Do you prefer realistic or cartoony graphics?
- Thread starter Chivalry
- Start date
Realistic is boring. I see real life all the time. I want experimentation and vision.
Something like Katamari or Okami will always be a better looking game to me than something like the new Spider-man or RDR2.
Something like Katamari or Okami will always be a better looking game to me than something like the new Spider-man or RDR2.
Both.
I don't need to decide one over the other. Cartoony works for some games, realistic for others, and that's OK with me.
I don't need to decide one over the other. Cartoony works for some games, realistic for others, and that's OK with me.
Both can be great - it's all in the execution.
For instance, I think both Assassin's Creed Unity and Breath of the Wild are visually spectacular. One is hyper-real, the other has a stylized animated aesthetic.
For instance, I think both Assassin's Creed Unity and Breath of the Wild are visually spectacular. One is hyper-real, the other has a stylized animated aesthetic.
I don't think I can really judge a game's art-style with just those two words. A game's never just realistic or cartoony! They're very broad terms and encompass so much it's impossible for me to pick just one. The idea that realism = a boring colour palette which ranges from brown to dark brown is also far from true and something I see suggested often. Look at something like Blood & Wine for an example of a realistic game which looks incredibly bright and vivid:
In general I do prefer realistic titles, but I'm voting both just because there's incredible looking games that are both realistic and cartoony and I can't pick just one. I'd say my favourite cartoony game art is BOTW, and realism has to go to Witcher 3.
In general I do prefer realistic titles, but I'm voting both just because there's incredible looking games that are both realistic and cartoony and I can't pick just one. I'd say my favourite cartoony game art is BOTW, and realism has to go to Witcher 3.
Is it good art? That's what I prefer. Realism is not inherently good, and neither is stylized/cartoony. It's easy to fuck up both into something unappealing. Execution is more important.
Yep. Typically, more stylized games have aged better. Mostly due to technical limitations though.
Cartoony ages much better, but doesn't really work for every type of game.
My biggest problem with realistic is how generic most devs make it look, instead of having different art design. Skyrim has a realistic art-stile, but the art direction is so good that it still looks great after 8 years, but BF3, released on the same year, already looks terrible because its all grey and brown.
My biggest problem with realistic is how generic most devs make it look, instead of having different art design. Skyrim has a realistic art-stile, but the art direction is so good that it still looks great after 8 years, but BF3, released on the same year, already looks terrible because its all grey and brown.
A cartoony artstyle makes gameplay limitations more believable to me.
Seeing realistic characters hitting invisible walls or glitching or even being anything but "perfect" pulls me out of the immersion instantly.
Seeing realistic characters hitting invisible walls or glitching or even being anything but "perfect" pulls me out of the immersion instantly.
Like many have already said - it all depends on art.
I mean, I think Jet Grind Radio is one of the best looking games of all time:
... and I mean, how f-ing beautiful is Wind Waker?
Sure is pretty! Better than "realistic Zelda," right?
Realistic graphics must be worse than cartoony... wait... hold up...
**
But if I had to pick a "style," then it would be, well... "stylized:"
(arguably one of the best looking games of all time)
I mean, I think Jet Grind Radio is one of the best looking games of all time:
... and I mean, how f-ing beautiful is Wind Waker?
Sure is pretty! Better than "realistic Zelda," right?
Realistic graphics must be worse than cartoony... wait... hold up...
**
But if I had to pick a "style," then it would be, well... "stylized:"
(arguably one of the best looking games of all time)
Whatever floats the developers boat :)
I won't reject a game due to it's art style though.
Also, what is realistic and what is cartoony?
What category would TLG (or other Ueda games) be in? I guess "cartoony" but it can also be very realistic at times especially the dog.
I won't reject a game due to it's art style though.
Also, what is realistic and what is cartoony?
What category would TLG (or other Ueda games) be in? I guess "cartoony" but it can also be very realistic at times especially the dog.
I think super realistic graphics can work for certainly games but those typically aren't the kind of games I'm into. But it seems that if something is super bright and colorful, it's called "cartoony" and if it's not, it's called "realistic". Like Twilight Princess has some goofy ass looking character models but people call that game "realistic". But I'm not a fan of really realistic looking games but I'd love to see another Zelda game with a similar art style (like that Wii U tech demo).
Maybe on an etymological level, yes. I'd never call Persona 5 "cartoony" or Fortnight "anime-like" though. In practice those terms are used for very different things.
