5 ms·

Sounds like they should have been developing for PC instead of mobile. The average mobile user plays exploitative "freemium" garbage to kill time in lines. How

Sounds like they should have been developing for PC instead of mobile. The average mobile user plays exploitative "freemium" garbage to kill time in lines. How can you expect them to appreciate the art behind it? Meanwhile, "retro"-style games are doing gangbusters on Steam, selling to people that actually appreciate those styles of art, music, and game design.

dragontamer 11y ago
While you have a point (and I've given you a +1 vote because of it), the fact remains that the "average person" I know thinks that Street Fighter 4 animations were better than Street Fighter 3. The Chun Li discussion happens a lot in my circle of friends, and I'm always in the minority. Very few people appreciate classic pixel art.
- fgsfdsfgsfds 11y ago
  That's fair, but if you want to make art, there's no sense in trying to appeal to everyone. The guy that disregards pixel art probably wouldn't see your traditional art for what it really is, either. You can be depressed that the "mainstream" doesn't appreciate what you do, you can crush your spirit trying to pander to them, or you can have fun in your cozy niche with a small handful of fans and peers that really get you.
- Tyr42 11y ago
  So, if we look to the digital art like Pixar, there are a lot of guidelines from traditional animation to make a scene come alive. * Squish and Stretch * Fallow through * Secondary Action These principles really help make dynamic scenes. If you look at the Chun Li animations, you can see that the older one does a better job of using these. I feel like if the HD version took advantage of these, it would look the best out of all of them, but it failed to reach its full potential in it's medium. Watch this early Pixar short: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4NPQ8mfKU0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4NPQ8mfKU0 See how alive and full of emotion the little lamp is?
  - JohnBooty 11y ago
    I can't directly compare the SF3 and SF4 animations: they're just totally different art forms. That said, as somebody who loves pixel art, I still really love what Capcom did with SF4's art style. The artists of SF4 definitely took a bold direction; the SF4 games don't really look like any other 3D fighting games. The characters are cartoonish without falling back on the crutch of cel shading; they're realistic without looking like drab psuedo-photo-realism. To me they look like childrens' action figures, fighting it out on the screen. As the author says, SF4 could have been animated better. Specifically it probably would have benefited from some squash-and-stretch as he suggests. It's also worth noting that SF3's traditional cel animation, while awesome, also has room for improvement. The animation style isn't very consistent from character to character. In a lot of cases (Chun Li in particular) it's not even consistent between her various moves. A great critique here: http://www.finalformgames.com/uncategorized/style-study-motion-blur-in-street-fighter-3/ http://www.finalformgames.com/uncategorized/style-study-moti...
    - dragontamer 11y ago
      > The artists of SF4 definitely took a bold direction; the SF4 games don't really look like any other 3D fighting games. The characters are cartoonish without falling back on the crutch of cel shading; they're realistic without looking like drab psuedo-photo-realism. To me they look like childrens' action figures, fighting it out on the screen. Actually, Arc System Works ironically was the one who pushed the envelope here. SF4 took a huge number of cues from Battle Fantasia. The "Super-Attack Zoom-in" animation, the dynamic camera movement, "Super Freeze", and so forth. Its ironic, because Arc System Works made Battle Fantasia as a "learning project". In various interviews, Arc System Works noted that they had very little 3D skill and needed to train everyone up on 3D Animation skills, and the best way to do that was to make a 3D-animated video game. Then a few years later, Capcom basically takes all the cues from Battle Fantasia and added a decent-style on top of it (the "Black Lines" and a unique style of cel-shading). And of course, Capcom's SF4 cast was much larger, more detailed animation and all that. Nonetheless, it is clear that it was Arc System Works that pushed the envelope in their experiments with the one-off Battle Fantasia. