Grimdark aesthetic

[Zeful]

I'm surprised really that some of you are tired of the brown, grim, look of today's games. Because all i see is a trend for cartoony looking games (be it cell shaded look a likes, or just vivid colored), not the opposite. The whole comic style, vivid colored stylized looking games was on the rise in the last years, seen as a change from the brownish games of last gen (esp pc games). So i don't know why the uproar that some of us want a dark, realistic, grim looking game, especially when it's for a... suited game. It's not like you don't have other colorful games to play in this age. Quite the opposite...

Because reality isn't dark. The reason game designers started running the retarded "bloom and brown" graphics style was because they couldn't get their lighting engines to properly react to brightly colored objects in a room filled with "natural" light, and were too lazy to try and fix it. "Cartoony looking" games like Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning, and Tribes: Ascend are orders of magnitude more realistic than the "dark, realistic, [and] grim looking game" you're vouching for.

More over Diablo 2 and Path of Exile are both very colorful outside of the initial area, and use the initial dark zone to set the mood and build atmosphere, the next act for both games is suddenly much more colorful.

[ButchinMelancholy]

Tribes Ascend cartoonish?

Otherwise, I don't see how you can pretend what the game he's "vouching for" looks like, but you can always imagine it a way that would support your opinion of course...

[Zeful]

Tribes Ascend cartoonish?

Otherwise, I don't see how you can pretend what the game he's "vouching for" looks like, but you can always imagine it a way that would support your opinion of course...

According to his definition of cartoony, which includes "vividly colored", yes it is.

And he's used the words "dark" and "grim" alongside "realistic" in reference to aesthetics, I've got a pretty good idea what game, graphically, he wants.

[ButchinMelancholy]

So according to you if Sarah is a girl, and she has red hair, then girls have red hair?
You can't take a part of an ensemble and consider it seperately from the rest, like if it's relativity didn't have a meaning, so I don't think you're making a relevant point.

And don't forget that words are just words, you shouldn't pretend more from them than they can convey...

[Zeful]

Because all i see is a trend for cartoony looking games (be it cell shaded look a likes, or just vivid colored), not the opposite.

The sentence, in full. The parenthetical addendum of "be it cell shaded look a likes[sic], or just vivid[sic] colored" is preceded by "cartoony looking games", making the parenthetical statement an elaboration or definition. Thus "Cartoony looking games", according to the poster, means "Games with cell shading" or "games with vivid color". I'm not assigning any strange meaning to what he said, merely applying the rules of grammar to his statement to understand the meaning inherent to the words and the order they exist in.

[ButchinMelancholy]

Yes, I admit that I have extrapolated his own words with what I assumed for a globally "cartoonish" kind of game.

Overall, my point is just that you shouldn't assume what his vision is when you can just relate to a few words on a forum. We can discuss of what we think about it, but not pretend something without substance.

[krellen]

W1 looks is probably created more because of the limitations of the technology of the time.

That is completely untrue. Many of the game's contemporaries had very different visual aesthetics. Wasteland looked like Wasteland because they wanted it to look like Wasteland.

[Plasmablaster]

I see the main argument here is that the original W1 graphics had a cartoony, comics inspired, graphics. But the thing is all of the games in that era had that look. This was because of technical limitations of the time, with very low resolution and thus few bitmaps available per screen; so bright and vivid colors were needed to better define the characters on the screen. Fallout 1&2 were the spiritual successor of W1, and had a very different art style. So were the games on the Infinity engine...As technical power increased, more art styles were possible. In this day, any art style can be done, so it's just a matter of fitting the game, more than anything. It's just that when i think of a post nuclear, apocalyptic game setting, cartoony, comic style is not exactly the first that comes to my mind.

I'm surprised really that some of you are tired of the brown, grim, look of today's games. Because all i see is a trend for cartoony looking games (be it cell shaded look a likes, or just vivid colored), not the opposite. The whole comic style, vivid colored stylized looking games was on the rise in the last years, seen as a change from the brownish games of last gen (esp pc games). So i don't know why the uproar that some of us want a dark, realistic, grim looking game, especially when it's for a... suited game. It's not like you don't have other colorful games to play in this age. Quite the opposite...

