Graphics vs Aesthetics

But something was missing from some of the games. Even on ultra, they didn’t “feel” right. The frame rate was fantastic, and textures were lush with details and animations, my enemies moved fluidly… but it wasn’t right.

Read Full Story >>
Pintheshadows979d ago

Art style, art style, art style, art style.

Art Style.

Far more important than graphics.

Get both right and you have a winner.

ape007979d ago

absolutely 100% true

hames like GTA, DKCR, Zelda, Mario, MGS, W101, KZ, TLOU, DooM 3 etc...

i also like battlefield bad company 2 waaay more than bf3 because of art style/look/feel

starchild978d ago

I agree. Art style plays a HUGE role in how enjoyable a game's visuals are. But a game that has fantastic technical elements and an outstanding art direction will be the most amazing of all.

Pintheshadows978d ago

Art styles determines massively how well a game ages as well.

I tried to play COD4 recently and my word it has aged awfully. Compare it to Warcraft 3 that I was playing again and due its unique and well thought out art style it still looks decent to this day.

I think the original Bioshock will age very well, in fact it has. It has such a unique look that it won't look too dated in years to come either.

3-4-5978d ago

Good Art Styles from the 90's still hold up very well today.

Any game trying to be "realistic" look like complete crap about 5-6 years later.

pandehz979d ago (Edited 979d ago )

Aesthetics are part of graphics.

Only a simpleton would have the need to think of it as two parts.

In real game development it is always considered 'can the tech pull of the art style?' and vice versa (in the sense can the tech do justice to the art style) I know this coz my step bro is trying to make his own game and I have begun to understand the processes.

Original designs and budgeting can drastically affect the art style. Art style today is very much a selling point 'compromised and specifically sculpted' according to funds and stereotypical audience tastes.

So basically they are hand in hand, well the entire game is a wholesome experience. No element can be isolated unless its PURELY FORMULAIC FOR BUSINESS

Foxgod979d ago (Edited 979d ago )

Actually, its simplistic to think they are not separate.

Anyone can create high polygons models after some practicing.
However, putting everything in such a way, that it looks pleasing to the eyes, that requires talent and insight.

Theres a reason why an art director exists.

pandehz979d ago (Edited 979d ago )

Isn't breaking down simplification?

The difficulty is to understand it as an entire whole complex entity and you learn it as a whole and not two separate entities.

Sometimes you just don't need to separate


read the second part.

Basically to make you understand.

The artist will do his work regardless, whether liked or disliked. All of it with the confines of the tech limits.

Ppl are not trying to intentionally calculate art assets, then the thing wont be relatable.

If you understand art then you understand the relation.

Foxgod979d ago (Edited 979d ago )

No, as you break things down, it usually reveals its complexity.
But that is a discussion that relates to particle physics, it has nothing to do with the fact that art direction is separate from having a lot of polygons.

starchild978d ago

Art is very important, but if it isn't supported by strong technical elements it will suffer a lot and not have the intended impact.

If a game has great art direction, but is marred by jaggies everywhere, blurry textures, pop-in, screen tearing, low-frame rate, half-resolution alpha effects,'s really not going to be a very nice visual experience.

andrewer979d ago

I think that a good example of art style vs. graphics is Crysis 3 vs. Wind Waker HD. Although Crysis 3 looks neat and realistic, Wind Waker HD is like it's calling me haha, because it's simply beautiful. For me, art style > graphics. But I still play both games whatsoever, because, you know, they are games after all.

pandehz979d ago (Edited 979d ago )

See the thing is Crysis 3 has an art style.
Ppl fail to understand that.

Better or worse is just entirely subjective and leave it at that.

If you are gonna calculate a painting, well you can cancel out art.


'Proper art direction?'

Lol thats exactly what critics say without knowing what makes it proper. Capturing setting properly etc is very very subjective. An alien gun could be enough for me and for someone else it could be grand design or intricate details.

Art cannot be judged like a court case or calculated.
You either relate to it or not, like it or not. FULL STOP

Foxgod979d ago

Every game has an art style, proper art direction is defined by whether it captures the setting of the game properly, and whether it looks pleasing on the eye, instead of otherwise being a chaotic mess, or unfitting experience.

PurpHerbison978d ago

At the end of the day they are both graphics. Getting tired of people trying to divide this up.

Foxgod979d ago (Edited 979d ago )

Aesthetics for sure, you can have a billion of polygons if you want, it will still look like crap without proper art direction.