5 ms·

Perhaps I'm just looking at things through rose tinted glasses, but I very much agree with this. I like to think that good pixel art works with the imagination.

Perhaps I'm just looking at things through rose tinted glasses, but I very much agree with this. I like to think that good pixel art works with the imagination. The artist puts down the broad strokes and lets the imagination fill the rest! There is a huge amount of skill that goes into good pixel art. It's not enough to have attention to detail, but an intuition about engaging and working with imagination. The more realistic the graphics, the higher the risk that it falls into the uncanny valley trap. The brain is already half fooled that it is seeing reality (or something that is supposed to be real) but if it's only slightly off, there'll be a feeling of unease. Of course, early 3d games were far off from feeling real, but they were already a step up and there was less headroom for imagination. The low polygon count models just look janky instead of endearing. Pixel art completely sidesteps this uncanny valley by not trying to be realistic, instead it tries to engage the brain to fill in the details. It's perhaps halfway between reading a book and watching a movie. E.g. looking at early 3d games, they just feel dated. One cannot help but compare them to today's 3d graphics and of course the oldies fall short by a very far margin. Comparing pixel art games to a modern AAA 3D game title is just so obviously apples to oranges that there is no struggle due to loss of fidelity. Again, perhaps my view is biased because I grew up with the pixelated games of old. Still, I'd like to assign the excitement of the early 3d titles more to the novelty (at the time) than from the fidelity of the graphics. I think the pixel art style will (or already does) have much more staying power.

the_af 6y ago
> I like to think that good pixel art works with the imagination. Fully agreed with this and the rest of your post. Are you familiar with Scott McCloud's "Understanding Comics"? I'm not particularly a fan of the whole book, but I really agree and am fascinated by the concept of "closure" he describes: the way the mind "fills in" the details that are missing in sequential art (i.e. comics), so you mentally create movement and detail when there is objectively none. This even works for storytelling itself, from a few "action" frames you mentally reconstruct the story, and this requires little effort. I think the same happens with pixel or line art. You just need some cues and then your brain gets to work on creating the scene.
m16ghost 6y ago
>E.g. looking at early 3d games, they just feel dated. One cannot help but compare them to today's 3d graphics and of course the oldies fall short by a very far margin. Comparing pixel art games to a modern AAA 3D game title is just so obviously apples to oranges that there is no struggle due to loss of fidelity. >Again, perhaps my view is biased because I grew up with the pixelated games of old. Still, I'd like to assign the excitement of the early 3d titles more to the novelty (at the time) than from the fidelity of the graphics. I think the pixel art style will (or already does) have much more staying power. I happen to agree that early 3d games like PS1/N64 look rather ugly, but nostalgia is very powerful, and retro low poly models is now its own aesthetic [0]. Like with pixel art, artists will take liberties with what was actually capable with hardware at the time, but people who grew up with the style will probably appreciate it more. [0]https://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/321754/Designing_a_demake_in_2018_The_making_of_PS1_love_letter_OKNORMAL.php https://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/321754/Designing_a_demak...
majormajor 6y ago
I never played this Indiana Jones game, or have much memory of other EGA games that I can think of, and to me, 90% of the VGA screenshots in this article look better than the EGA ones. To me, the limited color palette doesn't strike me as a differently meaningful sort of limitation than, say, the appearance of Mario 64 vs Mario Galaxy. The imagination always fills in the gap - I don't remember KOTOR looking worse than Mass Effect looking worse than Mass Effect Andromeda, say, but if I go back and look at them, they definitely were more limited - but if you don't have the memory of just how much your imagination originally filled in, I think it's harder to look past the actual pixels.
- short_sells_poo 6y ago
  I agree that some of the VGA art looks better, but here's the curse of the higher definition: if you look at the crypt scene, the VGA flavor has more detail, but now the crypt walls look as if made of modern concrete and the stalactites look as if made out of clay. This is not an issue with the EGA version because these details are left to the viewers imagination and it will tend to superimpose the details exactly according to the viewers expectations. In the VGA version, there is nothing left to the imagination, the brain is just confronted with the fact that the crypt walls are made in the style of brutalist architecture from poured concrete. This does not mesh at all with the setting of an ancient tomb! At least my subconscious has strong views on how ancient tombs are supposed to be :) There's a similar issue with the first scene inside the nazi fort, where the wall in the EGA version is made of rough hewn rocks and whether you imagine them to be slimy, moldy, smooth or rough is entirely up to you. There are only the broad strokes to guide your subconscious. The VGA version presents a done deal of what looks like modern masonry. Again it's jarring - we are supposed to be looking at the ancient foundations of the fort. In other cases, the artists did a better job with VGA so it's either OK or in rare cases better than the EGA version. Perhaps it also comes down to how vivid one's imagination is. Someone who has no preconceptions about the scenery or does not have a particularly strong visual imagination will just see a bunch of rough lines in the EGA flavor, and they won't mind the somewhat off putting lighting or details in the VGA screens - they'll just assume that's how it's supposed to be.
  - 6y ago

