When 2D games get better reviews than 3D AAA games.

[Railgun]

It looks easier to make an appealing 2D platformer these days, than a solid
AAA title. Obviously i get why, since you can't fail a 2D game in terms of optimisation / AA bugs /flickering / tearing , and stuff like that.

Before you hammer me, hear me out, I obviously know that EVERY single person that reads this post likes this game since the game got 99% positive reviews.

I really don't want to encourage and support this type of games, because 2D platformer doesn't
have t be made in a way where you could literally count the Pixels that your character is made of.

Games like

Steam world Dig 2

are a great example of platformer games that do try to keep the 2D platforming alive, with a 2017 touch to it.

I do get the "gameplay is more important than graphics" and "those graphics trying to hit the nostalgia" arguments, but at least give some effort to your Graphics. At least some.

[Damos]

Steamworld Dig 2[www.gamingboulevard.com]

I look at this and it's almost an instant turn off. So many games come out every month with that type of pseudo-detailled flash/mobile upgraded visuals, its so lazy, overdone and impersonal. So generic.. Not to mention the ugly palette of flashy colors and the bland character design.

Celeste Screenshot[www.dropbox.com]

On the other hand, Celeste with its simple but evocative abstract pixel art makes immediately a lasting impression on me. It's very cohesive and harmonious, almost like a pixelly painting at time and it's even beter in motion. But more important, it does the job perfectly to bring home both the narrative themes, the solitude of mountain climbing and the clarity required for a precision platformer.

[d0mmunism]

The pixel art isn't used because of a lack of effort, it's used because it's a legitimately nice-looking style.

Plus, in some ways, it's more difficult to make pixel art. In contrast to standard graphics, which don't have to be designed in such a precise manner, the pixels in pixel art have to be carefully selected and very precise.

[j0bs]

Messaggio originale di Railgun:

Yea maybe it's beautiful if you follow this thought process. But is it a beautiful game for
2018 standards and compared to the rest of Platformers of the recent years ?

Yes.

[Raeven]

Game is fine with regards to looks. To argue that a game should not be supported unless it looks like Hollow Knight/Ori is ridiculous. This game carries itself by the gameplay alone, and the graphical presentation fits what it is going for perfectly.

It absolutely deserves the reviews it gets, and it deserves the success that comes along with it. You come across as exceptionally narrow minded.

[Doggo Rosso]

I don't even like Hollow Knight's graphics. The animation is kinda choppy and the graphics also have that "Flash" look. Better than Steamworld Dig 2, but a lot worse than Ori. And when it comes to gameplay, Celeste is far and beyond the winner between the two. And the music is fantastic too. So I really don't see why you'd boycott this game because of the graphics alone... Could they be better? Absolutely, but the game is by no means ugly. Just compare it to Undertale, one of the most acclaimed indie games ever... And that game is only two years old, so the "2018" argument isn't really applicable. There's no reason why an indie game in 2018 has to look better than in late 2015.

[internisus]

Since Celeste has wonderful graphics, I can't figure out what the OP is talking about.

[PRinciple prickley!?!?!]

Putting effort into your graphics is cool and all. That time commitment takes this thing called money though. Putting less into it is part of why indie devs can get away with $20 price tags. Hell, I'd rather triple A publishers went the same route, rather than offering nearly exclusively games with bloated development budgets that can never pay for themselves. The game looks fine, and the savings get passed on to the customer.

[armedpoop]

lmao are you actually ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ about the graphics of a 20 dollar game that is otherwise top notch on every level? Not only that but you are using -current year- argument. Ill reverse that and say this: complaining about graphics when the game is good in 2018 is downright asinine.

[solamon77]

I'll wager that the OP is a young one (and that's okay). Personally, I LOVE pixel art. It's a huge draw for me. Especially how well some of these modern titles are doing it.

Ultimately what it comes down to is that pixel art is a design choice. Just like how a painter selects the medium he paints in, so does a game designer select his style. Strangly enough, it can actually be harder to make a game look good using pixel art than ust 2D pictures due to the limiting nature of the art form.

Maybe these kinds of graphics just aren't for you. That's okay. Not all games are for all people. For instance, I find the art in the universally acclaimed Undertale to be incredibly off-putting and I'm generally of the "graphics don't really matter" persuasion. So much so that I haven't been able to finish it. I'm still stuck a couple hours in. Considering how much I like good pixel art, Undertale just looks lazy to me.

I wonder, do you dislike all pixel art? If you find the time, go check out a game called Children of Morta and tell me what you think of that pixel art. It's probably the best I've ever seen.

Well, best of luck to you. Hopefully you'll be able to look past the graphics, but if not, no big deal.

[*Yuki*]

different games has different auditory. People, who prefer gameplay, will stick with 2D indies. While PCMASTERRACE will preorder AAA 60 bucks titles and ignore perfomance issues and lack of gameplay, until visuals match their 10k$ rig. While, say, "mobile gamers" will be fine with p2w freemium clickers with adware.

