The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
I was playing Metal Gear Solid 2 the other day, it was a nice game but what was particularly striking had to of been the graphics. The realism portrayed in what I was watching was astounding, it all looked like a film. If only the same could be said about how the game played, don’t get me wrong it was extremely fun and I enjoyed virtually all of it, but it didn’t feel as realistic as it played. The actions of the characters within the game, how they moved, how they reacted etc… it was all done well but wasn’t very realistic. But this was not due to the developer’s ability; they have made a game that I can safely say is one of the greatest Playstation 2 games so far… so what went wrong?
Realism doesn’t necessarily mean gorgeous graphics that look like real life; realism is much more than that. When I play a game, I often see a clenched fist of a character move towards an item, lets say a mug. Now in reality that hand would open (it wouldn’t be clenched in the first place) and that hand would wrap 5 fingers around the handle. But this is a game and not reality, so this clenched fist will approach the mug and will pick it up without opening the hand, as if by magic and certainly not realistic. Facial expressions are also important, whilst all games have them they aren’t always that obvious, the eyes, ears, mouth, hair, skin it all alters under varying circumstances. Another problem with realism is evident in first person shooters, if you are under fire in reality you will load the gun rapidly but the game will only allow you to load the gun at the same speed be you under fire or back at base. Now I spotted many occurrences such as the ones described occur in Metal Gear Solid 2. Now I will go back to what I said this isn’t the fault of the designer or programmers, the amount of time and effort to make the characters move as realistically as possible, grasps things the way a human would, make the game feel realistic as well as make the game look as gorgeous as possible, it could take 4 or 5 years before we see it in the shops. Also, although I have basically no knowledge in programming, it has become apparent that current day systems won’t be able to show 5 detailed fingers wrap around a mug realistically as well as keep the Polygon count as high as possible.
You see developers have a choice when they develop a game, either it moves and feels realistic, or it looks realistic. Now I do believe every developer in the world will agree that making the game moves and feel realistic is more important than looking realistic. When you go for a run you will slow down; you will get tired and if you can see and feel this happen in a game then that is realistic. Now many will point out that the brilliant GTA3 has the character slow down after a while, but this is not realistic, the character does not gradually slow down he goes from moving fast to walking. Another thing worth pointing out as regards character movements is that a individual never runs each step the same as a computer game character does, the width within legs will differ from time to time, the strides will change these are all realistic touches a developer can make and touches that will effect the way the game plays, in turn feeling more realistic. Meanwhile games don’t do this, this realistic touches would be brilliant but in the majority of the games will play such as Metal Gear Solid 2 the way a game looks takes priority and everything else such as movements comes second.
One awesome way of counter acting this though is by using a new graphical style, a style brought to life but the groundbreaking Jet Set Radio, that’s right Cel-shaded. Cel-shaded graphics are extremely easy to do, there isn’t much effort needed and they look very good (well I think so anyway). Lets take a closer look at Jet Set Radio, now this will revolutionize how we play games in the future, graphically the game was odd but brilliant, and the game moved perfectly (It’s sequel is basically enough for me to get an X-box). The way a character would do a cool mid-air stunt when you leap from one area to the next, the way a character will flail their legs through the air as you come crashing down from a high ledge. Each movement of the skater it feels and acts differently this is realism! But it is immensely sad that this awesome AAA title (read my review) never received the attention that it so rightly deserves, and there is a reason. Look at Zelda on the Gamecube, the response for that was shockingly disappointing 73% of Nintendo Official Magazine readers didn’t like the new style of graphics and were against the game. Now for reasons that I’ve already explained, the cel-shaded Zelda (Celda) will be much better than any previous Zelda games. Tip toeing past guards, the expressions on Link’s face under different circumstances, grabbing onto high ledges, it is done so realistically and plays beautifully. Now Shiguru Miyamoto, although not ashamed to show Super Mario Sunshine screenshots, he won’t show Zelda ones. The fact is Miyamoto was left gutted by the negative response his new masterpiece has received, but the fact is you can’t show how a game feels and moves with a screenshot. When a new Resident Evil screenshot is released the public will harp on about how good the game looks, that is all you can deduce from a screenshot. The look that cel-shaded games have isn’t that appealing especially when you compare it to Resident Evil and Final Fantasy and that is why the next time we see Zelda it will be in playable form at E3.
