standout styles of art direction and moods can only be achieved IF the game in question is trying to be as realistic as possible:

Silent Hill 3 is a game that's incredible stylistic flourishes only succeed because they're presented with a game that's designed to be as realistic and as cutting edge as the technology of the time could possibly allow.

I'll never accept that strictly 2D games or cel-shaded games have inherently more stylistic value than realistic games, as if realistic games aren't also stylized as hell too.

 

[LilScooby77]

What is the point of discussing a video when everyone incorrectly boils its premise down to cartoony = great, realistic = bad?

Click to shrink...

Gran Turismo has broken this belief every time it releases.

 

[Musubi]

I hate the distinction between 'graphics' and "art style," like they're not one in the same. Tons of the games that strive for photo realism can still be extremely stylized and distinct from one another, even if they're all set in approximately modern day.

Plus, some highly unique and standout styles of art direction and moods can only be achieved IF the game in question is trying to be as realistic as possible:

Silent Hill 3 is a game that's incredible stylistic flourishes only succeed because they're presented with a game that's designed to be as realistic and as cutting edge as the technology of the time could possibly allow.

I'll never accept that strictly 2D games or cel-shaded games have inherently more stylistic value than realistic games, as if realistic games aren't also stylized as hell too.

Click to shrink...

That is not what he said at all. In fact he directly compared to very similarly themed games Battlefield 3 and Spec Ops The Line as his initial examples. Spec Ops is far from cartoony but its world and characters are infinitely more memorable because they had a very specific themes they wanted to get across with the visual design. Where as Battlefield 3 is just going for realistic military sim.

If people are taking this as cartoony = good realistic = bad they've entirely missed the point. Art direction is about getting across specific themes or tones.

 

[Snefer]

This was horrible. Battlefield 3 looked good not just because of the tech, but because the STELLAR art direction involved that makes great use of that tech. DICE has historically had fantastic art direction. A huge part of succesful art direction in games is to work together with the tech, tools, and team at hand and make the best out if it. Not just having "oooh a UNIQUE VISION" and then forcing that.

 

[eraFROMAN]

Art Direction > Technology is usually the actual thing people mean when they bring up "Style over Realism." Realism...is an art style, so chasing that, if that is your vision, is fine. Doing it as a show piece for technology is what usually dates it instantly. Tekken Tag Tournament is relatively realistic, and is very conservative on the tech side, so it STILL looks good 21 years later. Tekken 6, on the other hand, has stylish graphics, but leans on trying to push its tech so hard that it looked like a blurry, over designed mess when it came out

 

[Tyaren]

art direction is graphics so the title is already 😶

Click to shrink...

I hate the distinction between 'graphics' and "art style," like they're not one in the same.

Click to shrink...

I am always confused when I hear the very common: "I don't care about graphics, art direction is much more important to me."
Isn't the art direction part of graphics? Without art the pure tech isn't able to visualize anything. It would be just...code...

So, if people mean by "graphics" what they see on their TV screen, then that of course includes art direction.

 

[Deleted member 17184]

Yep. This game is from 1997.

 

[KillstealWolf]

People really be going out of their way to shout from the rooftops with how wrong they are. Putting Breath of the Wild and Mario Kart 8 up there with photorealistic games as somehow going to age badly sure is a take.

Click to shrink...

Breath of the Wild already looked bad even at launch, it'll look as rough as Ocarina of Time does compared to today's releases in the future.

Mario Kart 8 will probably look fine in the future though, Artstyle seems to be the main thing the budget went to for that game (Just wish MK9 or whatever they call the next console title plays better than 8 does).

 

[Siresly]

 

[arsene_P5]

People really be going out of their way to shout from the rooftops with how wrong they are. Putting Breath of the Wild and Mario Kart 8 up there with photorealistic games as somehow going to age badly sure is a take.

Click to shrink...

MK8 and Breath of the Wild won't age as soon as realistic looking games. But those games will still age. Even with the artstyle Nintendo is shooting for, there is a lot to improve. MK8 and BotW have really poor textures at times and IQ, lightning and so on can improve massively on stronger hardware. A Zelda in 2040 will look significantly better than BotW. There is no doubt about that and if you can't see the flaws now, you will see them in 2040.

Whereas Rayman legends is basically timeless due to artstyle and it will look great and up there with other 2D games in 2040. Which game will hold up better in 2040 on Switch 4 or whatever Nintendo plans to do in the future?

And again, I repeat myself, because you misunderstood me. Obviously realistic games will age more poorly than BotW. But the artstyle of the incredible Zelda game still isn't timeless. Only a handful of games really have a timeless artstyle and those are 2D. 3D graphics in games regardless of artstyle can still massively improve and companies like Disney proof that.

 

[Atom Heart Mother]

realistic can still have an art direction. halo 3 is a realistic-style game but still looks fantastic

 

[SirKai]

That is not what he said at all. In fact he directly compared to very similarly themed games Battlefield 3 and Spec Ops The Line as his initial examples. Spec Ops is far from cartoony but its world and characters are infinitely more memorable because they had a very specific themes they wanted to get across with the visual design. Where as Battlefield 3 is just going for realistic military sim.

