Full Games List
Featured Games
New Games
Reviews
Media
Images
Blogs
Game Updates
Images Feedback Summary
Game Design Highlights
Tutorials
Articles
Scripts
Utilities / Plugins
Resources
Engines
Engine Bulletins
What is Makerscore?
Past Events
Achievements
Misaos
Forums
Post History
Chat
New to RMN?
Full Store List
RMN Music Pack (free)
[POLL] 16-BIT(PIXEL GRAPHICS) VS HD
Poll
What type of graphics would you prefer in a game? - Results
|
16-Bit
|
|
23
|
67%
|
|
HD
|
|
11
|
32%
|
Posts
Travio
149
Travio
View playlists
Closeauthor=McBick
@Sooz
They are major developers because their games sell. If their games weren't good they wouldn't sell.
There's a flaw in your logic here. Sometimes their games sell just because of the name of the company or a previous title being good. That doesn't mean the games are good - there's a large market of people who want the beige FPS war simulators, so there's companies that do nothing but put out the same game, over and over, with ever so slight differences. And they make money hand over foot not because of the quality, but they're putting out something for a specific market who's shown to repeatedly pay for that content (the same market that's willing to shell out an extra 50% of a game's cost to get all the extra DLC content that the company uses to fill the sales gap until the next release comes out). A game selling does not make it good; a game can sell merely on the reputation of a company or on the merits of a previous game, and the game turns out to be shit.
LockeZ
I'd really like to get rid of LockeZ. His play style is way too unpredictable. He's always like this too. If he ran a country, he'd just kill and imprison people at random until crime stopped.
5958
The difference between a minor developer and a major developer isn't game quality. It's marketing budget.
McBick
1339
I still don't understand how you interpret that as me being confused with 2d and 3d because 16-Bit is 2D. Also I even say they use HD where your quoting me, so why would you think I forgot?
McBick
1339
author=TravioA game can have similar or even exact mechanics of other games especially if they are made by the same people. That doesn't mean the game is bad. Mario for example hasn't changed much over the years and many Mario titles are virtually the same games with different lay outs, but many people would agree it is a fun game. It seems to me that you are just saying their bad because you alone think they are. If a game is good or bad is subjective, but if you look at the amount of people who buy/play your games you can get an idea if a game is bad or not. Also if a company continued to sell bad games they would lose their reputation and wouldn't be selling many games. There is a reason for their high reputation.author=McBickThere's a flaw in your logic here. Sometimes their games sell just because of the name of the company or a previous title being good. That doesn't mean the games are good - there's a large market of people who want the beige FPS war simulators, so there's companies that do nothing but put out the same game, over and over, with ever so slight differences. And they make money hand over foot not because of the quality, but they're putting out something for a specific market who's shown to repeatedly pay for that content (the same market that's willing to shell out an extra 50% of a game's cost to get all the extra DLC content that the company uses to fill the sales gap until the next release comes out). A game selling does not make it good; a game can sell merely on the reputation of a company or on the merits of a previous game, and the game turns out to be shit.
@Sooz
They are major developers because their games sell. If their games weren't good they wouldn't sell.
Travio
149
A game's sales numbers do not equate to a good game.
Let's go with two games I'm intimately familiar with:
Suikoden IV and Suikoden V.
It's a rare person who will say Suikoden IV is the better game. In fact, most fans of the franchise will list it as the worst game in the series. Suikoden V is, by most accounts, considered at the top of the series. However, the sales numbers on IV are nearly twice that of V. That would automatically negate your proposed hypothesis that sales numbers automatically equate to a better game.
I'm going to get into some muddy waters here and go to the Final Fantasy series: I propose that the quality of the games began to go downhill starting with 7 (holy shit, I think I just heard a million pitchforks being raised - but I'll quell a large number of the masses by saying that 9 was a redeeming point after the switch to 3D). At that point in time, the focus on graphics started to such a point that the rest of the game began to suffer for it. The jump from Playstation to Playstation 2 just further aggravated the standards - not to say the 3D games aren't good games, but they begin to show suffering from an emphasis on presentation over content.