Excatly. 16-color EGA graphics wouldn't allow for brown or anything realistic even if the artists wanted to. I would add that a post-apoc world will also have oblivious sheep, happy bunnies and lovebirds signing around. We can have those in abundance as well but personally I don't want them, nor do I want a graphically cartoonish style. Cartoonish characters maybe yes, but not the graphical style. Make no mistake, I'm not a "fan of brown", I was sick of it in FO3 where even the sky was sort of brown, but the sensation of desolation, of threat and of death should be ever-present if W2 is to offer any atmosphere at all.

[homeslice82]

I see the main argument here is that the original W1 graphics had a cartoony, comics inspired, graphics. But the thing is all of the games in that era had that look. This was because of technical limitations of the time, with very low resolution and thus few bitmaps available per screen; so bright and vivid colors were needed to better define the characters on the screen.

Hmmm...


Metal Gear (1987)


Artura (1988)


Death Sword (1988)

Now here's Wasteland.









So no. Wasteland's graphics were clearly not "supposed to be realistic" and "held back by technology"--Death Sword would fit that bill. Even the composition of Wasteland's portraits looks like it's from a comic book. Not to mention the absurdly pulpy writing on display in that screenshot.

[ButchinMelancholy]

@Plasmablaster: Agree with you too.

[Plasmablaster]

"Cartoony looking" games like Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning, and Tribes: Ascend are orders of magnitude more realistic than the "dark, realistic, [and] grim looking game" you're vouching for.

The over-saturation is an unforgivable sin whatever the original concept, either "dark & grim" or "cartoonish & lively". They are both crap.

EVE online is a good example of a game that is, indeed dark (space is dark after all) and has got it right: Not too much color, not too little of it:

[ButchinMelancholy]

It still feels like it has some kind of filter though.

In a totally different style, I loved the way the first Sacred look (to keep it isometric-oriented):





It is colored, detailed and refined, and feels "real" although it is totally imaginary. That's what I loved in those good old games, it just felt genuine...

Didn't find so much convincing screenshots though...
And sorry for the size by the way...

[Azriel]

I see the main argument here is that the original W1 graphics had a cartoony, comics inspired, graphics. But the thing is all of the games in that era had that look. This was because of technical limitations of the time, with very low resolution and thus few bitmaps available per screen; so bright and vivid colors were needed to better define the characters on the screen.

Hmmm...


Metal Gear (1987)


Artura (1988)


Death Sword (1988)

Now here's Wasteland.









So no. Wasteland's graphics were clearly not "supposed to be realistic" and "held back by technology"--Death Sword would fit that bill. Even the composition of Wasteland's portraits looks like it's from a comic book. Not to mention the absurdly pulpy writing on display in that screenshot.

Yes, they WERE held back at the time by the technology. Pointing to different companies making different games does not prove anything.

[homeslice82]

Edit: Actually, krellen said it better below.

[krellen]

Yes, they WERE held back at the time by the technology. Pointing to different companies making different games does not prove anything.

That's a stupid comment. Pointing to the different visual styles used by different companies using the same technology is entirely relevant to your claim that they were forced to use bright graphics because of "technical restraints". Not quite as stupid as the comment that "they couldn't do brown", but it's up there.

If these other companies could choose to have different visual styles, why couldn't Interplay? What sort of twisted logic concludes that Interplay had technical restraints these other companies did not?

[Plasmablaster]

I see the main argument here is that the original W1 graphics had a cartoony, comics inspired, graphics. But the thing is all of the games in that era had that look. This was because of technical limitations of the time, with very low resolution and thus few bitmaps available per screen; so bright and vivid colors were needed to better define the characters on the screen.

Hmmm...


Metal Gear (1987)


Artura (1988)


Now here's Wasteland.









So no. Wasteland's graphics were clearly not "supposed to be realistic" and "held back by technology"--Death Sword would fit that bill. Even the composition of Wasteland's portraits looks like it's from a comic book. Not to mention the absurdly pulpy writing on display in that screenshot.

----(shortened the above post by deleting some pictures to make it less cumbersome without losing its points)---

This comparison s totally unbalanced and proves nothing. Metal Gear was written for the MSX2 which could show 16 colors simultaneously out of a 512 colour palette. Artura was written for the Atari ST which could do the same. Wasteland, however was written for the Apple II and C64 which (C64) had 16 colors TOTAL (not 512).