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZDJenxXPuM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZDJenxXPuM IMO, Arc System Works has done 3D a massive favor here with Battle Fantasia, and they are once again pushing the envelope with Guilty Gear Xrd. Not to hate on SF4's style of course. I think I prefer Capcom's SF4 style over say... Tekken, DOA or even MvC3. And Capcom definite added a lot of "love" in the art-style. But the _core_ of the animation techniques were more or less copied from Battle Fantasia years earlier. Super Smash Bros always had the right idea with the attacks however. If you watch SSB:M carefully, the bones of the various characters expand with the hitboxes. For example, Mario's FAir attack has a huge exaggerated fist, and other characters shrink/ grow with their hitboxes. (Which adds for some interesting strategies / counter-strategies, since hitbox / hurtbox manipulation is a major element of high-level Fighting Games). The Super Smash Brothers series has been the best at communicating the hurtboxes and hitboxes in a 3D environment. And it looks like Guilty Gear Xrd is finally a 2nd series that finally communicates those important cues as well. ---------------------------- Still, it is clear that the 3D Artwork style of SF4 is still relatively new and isn't as a refined of artwork. Again, the Chun-Li animation from SF3 is near the peak of Capcom's animation prowess, while SF4 is probably better described as a great first step for Capcom (even if it is in many ways copied over from Battle Fantasia). Despite that fact, people are wow'ed by the the zooms, the buttery smooth animations, dynamic camera angles and automated shading. Things that honestly didn't take much effort on the part of SF4 artists. Heck, all of those things basically come for free when you use 3D Models.
drzaiusapelord 11y ago
There's this cognitive dissonance with a lot of game devs who damn well know mobile is a ghetto, but want the big bucks mobile can occasionally deliver. So they try to justify mobile development thinking they'll be the ones who make the "mature" game that will be "appreciated." Instead, freemium mouthbreathers leave 1 star reviews because "it looks funny on my phone." Don't blame the game or the style. Blame your chosen audience.
- fgsfdsfgsfds 11y ago
  You hit the nail on the head. Funding is also a big part of it. It's much easier to get funding for a mobile game than for an indie PC game, even though the mobile game is significantly less likely to make a return on investment. So perhaps some mobile devs know they aren't going to make it, but take the money anyway so that they can work on something on someone else's dime, while they build up experience and add another piece to their portfolio. I'm not convinced it's a worthwhile trade, however, if it makes you lose your faith in humanity and your art form in the process.
  - mguillemot 11y ago
    I'm working on a PC game and spoke to a lot of potential investors, and this is spot on. "Funding an original game that has already proved itself by actual sales, on a proven and stable platform?" Not interested. "Giving away a few millions to take a crap-shot chance at a totally unethical business on a overcrowded platform?" Yes please!
panic 11y ago
The average mobile user plays exploitative "freemium" garbage to kill time in lines. How can you expect them to appreciate the art behind it? How does your second statement follow from the first? Does choosing to play freemium mobile games somehow mean you have poor artistic taste?
- Mithaldu 11y ago
  Good question. It's also fairly simple to answer. Players of freemium games fall into two categories: People who have some emotional draw to it (maybe they like the art) and play it despite recognizing that the mobile freemium game industry is a giant social engineering experiment aimed at extracting money by exploiting weaknesses in the unaware human mentality. People who don't recognize this, either by simply lacking awareness, or lacking enough experience to draw a comparison to non-exploitative games. Regardless of which it is, in both of these case, on average over the entire population, it is fair to assume that they will either not be attentive enough to appreciate details in the art, or won't even have enough knowledge to draw a useful comparison to other kinds of art.
  - joesb 11y ago
    Are you implying that Players of paid games do not fall into the same two categories?
    - Mithaldu 11y ago
      No, i am absolutely and determinedly not saying they do not fall into the same two categories. I'm not implying, i'm explicitly saying that people who primarily play games that are either sold up-front and without any IAP, or only with IAP that unlocks the full-game part of a "free demo", are, on average over the entire population, are most likely to be found in the third category of people who either have enough experience with games that are not menschenverachtend or are able to recognize games that are menschenverachtend, and avoid those consciously, and are thus also more likely to have the experience or attention to appreciate small detail art decisions. These two statements are wildly different.
- 11y ago

dragontamer 11y ago

While you have a point (and I've given you a +1 vote because of it), the fact remains that the "average person" I know thinks that Street Fighter 4 animations were better than Street Fighter 3. The Chun Li discussion happens a lot in my circle of friends, and I'm always in the minority. Very few people appreciate classic pixel art.