My belief is that your statement that sales can be an accurate measurement of how good a game is is inherently flawed. Sales figures do not automatically equate to quality, but instead a larger marketing budget and propaganda machine.
Edit: Ah, I found an example in FPS world: Resistance 2 (amusingly found on my shelf because, short of outright throwing the game away, I can't find a way to get rid of it). The game sold a lot of copies because of the first game and its merits (in excess of 3 million copies), and reviewers were giving high praise to this sequel. However, it's considered a failure in the series and pretty damned shitty, over all, by gamers - to the point where the developers called it a failure and swore to take fan feedback into account for Resistance 3. Source.
Let's go with two games I'm intimately familiar with:
Suikoden IV and Suikoden V.
It's a rare person who will say Suikoden IV is the better game. In fact, most fans of the franchise will list it as the worst game in the series. Suikoden V is, by most accounts, considered at the top of the series. However, the sales numbers on IV are nearly twice that of V. That would automatically negate your proposed hypothesis that sales numbers automatically equate to a better game.
I'm going to get into some muddy waters here and go to the Final Fantasy series: I propose that the quality of the games began to go downhill starting with 7 (holy shit, I think I just heard a million pitchforks being raised - but I'll quell a large number of the masses by saying that 9 was a redeeming point after the switch to 3D). At that point in time, the focus on graphics started to such a point that the rest of the game began to suffer for it. The jump from Playstation to Playstation 2 just further aggravated the standards - not to say the 3D games aren't good games, but they begin to show suffering from an emphasis on presentation over content.
My belief is that your statement that sales can be an accurate measurement of how good a game is is inherently flawed. Sales figures do not automatically equate to quality, but instead a larger marketing budget and propaganda machine.
Edit: Ah, I found an example in FPS world: Resistance 2 (amusingly found on my shelf because, short of outright throwing the game away, I can't find a way to get rid of it). The game sold a lot of copies because of the first game and its merits (in excess of 3 million copies), and reviewers were giving high praise to this sequel. However, it's considered a failure in the series and pretty damned shitty, over all, by gamers - to the point where the developers called it a failure and swore to take fan feedback into account for Resistance 3. Source.
McBick
1339
Like I said earlier if a game is good or bad is subjective. You might think V is better and I might think IV is, but that doesn't mean one is the better. I also did not say that sales alone determines if a game is good or not. To clarify what I meant was that by looking at the sales of a game you can get an idea of if the game is good or bad. If that game has outsold every other game of its genre by a large margin then chances are its a good game. There is no way to prove a game is good or bad. If you associate good with what the majority plays then you can use sales of a game to help you assess if it will be a good game or not. Ultimately it will be different for every person.
Edit: On another note I'm amazed no one has picked HD yet. Yes I picked 16-Bit I love me some nostalgia.
Edit: On another note I'm amazed no one has picked HD yet. Yes I picked 16-Bit I love me some nostalgia.
author=McBick
If that's true then why do all the major developers use mostly HD? In fact I have only ever seen Indie games use 16-Bit-like graphics.
This. And there is an expectation that if it's in a High Gen Console, the game has to look what is to be expected from that console(if we're talking about AAA). Indies are a lot more liberal since they're not expected to be some AAA company, wtf are they doing with the money or why do they make sh*tty looking games and still call themselves AAA, criticism.
Also can you imagine making 16bit graphics and use those assets for 1920x1080 resolution? ._.;
Travio
149
author=Archeia_Nessiah
Also can you imagine making 16bit graphics and use those assets for 1920x1080 resolution? ._.;
Truth be told? I'd love to see someone at least try.
author=Travioauthor=Archeia_NessiahTruth be told? I'd love to see someone at least try.
Also can you imagine making 16bit graphics and use those assets for 1920x1080 resolution? ._.;
RyaReisender
200
In pretty much every game I know that has a 16-bit and a HD option, the 16-bit options looked a lot better. HD often looks really ugly, especially for 2D games. It's just way too cartoonish.
