Steam telepítése
belépés
|
nyelv
简体中文 (egyszerűsített kínai)
繁體中文 (hagyományos kínai)
日本語 (japán)
한국어 (koreai)
ไทย (thai)
Български (bolgár)
Čeština (cseh)
Dansk (dán)
Deutsch (német)
English (angol)
Español - España (spanyolországi spanyol)
Español - Latinoamérica (latin-amerikai spanyol)
Ελληνικά (görög)
Français (francia)
Italiano (olasz)
Bahasa Indonesia (indonéz)
Nederlands (holland)
Norsk (norvég)
Polski (lengyel)
Português (portugáliai portugál)
Português - Brasil (brazíliai portugál)
Română (román)
Русский (orosz)
Suomi (finn)
Svenska (svéd)
Türkçe (török)
Tiếng Việt (vietnámi)
Українська (ukrán)
Fordítási probléma jelentése
Hozzászólási szabályok és irányelvek
Hozzászólás jelentése
you should talk to someone son
I can prove that this is inaccurate.
This was addressed awhile back
I know this is weeks old discussion, and the whole thread is basically trolling and ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥, but this actually got me interested.
If I may ask, would you mind elaborating what is the problem with DOA5 visuals from the perspective of a professional? What makes it inferior to SFV / GG?
I'm not trying to argue or prove you otherwise. It's just that I'm not part of the "profession", and therefore am not versed in analyzing (objective) quality.
I am also interested what is wrong with Tekken, so if you don't mind, I would love to read more about that too.
To make it absolutely clear, I am not being sarcastic, but legitimately intrigued.
♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥.
Well, DoA doesn't look bad, his argument was that it looks thousand times better than SFV, which is incorrect.
I will check the thread again, but I think I made some explanations as to why SFV and GG are leading the pack, while Tekken is lagging behind (which isn't the main point, the main point is that Tekken often gets lauded for its visuals) in some other posts?
But, generally speaking:
-doa doesn't look bad. However, it's not on the SFV/GG level. Which is more than understandable, as the game is how much, five years old or so? It's not about doa looking bad, it's about not being exactly comparable. It's about relative aspect. DoA also doesn't offer anything spectacular in terms of stylization either - for some this might be important, for others less so, but why not mentioning it.
-SFV and GG are obviously completely differently looking games and not only that, but they present a completely different approach to designing a fighting game visually. One is mimicking the 2d sprite approach and the other one is embracing the 3d and is trying to make it work within its established style. Both do it quite masterfully and in different ways.
GG is perhaps easier to see why for a regular player - the imitation of 2d sprites is evidently on high level and that's easily perceivable by anyone. The additional notion there is that it's not exactly easy to do (or perhaps, it's not that hard, but you should know how to approach the issue - which many games don't, as a matter of fact, I am not aware of other teams achieving it at all). But it doesn't end there. Even if we exclude all the technicalities such as successful transition to 3d while remaining the 2d look fully (AND not only that, but utilizing the 3d even in that situation, by having camera angles, cinematic scenes, camera rotation etc. which would take ages to do in 2d), the design is fantastic. In every possible way. Characters are designed with much care and with much focus on their archetype, there's this rock-retro-future-silly theme going on, which is always executed masterfully, regardless of whether we like that setting or not. All the characters are meticulously designed, with the right amount of uncanny about them in order to suit the setting. Animations are carefully thought out and executed. I mean, I can talk about why GG is an example of a great visual presentation all day.
-as for SFV, it's similar in quality, but the approach is different. They tried to basically translate their 2d design into 3d world, but not by mimicking 2d, but by embracing 3d instead and everything that comes with it (different approach to textures, animation etc). There lies the first hats off thing - they actually did that. So, even though we have a 3d high fidelity Ryu jumping around, that Ryu is pretty much a fundamental Ryu design-wise, even more successful than some of his iterations from the 2d era. This goes for other characters as well.
Second, the dry technicalities are also top notch. Textures, animations, shading (less so, but still top notch) etc.
Animations are especially perhaps the best in a fighting game to date. They are so carefully crafted that you can literally slow down the game like ten times and just watch them and see how good they are. Especially the key frames (there are some uncanny things for certain inbetween frames, such as models becoming strange at some angles and moves, but no game is without them). And not only they are successfully technically implemented, they also have a very high aesthetic quality to them. The amount of exaggeration, careful design of key frames etc. are all contributing factors.
