[POLL] 16-BIT(PIXEL GRAPHICS) VS HD

Whew! Just read through this entire thread, and have a lot of things I could potentially say and reply to. But I think I'll just stick with my general opinion on the subject.

If I could choose to have FF13-level graphics for my game, I would, bottom line. Some of the visuals of that are simply amazing and really add value to the game.

But there are reasons I often prefer pixel art over HD.

1. Pixel graphics are a lot more forgiving, and cheaper, than HD graphics. A lot of HD graphics look bad because they ARE bad. Would you rather read a good book or watch a bad movie? It doesn't matter that the movie has flashy visuals and awesome sound effects. If it's a bad movie, it's bad.

And while I hypothetically could write a great book, my financial resources would not allow me to product a great movie. Not to mention too that a movie requires many more skills than a book, skills that I may not have.


2. HD graphics constrict us. In fact, better graphics in general can restrict us. When looking at map design I tend to go back to FF4 more than FF6, not because I felt FF4 was graphically superior (it absolutely was not), but because I felt it used what it was given much better. 16-bit gives us flexibility HD does not.


To help think about what I said above, I present to you Minecraft. People have created absolutely stunning scenery in Minecraft in a fraction of the time it would take to design in full HD. And unless you're FF13 or some of FPS games, I'd argue that what people are doing in Minecraft would look better too. I mean, just take a look:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WFhpgBp4JcM

What's more is that even the lower quality and pixel-like appearance can still provide for some incredibly powerful story telling. Check out this video (worth the look even if you don't care for what I'm saying):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I-sH53vXP2A

At the same time, I won't disagree that the previous video wouldn't be nearly so good if it was done all in 16-bit with text rather than song, and tiny pixelated characters rather than the emotional ones we see in the video. In fact, I'd even say that the video would have been significantly worse had it just used the normal Minecraft character graphics.

And yet it is still an excellent example of what's at stake here. Because the maker spent less time on the mapping they were able to spend more time on the characters. Because the maker spent less time on high resolution graphics they could spend more time on making the animation and emotions. The point is, they improved the graphics only where the improvement mattered. And when it didn't, they left it alone. And that's perfect. That's exactly how we need to approach it.

They improved the graphics only to the point where they assisted with the story but not beyond.

If we have to sacrifice gameplay for HD graphics, do we still want HD graphics? And between good looking pixel art versus bad looking HD, I'd take 16-bit every time.

Of course there's the Nostalgia factor, but I also think there's a lot to be said for leaving things up to the player's imagination/interpretation.

Like, I imagined Klavier Gavin from Phoenix Wright to speak with a German accent, but in the latest game he's voiced by Yuri Lowenthal playing Yuri Lowenthal. Obviously I wouldn't go as far as to say it ruined the game or the character, but it was still noticeable enough.

Sure, that example is sound rather than graphics, but y'know.

I couldn't decide. Low-resolution graphics allow for more work to be done in a shorter amount of time, also leaving some space for the player's imagination. But they cannot reach people who have become accustomed to high-resolution graphics. High resolution looks great, but it can be a true economical pain to make enough high-resolution graphics to fill an RPG.