So, yes, these colors we see in Wasteland were not choices but only what they had at hand.

[paultakeda]

So, yes, these colors we see in Wasteland were not choices but only what they had at hand.

Let's say they only had 16 colors (for some IBM-PC gamers like me, it was actually just 4 colors). They went for a colorful design instead of sticking to, say a monotone look of browns, yellows, reds and blacks. Also, the text in the game points to this very pulpy, colorful environment.

The Wasteland aesthetic was not dark. It was an adventure where you explores a world populated by armored bunnies and three-legged prostitutes. It wasn't grim, it was bright. The rangers set out to establish law and order in an area where people have already survived and towns are actually flourishing. Wasteland is taking place during a period where civilization is returning.

[homeslice82]

So no. Wasteland's graphics were clearly not "supposed to be realistic" and "held back by technology"--Death Sword would fit that bill. Even the composition of Wasteland's portraits looks like it's from a comic book. Not to mention the absurdly pulpy writing on display in that screenshot.

----(shortened the above post by deleting some pictures to make it less cumbersome without losing its points)---

This comparison s totally unbalanced and proves nothing. Metal Gear was written for the MSX2 which could show 16 colors simultaneously out of a 512 colour palette. Artura was written for the Atari ST which could do the same. Wasteland, however was written for the Apple II and C64 which (C64) had 16 colors TOTAL (not 512).

So, yes, these colors we see in Wasteland were not choices but only what they had at hand.

I already anticipated this objection. The screenshot of Artura is from the C64 version, and the Death Sword screenshot is from the Apple II version. The Wasteland screenshots were split evenly between the Apple II version and the DOS version. So, again, no. The comparison is not unbalanced--their art style was a conscious decision. And as Paul above me said, the rest of the game's over-the-top pulpiness points to this style anyway.

[Dogmeat]

Sry for not being too clear, english is not my first language and i tried to do my best in expressing the look of the game i don't want to see. Didn't expect my words to be dissected like that, lol. I understand that people have different tastes and i'm not trying to convince you that my preferred visual style is better than yours. It's just i was intrigued why some of you consider that the market is full of dark and brown games, when it's not.

I used some terms in my previous post, let me elaborate:

-by cartoony looking i meant when the game's textures look like they were hand drawn with a brush, using a single color or two and don't have any sharp details, if any; they're not realistic looking. I'm referring to the individual textures, no matter how small. Games like Dota 2, Diablo 3, Kingdoms of Amalur, Bloodline Champions, Deathspank, Torchlight 1&2, Orcs Must Die, etc, could be some examples. WoW and W3 started it all.

-by cell shaded look-alike games i was thinking of games like Borderlands, Leagues of Legends and Dungeon Defenders as prime examples. Not sure if that's the tech used for them, but they definitely have a common visual style that reminds me of cell shading.

-by vivid colored games i was referring to all the above but also to games with more detailed, somewhat realistic textures, like Enslaved, Titan Quest, Heroes of Newerth, Heroes 6, Defenders of Ardania, etc.

-by dark i meant the tone, not the light level in the game.

I don't hate the above styles (and it's irrelevant to the discussion, anyway), but i don't think they are suited to a post nuclear apocalyptic game. If you want to maintain the color palette of Wasteland 1, simply because of a nostalgia sentiment, then you should also preserve the pixelated look and many other things, not just the colorful look.

Personally i love the graphic style of games like Path of Exile (yes, i know it has some more colorful areas, but they are subdued, not overly bright and in tone with the atmosphere of the game), Grim Dawn or Lara Croft and the Guardian of Light. I don't think those games suffer from one earthy dominant color, but they look detailed and realistic, without being overly vivid and bright.

ps: if it was me, i would make the game look just like Fallout 1 and 2, color palette wise. That's my personal preference because i absolutely loved those games and that's the way i imagine a post nuclear world would look like. At least in the first decades; after that, it really doesn't matter what destroyed humanity, because the visual cues are buried by nature.

pss: i would also take some visual inspiration from movies like The Road and The Book of Eli.

[krellen]

Both Wasteland and Fallout are set nearly a century after the Apocalypse.