And that is why developers choose graphics over gameplay; graphics sells games as it can create hype. Jet Set Radio is an unknown game with odd graphics, when gamers see it they will look at the game and brand it crap. This is why Metal Gear Solid 2 used realistic graphics rather than movements, that way the game can be hyped up before its released rather than insulted. Now Zelda can change all of that as unlike Jet Set Radio, it isn’t a relatively unknown title, in fact one of the biggest games in the world. Although gamers are shocked and disgusted by this change in pace the game is still the top of the most anticipated charts, Gamecube network had it at the top by a massive landslide whilst Cube-Europe had it at the top but only narrowly beaten by Mario (but that is to be expected). This is because, realistic look or no realistic look the die-hard Zelda fans are exactly that, die hard fans. A friend of mine who said that the new Zelda looked “like a poorly made cartoon” has since said “I will get Zelda it looks quite interesting” and people are interested in how Zelda will play. Despite this Zelda may not enjoy the sales it is used to but it will sell over a million copies and the world will know about Cel-shaded graphics and how good they can be if used right (unlike Cel Damage).
One day graphics can look like the ones in Metal Gear Solid 2 without any effort, and developers can make games feel realistic as well as look it. But until then developers still have to choose between Graphics and Gameplay, and unless graphically styles like cel-shaded or even that odd style used in Paper Mario becomes popular with the casual gamer it will be graphics every time. I do hope that Zelda will go along way in changing the gamers prospective of the market, when Cube-Europe ran their “April Fools” claiming Perfect Dark was Cel-shaded I was generally happy at such news, if more major games do this then more the public will learn to accept this new graphical style. Sadly at the moment I can only see there being one company that is willing to go for Gameplay over graphics every time, as that my friends is the Nintendo difference.
Here’s to the future.
Dringo.
Realism doesn’t necessarily mean gorgeous graphics that look like real life; realism is much more than that. When I play a game, I often see a clenched fist of a character move towards an item, lets say a mug. Now in reality that hand would open (it wouldn’t be clenched in the first place) and that hand would wrap 5 fingers around the handle. But this is a game and not reality, so this clenched fist will approach the mug and will pick it up without opening the hand, as if by magic and certainly not realistic. Facial expressions are also important, whilst all games have them they aren’t always that obvious, the eyes, ears, mouth, hair, skin it all alters under varying circumstances. Another problem with realism is evident in first person shooters, if you are under fire in reality you will load the gun rapidly but the game will only allow you to load the gun at the same speed be you under fire or back at base. Now I spotted many occurrences such as the ones described occur in Metal Gear Solid 2. Now I will go back to what I said this isn’t the fault of the designer or programmers, the amount of time and effort to make the characters move as realistically as possible, grasps things the way a human would, make the game feel realistic as well as make the game look as gorgeous as possible, it could take 4 or 5 years before we see it in the shops. Also, although I have basically no knowledge in programming, it has become apparent that current day systems won’t be able to show 5 detailed fingers wrap around a mug realistically as well as keep the Polygon count as high as possible.
You see developers have a choice when they develop a game, either it moves and feels realistic, or it looks realistic. Now I do believe every developer in the world will agree that making the game moves and feel realistic is more important than looking realistic. When you go for a run you will slow down; you will get tired and if you can see and feel this happen in a game then that is realistic. Now many will point out that the brilliant GTA3 has the character slow down after a while, but this is not realistic, the character does not gradually slow down he goes from moving fast to walking. Another thing worth pointing out as regards character movements is that a individual never runs each step the same as a computer game character does, the width within legs will differ from time to time, the strides will change these are all realistic touches a developer can make and touches that will effect the way the game plays, in turn feeling more realistic. Meanwhile games don’t do this, this realistic touches would be brilliant but in the majority of the games will play such as Metal Gear Solid 2 the way a game looks takes priority and everything else such as movements comes second.