fgsfdsfgsfds 11y ago
That's fair, but if you want to make art, there's no sense in trying to appeal to everyone. The guy that disregards pixel art probably wouldn't see your traditional art for what it really is, either. You can be depressed that the "mainstream" doesn't appreciate what you do, you can crush your spirit trying to pander to them, or you can have fun in your cozy niche with a small handful of fans and peers that really get you.
Tyr42 11y ago
So, if we look to the digital art like Pixar, there are a lot of guidelines from traditional animation to make a scene come alive. * Squish and Stretch * Fallow through * Secondary Action These principles really help make dynamic scenes. If you look at the Chun Li animations, you can see that the older one does a better job of using these. I feel like if the HD version took advantage of these, it would look the best out of all of them, but it failed to reach its full potential in it's medium. Watch this early Pixar short: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4NPQ8mfKU0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4NPQ8mfKU0 See how alive and full of emotion the little lamp is?
- JohnBooty 11y ago
  I can't directly compare the SF3 and SF4 animations: they're just totally different art forms. That said, as somebody who loves pixel art, I still really love what Capcom did with SF4's art style. The artists of SF4 definitely took a bold direction; the SF4 games don't really look like any other 3D fighting games. The characters are cartoonish without falling back on the crutch of cel shading; they're realistic without looking like drab psuedo-photo-realism. To me they look like childrens' action figures, fighting it out on the screen. As the author says, SF4 could have been animated better. Specifically it probably would have benefited from some squash-and-stretch as he suggests. It's also worth noting that SF3's traditional cel animation, while awesome, also has room for improvement. The animation style isn't very consistent from character to character. In a lot of cases (Chun Li in particular) it's not even consistent between her various moves. A great critique here: http://www.finalformgames.com/uncategorized/style-study-motion-blur-in-street-fighter-3/ http://www.finalformgames.com/uncategorized/style-study-moti...
  - dragontamer 11y ago
    > The artists of SF4 definitely took a bold direction; the SF4 games don't really look like any other 3D fighting games. The characters are cartoonish without falling back on the crutch of cel shading; they're realistic without looking like drab psuedo-photo-realism. To me they look like childrens' action figures, fighting it out on the screen. Actually, Arc System Works ironically was the one who pushed the envelope here. SF4 took a huge number of cues from Battle Fantasia. The "Super-Attack Zoom-in" animation, the dynamic camera movement, "Super Freeze", and so forth. Its ironic, because Arc System Works made Battle Fantasia as a "learning project". In various interviews, Arc System Works noted that they had very little 3D skill and needed to train everyone up on 3D Animation skills, and the best way to do that was to make a 3D-animated video game. Then a few years later, Capcom basically takes all the cues from Battle Fantasia and added a decent-style on top of it (the "Black Lines" and a unique style of cel-shading). And of course, Capcom's SF4 cast was much larger, more detailed animation and all that. Nonetheless, it is clear that it was Arc System Works that pushed the envelope in their experiments with the one-off Battle Fantasia. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZDJenxXPuM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZDJenxXPuM IMO, Arc System Works has done 3D a massive favor here with Battle Fantasia, and they are once again pushing the envelope with Guilty Gear Xrd. Not to hate on SF4's style of course. I think I prefer Capcom's SF4 style over say... Tekken, DOA or even MvC3. And Capcom definite added a lot of "love" in the art-style. But the _core_ of the animation techniques were more or less copied from Battle Fantasia years earlier. Super Smash Bros always had the right idea with the attacks however. If you watch SSB:M carefully, the bones of the various characters expand with the hitboxes. For example, Mario's FAir attack has a huge exaggerated fist, and other characters shrink/ grow with their hitboxes. (Which adds for some interesting strategies / counter-strategies, since hitbox / hurtbox manipulation is a major element of high-level Fighting Games). The Super Smash Brothers series has been the best at communicating the hurtboxes and hitboxes in a 3D environment. And it looks like Guilty Gear Xrd is finally a 2nd series that finally communicates those important cues as well. ---------------------------- Still, it is clear that the 3D Artwork style of SF4 is still relatively new and isn't as a refined of artwork. Again, the Chun-Li animation from SF3 is near the peak of Capcom's animation prowess, while SF4 is probably better described as a great first step for Capcom (even if it is in many ways copied over from Battle Fantasia). Despite that fact, people are wow'ed by the the zooms, the buttery smooth animations, dynamic camera angles and automated shading. Things that honestly didn't take much effort on the part of SF4 artists. Heck, all of those things basically come for free when you use 3D Models.

drzaiusapelord 11y ago

There's this cognitive dissonance with a lot of game devs who damn well know mobile is a ghetto, but want the big bucks mobile can occasionally deliver. So they try to justify mobile development thinking they'll be the ones who make the "mature" game that will be "appreciated." Instead, freemium mouthbreathers leave 1 star reviews because "it looks funny on my phone." Don't blame the game or the style. Blame your chosen audience.

fgsfdsfgsfds 11y ago
You hit the nail on the head. Funding is also a big part of it. It's much easier to get funding for a mobile game than for an indie PC game, even though the mobile game is significantly less likely to make a return on investment. So perhaps some mobile devs know they aren't going to make it, but take the money anyway so that they can work on something on someone else's dime, while they build up experience and add another piece to their portfolio. I'm not convinced it's a worthwhile trade, however, if it makes you lose your faith in humanity and your art form in the process.
- mguillemot 11y ago
  I'm working on a PC game and spoke to a lot of potential investors, and this is spot on. "Funding an original game that has already proved itself by actual sales, on a proven and stable platform?" Not interested. "Giving away a few millions to take a crap-shot chance at a totally unethical business on a overcrowded platform?" Yes please!

panic 11y ago

The average mobile user plays exploitative "freemium" garbage to kill time in lines. How can you expect them to appreciate the art behind it? How does your second statement follow from the first? Does choosing to play freemium mobile games somehow mean you have poor artistic taste?

Mithaldu 11y ago
Good question. It's also fairly simple to answer. Players of freemium games fall into two categories: People who have some emotional draw to it (maybe they like the art) and play it despite recognizing that the mobile freemium game industry is a giant social engineering experiment aimed at extracting money by exploiting weaknesses in the unaware human mentality. People who don't recognize this, either by simply lacking awareness, or lacking enough experience to draw a comparison to non-exploitative games. Regardless of which it is, in both of these case, on average over the entire population, it is fair to assume that they will either not be attentive enough to appreciate details in the art, or won't even have enough knowledge to draw a useful comparison to other kinds of art.
- joesb 11y ago
  Are you implying that Players of paid games do not fall into the same two categories?
  - Mithaldu 11y ago
    No, i am absolutely and determinedly not saying they do not fall into the same two categories. I'm not implying, i'm explicitly saying that people who primarily play games that are either sold up-front and without any IAP, or only with IAP that unlocks the full-game part of a "free demo", are, on average over the entire population, are most likely to be found in the third category of people who either have enough experience with games that are not menschenverachtend or are able to recognize games that are menschenverachtend, and avoid those consciously, and are thus also more likely to have the experience or attention to appreciate small detail art decisions. These two statements are wildly different.
11y ago