Nothing to discuss there

[Captain Blud]

Messaggio originale di Jake.m17:

Messaggio originale di Railgun:

Obviously it is but as I said, at least put some effort to make it look like it's made in 2017.
Super Mario Bros. has great gameplay to it as well as The Legend of Zelda (the first).
People comment and I quote "my eyes hurt" when they try to play those two games
in 2017. And a momment later you end up playing Stardew Valley and Celeste, just because it has the 2017/2018 tag to it. mkay.

Stardew valley and Celeste run on way more technically advanced engines than super mario and the legend of zelda. And even though it is pixel art, the NES didn't have the color scheme or lighting capabilities of modern pixel games.

Or the layer thingy or the memory capability. The pixels have to be at least 32 bit, with modern pc for bells and whistles and just overall depth. I'm all for pixellated games. A pixel game would be like, say, a photograph of something, where as old polygon games would be like vhs compared to blueray. One stays and looks the same over the years, the other looks like ♥♥♥♥ once modern stuff is out.

[Captain Blud]

Messaggio originale di Railgun:

Messaggio originale di SeHa j0bs:

Have we played the same game? In fact, have you played Celeste at all? I doubt you did, otherwise there's no way you'd have missed how beautiful the game is, how much personality it has, and just how much attention to detail there is in pretty much everything.

Now, it could be that you just don't like pixel art, and that's ok. You don't have to. But saying these graphics took no effort? That's just silly.

Messaggio originale di ♕Karma:

Ok you make some pixel graphics that have effort in them and then animate them too and then finally come back to us and show the dev's what effort is because I see plenty of effort in their game for the graphics.

The art is beautiful and fits their tone and style perfectly fine.

Guys are you sure we are talking about the same game here ? You might have confused the Forum section. I'm talking about Celeste

Or do you mean it looks "beautiful" because it has cool colors ?
Colors does not equal art or graphics, I know shocker right ?

Ori is a beautiful game
Hollow Knight is a beautiful game
Steamworld Dig is a beautiful game
Trine is a beautiful game
Cuphead is a beautiful game (?) (maybe depends how you look at it)

Celeste is a great game. Is it beautiful ? Sure if you mean "beautiful in it's own cute way"
or "beautiful compared to Super Meatboy" or "beautiful compared to other 8bit games"

Yea maybe it's beautiful if you follow this thought process. But is it a beautiful game for
2018 standards and compared to the rest of Platformers of the recent years ?

I think you just need a quarter of a brain to answer that. Don't be a fanboy.
Everything has it's pros and it's cons.


-------------------------------------------------------

Messaggio originale di Index154:

You're accusing them of not putting any effort ......

I don't really want to answer to your comment because in it's entirety it look like it was written by a 16/17 year old, and although I DONT judge that, you certainly lack the experience or the knowledge to talk about the stuff you are trying to talk. Or do I really need to explain why Platformer graphics like Ori / Hollow Knight / Trine / Steamworld , are harder to make than Celeste ?

Okay, case closed, mystery solved. You have a much different view of "beauty" then many others. That's a whole different philosphical debate there.

I'm with everybody else. I find Celeste absolutely enchanting to look at. It's abosolutely gorgeous. Ori is pretty. Hollow Knight is awesome looking, but I wouldn't call it beautiful looking. It's more style. Steamworld Dig 2 is a great game with great graphics but I would never call it "beautiful." It has nice updated pleasant visuals that match the theme perfectly. Cuphead is great looking too, the thing is, Celeste is in its own league here.

The fact that they have this beautifully pixellated mountain to ascend, lonely and so much stuff in the back ground. Wind gusts, snowflakes, those weird thingys that float around when you dash next to them.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and that saying has never been more true. You're obviously not a fan of pixel graphics, and that's fine. Why does this have to turn in to a 5,000 post thread?

And as you already stated, you're obviously in the minority here since everybody else loves it. So, not to point fingers, but it's you who just "doesn't see it" as opposed to everyone else.

[internisus]

I wish we could round up all the pixel philistines and sequester them in an alternate instance of Steam so we didn't have to see these same. complaints. over. and over. and over. with. every. indie. release.

Or maybe I'll start posting on the forums for every game with 3D graphics. Really, Activision? You guys had all that money to make Call of Duty and you couldn't be bothered to dress it up in beautiful sprite art? I can't believe people play this ugly dreck.

[MoltenFrost2021]

Is the game amazing? Yes, that's all that matters. That's like comparing the witness and opus magnum...both great games, so who cares if one uses a style you prefer more?

[sureyoucan]

Messaggio originale di Damos:

Steamworld Dig 2[www.gamingboulevard.com]

I look at this and it's almost an instant turn off. So many games come out every month with that type of pseudo-detailled flash/mobile upgraded visuals, its so lazy, overdone and impersonal. So generic.. Not to mention the ugly palette of flashy colors and the bland character design.

Celeste Screenshot[www.dropbox.com]

On the other hand, Celeste with its simple but evocative abstract pixel art makes immediately a lasting impression on me. It's very cohesive and harmonious, almost like a pixelly painting at time and it's even beter in motion. But more important, it does the job perfectly to bring home both the narrative themes, the solitude of mountain climbing and the clarity required for a precision platformer.

Agree so much