One awesome way of counter acting this though is by using a new graphical style, a style brought to life but the groundbreaking Jet Set Radio, that’s right Cel-shaded. Cel-shaded graphics are extremely easy to do, there isn’t much effort needed and they look very good (well I think so anyway). Lets take a closer look at Jet Set Radio, now this will revolutionize how we play games in the future, graphically the game was odd but brilliant, and the game moved perfectly (It’s sequel is basically enough for me to get an X-box). The way a character would do a cool mid-air stunt when you leap from one area to the next, the way a character will flail their legs through the air as you come crashing down from a high ledge. Each movement of the skater it feels and acts differently this is realism! But it is immensely sad that this awesome AAA title (read my review) never received the attention that it so rightly deserves, and there is a reason. Look at Zelda on the Gamecube, the response for that was shockingly disappointing 73% of Nintendo Official Magazine readers didn’t like the new style of graphics and were against the game. Now for reasons that I’ve already explained, the cel-shaded Zelda (Celda) will be much better than any previous Zelda games. Tip toeing past guards, the expressions on Link’s face under different circumstances, grabbing onto high ledges, it is done so realistically and plays beautifully. Now Shiguru Miyamoto, although not ashamed to show Super Mario Sunshine screenshots, he won’t show Zelda ones. The fact is Miyamoto was left gutted by the negative response his new masterpiece has received, but the fact is you can’t show how a game feels and moves with a screenshot. When a new Resident Evil screenshot is released the public will harp on about how good the game looks, that is all you can deduce from a screenshot. The look that cel-shaded games have isn’t that appealing especially when you compare it to Resident Evil and Final Fantasy and that is why the next time we see Zelda it will be in playable form at E3.
And that is why developers choose graphics over gameplay; graphics sells games as it can create hype. Jet Set Radio is an unknown game with odd graphics, when gamers see it they will look at the game and brand it crap. This is why Metal Gear Solid 2 used realistic graphics rather than movements, that way the game can be hyped up before its released rather than insulted. Now Zelda can change all of that as unlike Jet Set Radio, it isn’t a relatively unknown title, in fact one of the biggest games in the world. Although gamers are shocked and disgusted by this change in pace the game is still the top of the most anticipated charts, Gamecube network had it at the top by a massive landslide whilst Cube-Europe had it at the top but only narrowly beaten by Mario (but that is to be expected). This is because, realistic look or no realistic look the die-hard Zelda fans are exactly that, die hard fans. A friend of mine who said that the new Zelda looked “like a poorly made cartoon” has since said “I will get Zelda it looks quite interesting” and people are interested in how Zelda will play. Despite this Zelda may not enjoy the sales it is used to but it will sell over a million copies and the world will know about Cel-shaded graphics and how good they can be if used right (unlike Cel Damage).
One day graphics can look like the ones in Metal Gear Solid 2 without any effort, and developers can make games feel realistic as well as look it. But until then developers still have to choose between Graphics and Gameplay, and unless graphically styles like cel-shaded or even that odd style used in Paper Mario becomes popular with the casual gamer it will be graphics every time. I do hope that Zelda will go along way in changing the gamers prospective of the market, when Cube-Europe ran their “April Fools” claiming Perfect Dark was Cel-shaded I was generally happy at such news, if more major games do this then more the public will learn to accept this new graphical style. Sadly at the moment I can only see there being one company that is willing to go for Gameplay over graphics every time, as that my friends is the Nintendo difference.
Here’s to the future.
Dringo.
Page:
So let me get this straight, cartoony games, based on cartoon characters are wrong? They remind you of the Tweenies, who aren't even cartoon characters but people in costumes?
Well, I don't actually choose what I play for the graphics. I choose for the gameplay. And if that means people consider me to be acting like a child for my age, then that's their problem. Whilst they're playing the same old FPS with slightly different weapons and characters, I'll be playing a game full of originality, imagination and the unique Nintendo style which makes gaming to me what riding in the Grand National is to a Jockey (coincedence it's happening today? :) )
I play for fun, for escapism, to get away from photo-realistic worlds. I like to use my imagination, to dream, to do more than just play the game, and if cartoony graphics with plumbers with head's bigger than their bodies let's me do that, then those are the games I'll play.
If the game WAS the Tweenies on the Playstation that I was playing, then I can understand you critiscising a nearly 17 year old for playing it. But Mario games are no way easy, and they're not that childish really. They're imaginative, and that's all a game needs to be (with gameplay as well ofcourse) to be fun. Surely Orks and Hobbits aren't real, or maybe even Wookies and Banthas. Even films like The Matrix and Mission Impossible seem only the cartoon "Defenders of the Earth" with real people acting instead of cartoon characters.