If people are taking this as cartoony = good realistic = bad they've entirely missed the point. Art direction is about getting across specific themes or tones.

Click to shrink...

I was responding to the thumbnail that graphics and art style are, somehow, not the same. I just don't see how they're not.

 

[Deleted member 1003]

I would argue they are intertwined. Graphics and art style cannot be separated.

 

[Ploid 6.0]

art direction is graphics so the title is already 😶

i guess what they actually mean is photorealism not a target > photorealism a target. because even studios like naughty dog are doing cartoon-esque things like characters with big eyes

Click to shrink...

And in that case, what makes stylized so good is the freedom it gives when creating interesting worlds and characters.

"The significant difference between realism and stylized is that with realism you are restricted to making things look 'real' while enhancing their visual language. With stylized you are free to play with the shapes and colors, exaggerate or remove details to enhance the look and feel in any direction." - Kim Aava, Lead 3D artist (Battlefield V, Horizon Zero Dawn, Apex Construct, The Solus Project)

Realistic vs. Stylized: Technique Overview

Kim Aava summarised her amazing talk about the difference in techniques, which artists use to build photo-realistic and stylized environments.

80.lv

 

[squidyj]

Me, an intellectual "Realism bad"

 

[DaciaJC]

He is not wrong. Art direction can be basically timeless in a way realistic games simply can't.

Click to shrink...

I think you need a better choice of words, because "art direction" doesn't refer to any one visual style.

 

[lvl 99 Pixel]

Games aiming for realism did age a whole lot harder. Humans are very good at noticing when things look off/uncanny and "cartoony" games circumvent this somewhat by being deliberately surreal. The video is weird though. He mostly lists off themes his favourite games use rather than specific art direction, basically conflating Creative Director and Art Director.

 

[CountAntonio]

I'll take pre Cosmetic overload TF2 over Any modern shooter and SFV over Tekken. I love stylized, clean graphics.

 

[Spoit]

Um…Bioshock was stunning at launch. What's this guy on? It was easily one of the best looking games technically and it just was off the charts in style.

Click to shrink...

Didn't it come out within months of Crysis?

 

[RedSwirl]

Battlefield campaigns aren't memorable because their stories and level design aren't memorable. Modern Warfare has a similar "realistic" military style but is way more memorable because of how it was written and designed. Hell, Bad Company 2 ran on the same tech and similar art direction to BF3 (just earlier and less advanced) and is more memorable because of its writing.

But its not that much of a reach to say stylized games hold up longer than ones that go for photorealism. The thing about photorealism I think though, is that somebody still needs to be out there pushing new limits of graphics rendering.

Didn't it come out within months of Crysis?

Click to shrink...

It did but Crysis was kind of in a league of its own. Most people in 2007 didn't have the hardware to run it. Aside from that, BioShock did have relatively cutting-edge gaming graphics tech at the time.

 

[Pancracio17]

I hate the distinction between 'graphics' and "art style," like they're not one in the same. Tons of the games that strive for photo realism can still be extremely stylized and distinct from one another, even if they're all set in approximately modern day.

Plus, some highly unique and standout styles of art direction and moods can only be achieved IF the game in question is trying to be as realistic as possible:

Silent Hill 3 is a game that's incredible stylistic flourishes only succeed because they're presented with a game that's designed to be as realistic and as cutting edge as the technology of the time could possibly allow.

I'll never accept that strictly 2D games or cel-shaded games have inherently more stylistic value than realistic games, as if realistic games aren't also stylized as hell too.

Click to shrink...

Right. Very few games go for true realism I think. Stuff like Horizon Zero Dawn looks pretty different to RDR2. Theyre both "realistic" but stylized to fit the theme.

 

[Vitamin_B_Complex]

There is nothing bad about art being temporary. I'm perfectly fine with beauty that is fleeting.

Click to shrink...

Great point. Also, games that have incredibly good graphic fidelity usually also have very good art direction.

I think people tend to dismiss realistic looking games because something like Wind Waker is more obviously artsy. But they still have art direction that can shine even after decades.
I also think that those games gain a certain charme after some time. I don't know but I love the look of every era of gaming no matter how advanced the graphics were.

 

[Vulcano's Assistant]

Glad to see horror games were already posted on the first page, saves us from seeing the argument that pretends that striving for realistic models, textures, or lighting is devoid of the same amount of artistic intent.

Let's also not pretend that cartoony styles do not benefit from higher polycount like other styles. Compare Jak and Daxter 1 to Jack and Daxter 2, the cutscenes with higher poly models in the sequel make a world of difference when it comes to expressiveness.

 

[-Tetsuo-]

For the millionth time, you can have a game that is pushing the technical barriers while also not having "realistic" art design.

 

[DiipuSurotu]

 

[ShinUltramanJ]

Didn't it come out within months of Crysis?

Click to shrink...

Doesn't really matter, Bioshock was among the best looking games of it's time.

 

[jett]

I hate the distinction between 'graphics' and "art style," like they're not one in the same. Tons of the games that strive for photo realism can still be extremely stylized and distinct from one another, even if they're all set in approximately modern day.

Click to shrink...

Agreed, it's nonsense.