I saw it was at like 6k yesterday and didn't think it would make it. Hotness.
I saw it was at like 6k yesterday and didn't think it would make it. Hotness.
ITT: Number shuffler gives art lesson.
it was super interesting to read through all this, even if I missed funding the game.
I like their approach since it seems to be the same that Yacht Club Games had with Shovel Knight. Don't do a blocky style and call it '8-bit' but actually know the original hardware limits that resulted in the look and adhere to it.
Such restrictions can breed creative results. If anyone's familiar, Red Letter Media does this whole commentary series on why the Star Wars prequels are so bad. The sticking point in my mind (and relevant to this) is that when Lucas was completely unrestricted in what he could have, things went to shit. Having practical or imposed limits can keep you focused, or safe from gorging on your own creative excess, and Lucas was sorely lacking in that with I-III. In IV-VI the ways in which he was limited actually yielded in some good results. Why ever have practical effects again, if CG can give you literally whatever you want on screen without limitations? Because sometimes solving the problem with limits yields results that can stand the test of time, than just be pretty in the moment, to be outdated later when CG improves even further.
To tie it back to games - something designed around the NES' limitations, with deliberate intent, may give a more long-lasting, timeless look than if they had all the budget and resources in the world without direction or limits. Think about more modern 2D games...how many could you honestly say hits the points of not just looking advanced, but will remain appealing long after its newness is outclassed?
Or to tie it to painting - regardless of style, one thing that's near-continuous in the discipline is creating a limited palette. Deliberately restricting the colors you can use...and why? It actually helps build color harmony in the piece, helps the artist better see colors as relative to one another than as absolutes, and trains them to create solutions that may be interesting, inventive, or overlooked had they been able to use any and every color instead...
Then there's the straight pragmatism of such restrictions. You know you have a small team, limited budget, but still want to create a visually appealing, well-crafted, artful look? Swing low! Use a style that's proven to give timeless results without requiring a staff of hundreds. Not every developer can be Double Fine, asking for millions over and over again to create super-beautiful games that take forever and a day to create while breaking the bank.
To me, it isn't about 'retro' being played out. It's that any style - 8-bit, 16, pixel, low poly, hi poly, flash, traditional animation, et al - can be good if it's created well and with deliberate intent. Like Yacht Club Games did. Like these guys seem to be doing. Like Ubisoft pulled with Grown Home. You can make something look good without it needing to be cutting edge. Or if it IS cutting edge, you better hope it's more than just that. Otherwise the aesthetic will be easily forgotten the second the next big visual advancement happens.
This reminds me mostly of Journey to Silius, the version with the realistic sprite not the one with the mop haired kid; but with Terminator 2 (NES) quality graphics.
None of this retro shit is going to be long lasting or timeless, because none of it is as good as what it's trying to ape.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hero
You can argue that modern 2D games won't either, but the problem is that good developers aren't allowed or can't afford to do 2D anymore, which is the real problem. Something like SotN certainly hasn't been forgotten, despite not resulting to artificially and arbitrarily limiting itself to look like Simon's Quest.
edit: Actually, let me turn this around on you. What timeless game has instituted such arbitrary limitations?
Shovel Knight is. Fantasy Zone II DX is. Timeless games are, of course, the exception with any genre, but there are those games that nail it so perfectly they can stand alongside the great titles that inspired them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
Honestly? I'm not sure yet but I don't think that means the principle doesn't exist. The notion of imposed limits for looks is still a relatively new one in game development, because most 'retro' approaches it as "make it blocky Because Nostalgia." The other reason that makes it difficult is we'd actually need time to pass to see if these deliberately-limited games stand up.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
Persoanlly though? I think Shovel Knight will. I think La Mulana will. I think Cave Story has so far (not sure if that one set limits on purpose, but it definitely looks like the product of restricted development). So I'm optimistic that creating a game aesthetic under certain ground rules won't prevent it from being timeless.
Guys, you aren't applying nostalgia to skew the results. We don't have nostalgia for these new games which is why they aren't as good.
Volgarr is also excellent.
I don't think Shovel Knight, La Mulana, or Cave Story are anywhere near 8-bit/16-bit classic tier, but Rockman 9, Rockman 10, and as mentioned, Fantasy Zone II DX are all worthy of their predecessors. You can argue that Volgarr shot for a 16-bit aesthetic and that game is classic-worthy. You could even look at what Cave was doing for the last half-decade as "throwback" if you really wanted (I don't really care about the intent, but they were making 240p games in 2012), and even (especially) their last games are basically the top of the genre.
I think that the visuals, like tons of other things about a given game, are a compromise in many cases, but there's more value in delivering something cohesive at a lower tech level than sloppy at a higher tech level. I think Rockman 9 will be more fondly remembered than Monster Boy.
The Locomalito stuff, too. Maldita Castilla is every bit as good as Ghouls & Ghosts, and Endless Forms Most Beautiful is in my top ten games ever made.