In all respect, you can make anything seem to have a relationship with the Teletubbies, Tweenies or any other children's TV character if you really wanted to. I just think that argument about playing with a fat plumber is just so stupid! It's just the same as playing with a stick woman with hip troubles and interchangable breats (Lara Croft)!
Well, I don't actually choose what I play for the graphics. I choose for the gameplay. And if that means people consider me to be acting like a child for my age, then that's their problem. Whilst they're playing the same old FPS with slightly different weapons and characters, I'll be playing a game full of originality, imagination and the unique Nintendo style which makes gaming to me what riding in the Grand National is to a Jockey (coincedence it's happening today? :) )
I play for fun, for escapism, to get away from photo-realistic worlds. I like to use my imagination, to dream, to do more than just play the game, and if cartoony graphics with plumbers with head's bigger than their bodies let's me do that, then those are the games I'll play.
If the game WAS the Tweenies on the Playstation that I was playing, then I can understand you critiscising a nearly 17 year old for playing it. But Mario games are no way easy, and they're not that childish really. They're imaginative, and that's all a game needs to be (with gameplay as well ofcourse) to be fun. Surely Orks and Hobbits aren't real, or maybe even Wookies and Banthas. Even films like The Matrix and Mission Impossible seem only the cartoon "Defenders of the Earth" with real people acting instead of cartoon characters.
In all respect, you can make anything seem to have a relationship with the Teletubbies, Tweenies or any other children's TV character if you really wanted to. I just think that argument about playing with a fat plumber is just so stupid! It's just the same as playing with a stick woman with hip troubles and interchangable breats (Lara Croft)!
Gar-J wrote:
At the end of the day, there's nothing immature
> about 3D graphics, polygons and light shading, but what you produce using these
> elements may or may not be childish. The same goes for cel-shading. Given to
> Nintendo I'm sure they could manage a cute little kid game produced entirely
> with cel-shading, but that's Nintendo. I choose not to play games that remind me
> of Rainbow, Telly Tubbies and the Tweenies, regardless of what graphics engine
> they run on.
Thank god they dont remind me of Tweenies etc....
At the end of the day, there's nothing immature
> about 3D graphics, polygons and light shading, but what you produce using these
> elements may or may not be childish. The same goes for cel-shading. Given to
> Nintendo I'm sure they could manage a cute little kid game produced entirely
> with cel-shading, but that's Nintendo. I choose not to play games that remind me
> of Rainbow, Telly Tubbies and the Tweenies, regardless of what graphics engine
> they run on.
Thank god they dont remind me of Tweenies etc....
Jet Set Radio is one of my favouite games, and it was the unique graphical style which first attracted me to the game.
I've nothing against "realistic" graphics, but if I had to choose I would always go for visuals that have a certain unique charm - i.e. JSR and Rez.
One major aspect that is missing from the gaming world is "graphical originality".
It seems to me that games have to be either "realistic" in appearance or "cartoony".
Developers should look more into ART - both modern and ancient.
For instance the colourful, vibrant and mysterious images found in Eastern religious art would make for truly striking and original graphical styles.
Developers have got to look beyond this mindset of either "realistic or cartoony".
I've nothing against "realistic" graphics, but if I had to choose I would always go for visuals that have a certain unique charm - i.e. JSR and Rez.
One major aspect that is missing from the gaming world is "graphical originality".
It seems to me that games have to be either "realistic" in appearance or "cartoony".
Developers should look more into ART - both modern and ancient.
For instance the colourful, vibrant and mysterious images found in Eastern religious art would make for truly striking and original graphical styles.
Developers have got to look beyond this mindset of either "realistic or cartoony".
Edgy wrote:
On another note: does this
> mean we'll have no more of this "Nintendo games are rubbish cos they've got
> cartoony graphics"? Well I doubt it because that's one of Nintendo-haters
> main arguments, but as Cel-shading becomes more popular, that argument will have
> less and less meaning.
There's a difference: cel-shaded characters so far are not cute little fluffy animals that fly space ships. They are 3D representations of 2D drawings. I didn't see a big fox on roller blades in Jet Set Radio, nor did I see a plumber with a head bigger than the rest of his body.