For example Half-Minute Hero: http://www.gametrailers.com/videos/w5gc13/half-minute-hero-super-mega-neo-climax-art-style-comparison
For example Half-Minute Hero: http://www.gametrailers.com/videos/w5gc13/half-minute-hero-super-mega-neo-climax-art-style-comparison
author=Archeia_Nessiah
Also can you imagine making 16bit graphics and use those assets for 1920x1080 resolution? ._.;
Exactly. While still a valid choice, I guess, working with 'true' pixels at high resolutions becomes increasingly difficult and just not worth the effort... The real beauty of pixel-art comes from when you're working with genuine limitations. It is how you learn to make good use of color, space, etc. But if your only requirement is "noticeably-made-of-blocks" and you use zillions of colors, sizes and whatnot, it kinda defeats that purpose. That is not a conscious design choice, you're just mocking the art style for cheap familiarity points.
I'm actually a bit surprised to see "16-bit" ahead of "HD" in this poll. Funny how people cling to the past. But it's only a matter of time...
@Travio: A bit off-topic, but while I'd agree Suikoden IV is the lowest point in the series, I'd still argue is a "good" game. So, yeah... =P
Edit: Touché. xD
Travio
149
author=alterego
@Travio: A bit off-topic, but while I'd agree Suikoden IV is the lowest point in the series, I'd still argue is a "good" game. So, yeah... =P
I'd argue it's a good half a game. ;)
Sooz
They told me I was mad when I said I was going to create a spidertable. Who’s laughing now!!!
5354
author=McBick
Mario for example hasn't changed much over the years and many Mario titles are virtually the same games with different lay outs,
...we're talking about the Super Mario plumber guy who rescues the princess from the turtle dragon thing, right? Because in my universe, that game has changed tremendously over its lifetime, and continues to do so. Unless your idea of "change" is "turns into a completely different genre of game," in which case... wait, there's like eighty jillion different versions of Mario games in different genres.
author=McBick
There is no way to prove a game is good or bad. If you associate good with what the majority plays then you can use sales of a game to help you assess if it will be a good game or not. Ultimately it will be different for every person.
...if your attitude is this, then why do you involve yourself in any discussions on game quality in the first place?
Also, if lots of sales is a sign of something good, then one would expect Twilight and Shades of Grey to be good. Which they are not. Sales have a good deal more to do with marketing than quality, and many consumers of entertainment are satisfied with mediocrity. The fact that they will take gruel when nobody's offering steak does not mean that gruel is steak-quality or even good. It just means they're hungry and gruel is there.
Really, I think if you're gonna discuss whether something is "good," you should define what you mean by "good," since it's pretty obvious right now that you're sliding around among a lot of different definitions.
author=Travioauthor=alteregoI'd argue it's a good half a game. ;)
@Travio: A bit off-topic, but while I'd agree Suikoden IV is the lowest point in the series, I'd still argue is a "good" game. So, yeah... =P
Sorry have to laugh at that. Yeah... would have been better if included with Tactics and kept the Tactics battle style. ;p (I'm not big on the departure from 6-person parties when you have so many characters.)
Did anyone else see that trailer Square did to rundown what happened in the FF13 story so far for Lightning Returns' release? See, I'd love to have played a FF13 in that style - mainly because then they might have devoted more time to the other aspects.
When it comes to HD, for the most part story, world lore/building and characterisation suffers which is NOT what you want in an RPG. Sure, if it's an Adventure game or a Shump, understandable, but RPGs shouldn't be about the graphics as much as they should be about the journey. Notice I didn't say they shouldn't focus on the graphics at all, but blowing your budget on graphics is, imo, unprofessional. Balance is best.
McBick
1339
@sooz
I was talking about the "new super mario bros" series which there are at least 5 of if not more and they are all just rehashes.
Just because I look at something objectively doesn't mean I can't discuss the good and the bad of it. It allows me to look at it from every ones point of view instead of dismissing anyone because it goes against what I think. Again your using your opinion as fact. Not only that, but your using books that probably aren't targeted for you either. That's like me saying COD sucks because I hate first person shooters.
@Liberty
What if you could have the exact gameplay, but could play it in 16-Bit or HD?
I was talking about the "new super mario bros" series which there are at least 5 of if not more and they are all just rehashes.