the_af 6y ago

> I like to think that good pixel art works with the imagination. Fully agreed with this and the rest of your post. Are you familiar with Scott McCloud's "Understanding Comics"? I'm not particularly a fan of the whole book, but I really agree and am fascinated by the concept of "closure" he describes: the way the mind "fills in" the details that are missing in sequential art (i.e. comics), so you mentally create movement and detail when there is objectively none. This even works for storytelling itself, from a few "action" frames you mentally reconstruct the story, and this requires little effort. I think the same happens with pixel or line art. You just need some cues and then your brain gets to work on creating the scene.

m16ghost 6y ago

>E.g. looking at early 3d games, they just feel dated. One cannot help but compare them to today's 3d graphics and of course the oldies fall short by a very far margin. Comparing pixel art games to a modern AAA 3D game title is just so obviously apples to oranges that there is no struggle due to loss of fidelity. >Again, perhaps my view is biased because I grew up with the pixelated games of old. Still, I'd like to assign the excitement of the early 3d titles more to the novelty (at the time) than from the fidelity of the graphics. I think the pixel art style will (or already does) have much more staying power. I happen to agree that early 3d games like PS1/N64 look rather ugly, but nostalgia is very powerful, and retro low poly models is now its own aesthetic [0]. Like with pixel art, artists will take liberties with what was actually capable with hardware at the time, but people who grew up with the style will probably appreciate it more. [0]https://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/321754/Designing_a_demake_in_2018_The_making_of_PS1_love_letter_OKNORMAL.php https://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/321754/Designing_a_demak...

majormajor 6y ago

I never played this Indiana Jones game, or have much memory of other EGA games that I can think of, and to me, 90% of the VGA screenshots in this article look better than the EGA ones. To me, the limited color palette doesn't strike me as a differently meaningful sort of limitation than, say, the appearance of Mario 64 vs Mario Galaxy. The imagination always fills in the gap - I don't remember KOTOR looking worse than Mass Effect looking worse than Mass Effect Andromeda, say, but if I go back and look at them, they definitely were more limited - but if you don't have the memory of just how much your imagination originally filled in, I think it's harder to look past the actual pixels.

short_sells_poo 6y ago
I agree that some of the VGA art looks better, but here's the curse of the higher definition: if you look at the crypt scene, the VGA flavor has more detail, but now the crypt walls look as if made of modern concrete and the stalactites look as if made out of clay. This is not an issue with the EGA version because these details are left to the viewers imagination and it will tend to superimpose the details exactly according to the viewers expectations. In the VGA version, there is nothing left to the imagination, the brain is just confronted with the fact that the crypt walls are made in the style of brutalist architecture from poured concrete. This does not mesh at all with the setting of an ancient tomb! At least my subconscious has strong views on how ancient tombs are supposed to be :) There's a similar issue with the first scene inside the nazi fort, where the wall in the EGA version is made of rough hewn rocks and whether you imagine them to be slimy, moldy, smooth or rough is entirely up to you. There are only the broad strokes to guide your subconscious. The VGA version presents a done deal of what looks like modern masonry. Again it's jarring - we are supposed to be looking at the ancient foundations of the fort. In other cases, the artists did a better job with VGA so it's either OK or in rare cases better than the EGA version. Perhaps it also comes down to how vivid one's imagination is. Someone who has no preconceptions about the scenery or does not have a particularly strong visual imagination will just see a bunch of rough lines in the EGA flavor, and they won't mind the somewhat off putting lighting or details in the VGA screens - they'll just assume that's how it's supposed to be.
- 6y ago