Lastly, character design. SFV's stylization is one of the best I've seen, especially if we observe it within the confines of the game itself. It has certainly done by people who not only are masters of anatomy, but also masters of playing around with anatomy, which is something that takes ages to get even average at. But level of that in SFV is mind blowing. For example, I think this is perhaps the most intuitive way of realizing this as a "non-professional": observe female legs (yes, I know it sounds kinda silly, but trust me lol). You'll see that all ladies have different legs, not just in the sense of buffed/slim/fat etc. but in the actual anatomical sense. And yet, they are all "valid", to put it that way. The level of craftsmanship just in that alone is unbelievable. Ibuki has thinner ankles than karin and less body fat, Chun has more "fast twitch fibers" in her calves than all the other girls and also has way stronger ligaments than, say Ibuki. Cammy has very low body fat, but is highly muscular and also has strong legs, more footbal-like than basketball-like legs of Chun. And so on and so forth. it is very rare to see this much meticulousness regarding anatomy in a single IP, actually, especially in a fast paced video game. Also, all of this is highly exaggerated without it losing its purpose for a second. No one would think Cammy is ugly, for example, even though if she walked into a room, people would think an alien just showed up, or at the very least, someone with a severe genetic disorder. Whish is a HUGE success for a game that did that with a relatively realistic approach (it's way easier to do the same in GG, for example. Think how ninja turtles always end up weird or bad or repulsive in movies, whereas they aren't in cartoons. But, Ryu is fine, so is Cammy and the rest of the gang. Not only that, but it seems that SFV's "waifu factor" is pretty high, considering a lot of the feedback from the waifuers, which is quite a feat).
Why is Tekken badly done. Well, I think we also talked about this in more detail. And the answer lies in it being done on a sub-par technical level mostly. Although there are questionable artistic things regardless of technicalities, most of Tekken's criticisms are due to it being done with questionable quality technically.
That said, there are things which are independent of engine limitations or budget etc. Most of animations are archaic and badly done (I have joked about them being on a vectorman level), textures are often chosen weirdly and applied with exaggeration (but not a style-related one, so it doesn't work), lighting is very, very bad. Character stances and animations, key frames and frames in general are way worse than many contemporary fighting games, including KoFXIV which has plethora of problems (due to it having a very small budget), due to them simply being bad with no justifiable reason. Hmmm, if you want a practical example, turn the game on and crouch with any character and see how sloppily the crouch is solved. They all break their spines - again, not in some stylization-justified fashion (Juri is breaking her spine all the time in SFV, for example), but in a "bad way".
But, regarding Tekken, for more technical detail, you might want to ask Providence, as he's the "3d guy". He would be able to explain it in a more "computer 3d way":) I do concept art/illustration/painting/teaching so I have learned to observe what's good or bad, but in the sense of programming or rigging etc. I can't explain "why" as I am not versed in many of the processes. For example, models feel very low poly, though I don't think that's the case. Now, that's something Providence probably has an explanation as to why. Also, clothes. Do kicks with Kazumi (or any move that stretches her stance) and see how her kimono behaves.
I often jokingly say about Tekken that the franchise has built their own bad look which fans love, some kind of Stockholm syndrome:) While it's an exaggeration of sorts, I don't think the philosophy of it is THAT much false. For example, I have talked about Tekken specifically with many of my colleagues and I have yet to find a single one not finding praises for Tekken's visual design and presentation weird and some are literally shocked if they didn't know it was lauded before I told them and think I'm pulling their leg. So it's kind of a mini-meme in some highly specific nerdish way. Some people I've known for decades and are very good artists haven't actually played Tekken before and when I show it to them and tell them how its visuals are received generally, they are confused.
There's A LOT of knowledge and effect in knowing how to stylize and when and in what measure. That might be the hardest thing to do and those who can do it are usually masters of their craft.
For example, this portrait is stylized, it's been played with, it's what makes it so good
https://i.imgur.com/pSEkiix.jpg
yet it's also realistic. The ability to successfully play with these things is something only those extremely versed in the craft can do. And when it comes to doing that with people, it's kinda the pinnacle of the craft.
For some reason I assumed there was more to DOA not being on the same level as SFV / GG, but I was overthinking it. My bad. Even though the tech might be old, I still enjoy the visuals just as much as SFV or GG, and I as a layman would not be able to tell you it's actually older, and how its age actually shows.
Nevertheless, I see what you mean, and have to agree. The fact that both SFV and GG went in their respective direction of stylization, and managed to pull it off as wells as they did, is much more impressive.
About Tekken, I was mainly curious because while I don't hate it or think it's bad, I always felt there was something "off" about it, but couldn't really put my finger on where exactly, nor would I be able to explain. It's not terribly important, but nice to know there is some kind of basis there for my feelings. :)
Cheers!