Just because I look at something objectively doesn't mean I can't discuss the good and the bad of it. It allows me to look at it from every ones point of view instead of dismissing anyone because it goes against what I think. Again your using your opinion as fact. Not only that, but your using books that probably aren't targeted for you either. That's like me saying COD sucks because I hate first person shooters.
@Liberty
What if you could have the exact gameplay, but could play it in 16-Bit or HD?
16 bit. It has more charm. I'll always prefer Suikoden II to Suikoden V if only because of the art direction which added more fun and cuteness to the characters. HD removes something of the players' interpretation of the characters, I think. Like a book made into a movie messes with peoples' preconceptions of characters because you see a person in your mind and when it's taken to actual physically detailed form it might not be what you envisioned, ruining part of the experience for you.
I like visuals, don't get me wrong, but I like to leave something to the imagination. I'd much prefer that the creators worked more on the world around the characters - making the setting interesting and varied - rather than making more detailed visual characters *. Leave something for us to invest in the game, imagination-wise, kthnxbye.
*That is not meaning don't invest in the actual characterisation of the characters. Do that. We need something to bring the characters in our imagination to life, after all.
One example I will share - the official art book for The Wheel of Time left me highly disappointed. These were NOT the characters I envisioned as I journeyed through that world. Not at all. About the only thing I 'got right' was the Midraal or whatever they were called.
I like visuals, don't get me wrong, but I like to leave something to the imagination. I'd much prefer that the creators worked more on the world around the characters - making the setting interesting and varied - rather than making more detailed visual characters *. Leave something for us to invest in the game, imagination-wise, kthnxbye.
*That is not meaning don't invest in the actual characterisation of the characters. Do that. We need something to bring the characters in our imagination to life, after all.
One example I will share - the official art book for The Wheel of Time left me highly disappointed. These were NOT the characters I envisioned as I journeyed through that world. Not at all. About the only thing I 'got right' was the Midraal or whatever they were called.
Sooz
They told me I was mad when I said I was going to create a spidertable. Who’s laughing now!!!
5354
author=McBick
@sooz
I was talking about the "new super mario bros" series which there are at least 5 of if not more and they are all just rehashes.
You should probably be more specific in what you say then. Half the reason this topic is such a mess is because you keep saying things, then having to clarify because you didn't actually say what you meant.
Not only that, but your using books that probably aren't targeted for you either. That's like me saying COD sucks because I hate first person shooters.
As a young(ish) ladytype who likes romance and the supernatural, those books are ABSOLUTELY targeted at me. They suck on any objective level because they are terribly written. They are popular, not because they are good, but because they provide a setup that is popular.
Again: WHAT IS YOUR DEFINITION OF "GOOD"? Is it "popular"? "Enjoyable"? "Created competently"? "Does not explode when I touch it"? "Gives me a fleeting respite from my dreary existence and constant awareness of my own mortality"? "Supplies me with my daily dose of violent/sexual fantasy"? So far, you seem to flit from one definition to the next like a butterfly in a flower garden, never maintaining one position for too long.
McBick
1339
@sooz
I said they PROBABLY aren't targeted to you. Again you just say their bad and give no reason which would make it seem like your basing that off your opinion alone, I am not saying that you are. Please don't bring this up again because I have never read or even seen the movie, so I wouldn't be able to discuss this further.
I don't know where you see that I describe what good is and you even ask me what my definition is yet say I keep switching the definition. I have been constantly saying "good" is different to each person. My definition of what good would mean is satisfaction in something.
I said they PROBABLY aren't targeted to you. Again you just say their bad and give no reason which would make it seem like your basing that off your opinion alone, I am not saying that you are. Please don't bring this up again because I have never read or even seen the movie, so I wouldn't be able to discuss this further.
I don't know where you see that I describe what good is and you even ask me what my definition is yet say I keep switching the definition. I have been constantly saying "good" is different to each person. My definition of what good would mean is satisfaction in something.
HD's cool and all, but something about 16-bit just... clicks with me in a way that I tend to enjoy it more frequently than the former.
Addit
6394
author=Sated
Gameplay >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Graphics to a level that this question is completely irrelevant.
Pretty much this.
It just depends on the game.