It isn't the graphics that annoy people with Nintendo's games - it's the kiddy characters that make up the graphics. Starfox would probably be passed as a more adult game if the characters were all replaced by humans, even if the graphics engine was retained exactly as it is.
At the end of the day, there's nothing immature about 3D graphics, polygons and light shading, but what you produce using these elements may or may not be childish. The same goes for cel-shading. Given to Nintendo I'm sure they could manage a cute little kid game produced entirely with cel-shading, but that's Nintendo. I choose not to play games that remind me of Rainbow, Telly Tubbies and the Tweenies, regardless of what graphics engine they run on.
On another note: does this
> mean we'll have no more of this "Nintendo games are rubbish cos they've got
> cartoony graphics"? Well I doubt it because that's one of Nintendo-haters
> main arguments, but as Cel-shading becomes more popular, that argument will have
> less and less meaning.
There's a difference: cel-shaded characters so far are not cute little fluffy animals that fly space ships. They are 3D representations of 2D drawings. I didn't see a big fox on roller blades in Jet Set Radio, nor did I see a plumber with a head bigger than the rest of his body.
It isn't the graphics that annoy people with Nintendo's games - it's the kiddy characters that make up the graphics. Starfox would probably be passed as a more adult game if the characters were all replaced by humans, even if the graphics engine was retained exactly as it is.
At the end of the day, there's nothing immature about 3D graphics, polygons and light shading, but what you produce using these elements may or may not be childish. The same goes for cel-shading. Given to Nintendo I'm sure they could manage a cute little kid game produced entirely with cel-shading, but that's Nintendo. I choose not to play games that remind me of Rainbow, Telly Tubbies and the Tweenies, regardless of what graphics engine they run on.
In all honesty, we needed a new type of graphics to change from these supposedy realistic faces that all look the same, whether from Final Fantasy games on the Playstation, or the Shenmue games on the Dreamcast.
Ever since consoles started producing these so-called realistic graphics, there has been little to differentiate games from one another, except whether or not a game has jagged edges or not. The graphics in games all seem to be heading the same way and it's brilliant that games like Jet Set Radio have been created to produce a new-look cel-shaded type of game.
I am a fan of retro-style gaming, and Jet Set Radio made me feel like I was playing a game of a past era. It had the playability that had been long lost paying the price for graphics. Jet Set Radio has zany cartoony graphics which make the characters look and feel almost 2D, yet they can move freely around a 3D environment with no jagged lines, no blocky movement, just smooth fluid gaming.
I don't think that all games should move to Cel-shading, otherwise we'll all get bored of the new image and it wont stay with us for long, but if just a few games carry on with the new look, Jet Set Radio Future and Zelda GameCube to name a couple, then I reckon we could see some pretty cool games coming to our consoles this time round!
Someone told me that games can't possibly change that much now with the new technology as we're close to realism as we are. But, games aren't about realism. They're about having some fun in an alternate reality where anything can happen so long as it's been programmed by the developers. So, despite games not getting any more photo-realistic, they're still changing for the better!
Isn't it the gameplay that counts? Not just the graphics? Well what if I were to say that graphics can be just as important, if not more important? They're what detirmines us to buy games, they're what gives us our first impressions in magazines and on the back of their packaging and more importantly, they're what we see constantly whilst we're playing the games.
On another note: does this mean we'll have no more of this "Nintendo games are rubbish cos they've got cartoony graphics"? Well I doubt it because that's one of Nintendo-haters main arguments, but as Cel-shading becomes more popular, that argument will have less and less meaning.
Ever since consoles started producing these so-called realistic graphics, there has been little to differentiate games from one another, except whether or not a game has jagged edges or not. The graphics in games all seem to be heading the same way and it's brilliant that games like Jet Set Radio have been created to produce a new-look cel-shaded type of game.
I am a fan of retro-style gaming, and Jet Set Radio made me feel like I was playing a game of a past era. It had the playability that had been long lost paying the price for graphics. Jet Set Radio has zany cartoony graphics which make the characters look and feel almost 2D, yet they can move freely around a 3D environment with no jagged lines, no blocky movement, just smooth fluid gaming.
I don't think that all games should move to Cel-shading, otherwise we'll all get bored of the new image and it wont stay with us for long, but if just a few games carry on with the new look, Jet Set Radio Future and Zelda GameCube to name a couple, then I reckon we could see some pretty cool games coming to our consoles this time round!
Someone told me that games can't possibly change that much now with the new technology as we're close to realism as we are. But, games aren't about realism. They're about having some fun in an alternate reality where anything can happen so long as it's been programmed by the developers. So, despite games not getting any more photo-realistic, they're still changing for the better!
Isn't it the gameplay that counts? Not just the graphics? Well what if I were to say that graphics can be just as important, if not more important? They're what detirmines us to buy games, they're what gives us our first impressions in magazines and on the back of their packaging and more importantly, they're what we see constantly whilst we're playing the games.
On another note: does this mean we'll have no more of this "Nintendo games are rubbish cos they've got cartoony graphics"? Well I doubt it because that's one of Nintendo-haters main arguments, but as Cel-shading becomes more popular, that argument will have less and less meaning.
I was playing Metal Gear Solid 2 the other day, it was a nice game but what was particularly striking had to of been the graphics. The realism portrayed in what I was watching was astounding, it all looked like a film. If only the same could be said about how the game played, don’t get me wrong it was extremely fun and I enjoyed virtually all of it, but it didn’t feel as realistic as it played. The actions of the characters within the game, how they moved, how they reacted etc… it was all done well but wasn’t very realistic. But this was not due to the developer’s ability; they have made a game that I can safely say is one of the greatest Playstation 2 games so far… so what went wrong?
Realism doesn’t necessarily mean gorgeous graphics that look like real life; realism is much more than that. When I play a game, I often see a clenched fist of a character move towards an item, lets say a mug. Now in reality that hand would open (it wouldn’t be clenched in the first place) and that hand would wrap 5 fingers around the handle. But this is a game and not reality, so this clenched fist will approach the mug and will pick it up without opening the hand, as if by magic and certainly not realistic. Facial expressions are also important, whilst all games have them they aren’t always that obvious, the eyes, ears, mouth, hair, skin it all alters under varying circumstances. Another problem with realism is evident in first person shooters, if you are under fire in reality you will load the gun rapidly but the game will only allow you to load the gun at the same speed be you under fire or back at base. Now I spotted many occurrences such as the ones described occur in Metal Gear Solid 2. Now I will go back to what I said this isn’t the fault of the designer or programmers, the amount of time and effort to make the characters move as realistically as possible, grasps things the way a human would, make the game feel realistic as well as make the game look as gorgeous as possible, it could take 4 or 5 years before we see it in the shops. Also, although I have basically no knowledge in programming, it has become apparent that current day systems won’t be able to show 5 detailed fingers wrap around a mug realistically as well as keep the Polygon count as high as possible.
You see developers have a choice when they develop a game, either it moves and feels realistic, or it looks realistic. Now I do believe every developer in the world will agree that making the game moves and feel realistic is more important than looking realistic. When you go for a run you will slow down; you will get tired and if you can see and feel this happen in a game then that is realistic. Now many will point out that the brilliant GTA3 has the character slow down after a while, but this is not realistic, the character does not gradually slow down he goes from moving fast to walking. Another thing worth pointing out as regards character movements is that a individual never runs each step the same as a computer game character does, the width within legs will differ from time to time, the strides will change these are all realistic touches a developer can make and touches that will effect the way the game plays, in turn feeling more realistic. Meanwhile games don’t do this, this realistic touches would be brilliant but in the majority of the games will play such as Metal Gear Solid 2 the way a game looks takes priority and everything else such as movements comes second.
One awesome way of counter acting this though is by using a new graphical style, a style brought to life but the groundbreaking Jet Set Radio, that’s right Cel-shaded. Cel-shaded graphics are extremely easy to do, there isn’t much effort needed and they look very good (well I think so anyway). Lets take a closer look at Jet Set Radio, now this will revolutionize how we play games in the future, graphically the game was odd but brilliant, and the game moved perfectly (It’s sequel is basically enough for me to get an X-box). The way a character would do a cool mid-air stunt when you leap from one area to the next, the way a character will flail their legs through the air as you come crashing down from a high ledge. Each movement of the skater it feels and acts differently this is realism! But it is immensely sad that this awesome AAA title (read my review) never received the attention that it so rightly deserves, and there is a reason. Look at Zelda on the Gamecube, the response for that was shockingly disappointing 73% of Nintendo Official Magazine readers didn’t like the new style of graphics and were against the game. Now for reasons that I’ve already explained, the cel-shaded Zelda (Celda) will be much better than any previous Zelda games. Tip toeing past guards, the expressions on Link’s face under different circumstances, grabbing onto high ledges, it is done so realistically and plays beautifully. Now Shiguru Miyamoto, although not ashamed to show Super Mario Sunshine screenshots, he won’t show Zelda ones. The fact is Miyamoto was left gutted by the negative response his new masterpiece has received, but the fact is you can’t show how a game feels and moves with a screenshot. When a new Resident Evil screenshot is released the public will harp on about how good the game looks, that is all you can deduce from a screenshot. The look that cel-shaded games have isn’t that appealing especially when you compare it to Resident Evil and Final Fantasy and that is why the next time we see Zelda it will be in playable form at E3.
And that is why developers choose graphics over gameplay; graphics sells games as it can create hype. Jet Set Radio is an unknown game with odd graphics, when gamers see it they will look at the game and brand it crap. This is why Metal Gear Solid 2 used realistic graphics rather than movements, that way the game can be hyped up before its released rather than insulted. Now Zelda can change all of that as unlike Jet Set Radio, it isn’t a relatively unknown title, in fact one of the biggest games in the world. Although gamers are shocked and disgusted by this change in pace the game is still the top of the most anticipated charts, Gamecube network had it at the top by a massive landslide whilst Cube-Europe had it at the top but only narrowly beaten by Mario (but that is to be expected). This is because, realistic look or no realistic look the die-hard Zelda fans are exactly that, die hard fans. A friend of mine who said that the new Zelda looked “like a poorly made cartoon” has since said “I will get Zelda it looks quite interesting” and people are interested in how Zelda will play. Despite this Zelda may not enjoy the sales it is used to but it will sell over a million copies and the world will know about Cel-shaded graphics and how good they can be if used right (unlike Cel Damage).
One day graphics can look like the ones in Metal Gear Solid 2 without any effort, and developers can make games feel realistic as well as look it. But until then developers still have to choose between Graphics and Gameplay, and unless graphically styles like cel-shaded or even that odd style used in Paper Mario becomes popular with the casual gamer it will be graphics every time. I do hope that Zelda will go along way in changing the gamers prospective of the market, when Cube-Europe ran their “April Fools” claiming Perfect Dark was Cel-shaded I was generally happy at such news, if more major games do this then more the public will learn to accept this new graphical style. Sadly at the moment I can only see there being one company that is willing to go for Gameplay over graphics every time, as that my friends is the Nintendo difference.
Here’s to the future.
Dringo.
Realism doesn’t necessarily mean gorgeous graphics that look like real life; realism is much more than that. When I play a game, I often see a clenched fist of a character move towards an item, lets say a mug. Now in reality that hand would open (it wouldn’t be clenched in the first place) and that hand would wrap 5 fingers around the handle. But this is a game and not reality, so this clenched fist will approach the mug and will pick it up without opening the hand, as if by magic and certainly not realistic. Facial expressions are also important, whilst all games have them they aren’t always that obvious, the eyes, ears, mouth, hair, skin it all alters under varying circumstances. Another problem with realism is evident in first person shooters, if you are under fire in reality you will load the gun rapidly but the game will only allow you to load the gun at the same speed be you under fire or back at base. Now I spotted many occurrences such as the ones described occur in Metal Gear Solid 2. Now I will go back to what I said this isn’t the fault of the designer or programmers, the amount of time and effort to make the characters move as realistically as possible, grasps things the way a human would, make the game feel realistic as well as make the game look as gorgeous as possible, it could take 4 or 5 years before we see it in the shops. Also, although I have basically no knowledge in programming, it has become apparent that current day systems won’t be able to show 5 detailed fingers wrap around a mug realistically as well as keep the Polygon count as high as possible.
You see developers have a choice when they develop a game, either it moves and feels realistic, or it looks realistic. Now I do believe every developer in the world will agree that making the game moves and feel realistic is more important than looking realistic. When you go for a run you will slow down; you will get tired and if you can see and feel this happen in a game then that is realistic. Now many will point out that the brilliant GTA3 has the character slow down after a while, but this is not realistic, the character does not gradually slow down he goes from moving fast to walking. Another thing worth pointing out as regards character movements is that a individual never runs each step the same as a computer game character does, the width within legs will differ from time to time, the strides will change these are all realistic touches a developer can make and touches that will effect the way the game plays, in turn feeling more realistic. Meanwhile games don’t do this, this realistic touches would be brilliant but in the majority of the games will play such as Metal Gear Solid 2 the way a game looks takes priority and everything else such as movements comes second.
One awesome way of counter acting this though is by using a new graphical style, a style brought to life but the groundbreaking Jet Set Radio, that’s right Cel-shaded. Cel-shaded graphics are extremely easy to do, there isn’t much effort needed and they look very good (well I think so anyway). Lets take a closer look at Jet Set Radio, now this will revolutionize how we play games in the future, graphically the game was odd but brilliant, and the game moved perfectly (It’s sequel is basically enough for me to get an X-box). The way a character would do a cool mid-air stunt when you leap from one area to the next, the way a character will flail their legs through the air as you come crashing down from a high ledge. Each movement of the skater it feels and acts differently this is realism! But it is immensely sad that this awesome AAA title (read my review) never received the attention that it so rightly deserves, and there is a reason. Look at Zelda on the Gamecube, the response for that was shockingly disappointing 73% of Nintendo Official Magazine readers didn’t like the new style of graphics and were against the game. Now for reasons that I’ve already explained, the cel-shaded Zelda (Celda) will be much better than any previous Zelda games. Tip toeing past guards, the expressions on Link’s face under different circumstances, grabbing onto high ledges, it is done so realistically and plays beautifully. Now Shiguru Miyamoto, although not ashamed to show Super Mario Sunshine screenshots, he won’t show Zelda ones. The fact is Miyamoto was left gutted by the negative response his new masterpiece has received, but the fact is you can’t show how a game feels and moves with a screenshot. When a new Resident Evil screenshot is released the public will harp on about how good the game looks, that is all you can deduce from a screenshot. The look that cel-shaded games have isn’t that appealing especially when you compare it to Resident Evil and Final Fantasy and that is why the next time we see Zelda it will be in playable form at E3.
And that is why developers choose graphics over gameplay; graphics sells games as it can create hype. Jet Set Radio is an unknown game with odd graphics, when gamers see it they will look at the game and brand it crap. This is why Metal Gear Solid 2 used realistic graphics rather than movements, that way the game can be hyped up before its released rather than insulted. Now Zelda can change all of that as unlike Jet Set Radio, it isn’t a relatively unknown title, in fact one of the biggest games in the world. Although gamers are shocked and disgusted by this change in pace the game is still the top of the most anticipated charts, Gamecube network had it at the top by a massive landslide whilst Cube-Europe had it at the top but only narrowly beaten by Mario (but that is to be expected). This is because, realistic look or no realistic look the die-hard Zelda fans are exactly that, die hard fans. A friend of mine who said that the new Zelda looked “like a poorly made cartoon” has since said “I will get Zelda it looks quite interesting” and people are interested in how Zelda will play. Despite this Zelda may not enjoy the sales it is used to but it will sell over a million copies and the world will know about Cel-shaded graphics and how good they can be if used right (unlike Cel Damage).
One day graphics can look like the ones in Metal Gear Solid 2 without any effort, and developers can make games feel realistic as well as look it. But until then developers still have to choose between Graphics and Gameplay, and unless graphically styles like cel-shaded or even that odd style used in Paper Mario becomes popular with the casual gamer it will be graphics every time. I do hope that Zelda will go along way in changing the gamers prospective of the market, when Cube-Europe ran their “April Fools” claiming Perfect Dark was Cel-shaded I was generally happy at such news, if more major games do this then more the public will learn to accept this new graphical style. Sadly at the moment I can only see there being one company that is willing to go for Gameplay over graphics every time, as that my friends is the Nintendo difference.
Here’s to the future.
Dringo.
Page: