Senjo No Valkyria (Valkyrie of the Battlefield) : Best Cell shading ever?

[patsu]

I think that's what Sigfried meant:

I don't really care how many polygons the engine pushes and how high texture resolutions are as the long as the results look good. In the end, VC easily overcomes it's technical shortcomings (whatever those may be) because the art direction is so beautiful.

The game looks good because of strong character design, excellent color use, and the subtle sketch + water-color look. Every character in the game, including the entire supporting cast, is unique. They all have their own catch phrases and character quirks that affect gameplay.

IMHO, the GameTrailer review presents it best:
[gt]43160[/gt]

 

[vazel]

...

 

[patsu]

I do recognize the merits of the art design but I still don't think the right word is 'gorgeous' due to the technical shortfalls.

Gorgeous is a subjective term, like attractive. I don't think you can necessarily discount it because of technical shortfalls.

What does that have to do with the game being 'gorgeous'?

Ah, in Valkyria's case, the beauty is more than skindeep. The character design for example affects gameplay too.

 

[vazel]

...

 

[deepbrown]

Gorgeous implies something above just looking good. The sketchy filter and onomatopoeia were unique aspects but everything else was merely standard or sub-par in the case of textures. As an example of a game that looked gorgeous thanks to its art direction and technical excellence take a look at Shadow of the Colossus.
We are talking about visuals not gameplay(this argument started with a comparison to the anime after all).

But anyways this argument is creeping me out.

If a game is sketched or anime - why does it need textures? Being drawn is by definition - 2D and flat. I think it would be very hard to criticise the look of VC - it is beautiful. This game and Naruto both have recreated cartoon/anime to the extreme.

 

[vazel]

...

 

[patsu]

Gorgeous implies something above just looking good. The sketchy filter and onomatopoeia were unique aspects but everything else was merely standard or sub-par in the case of textures. As an example of a game that looked gorgeous thanks to its art direction and technical excellence take a look at Shadow of the Colossus.

I see what you mean, but there is no technical or universal yardstick for measuring attractiveness. Not sure what's creepy about it. Some scenes in Valkyria look very good (not just looking good). The music adds further to the experience. No one says VC is more gorgeous than SofC in this thread anyway.

I was wow'ed a few times while playing the game.

We are talking about visuals not gameplay(this argument started with a comparison to the anime after all).

But anyways this argument is creeping me out.

You're are talking about technical visuals, Sigfried is talking about the perceived beauty of Valkyria (regardless of resolutions and textures). I am talking about the beauty of the game as a whole. I seldom look at things in isolated pieces.

 

[vazel]

...

 

[patsu]

What I find creepy is you people keep talking about a game like a woman and also keep stretching the argument in order to make the game look better.

Actually, xbd and I had a brief discussion in the B3D chatroom about Valkyria Chronicles. That's why this thread was bumped (to give him more follow up info, especially the price drop since he'd indicated his interest in a cheaper VC). I also told him to get others' feedback.

The talk about whether Valkyria Chronicles is gorgeous or not is subjective. I am not even sure if we are arguing on the same point.

I do recognize the unique art design but the textures being sub-par by this gen's standards does impact how its art design comes off. Even a comic book's art is impacted by which color printing process it uses and wether it uses matte or glossy paper. It's not just about the art it's also about the process of how that art is delivered.

I don't think people are denying the low texture argument. The thing is it's not important by some of our standard/perception to score Valkyria Chronicles visuals. e.g., In your example above, I don't care whether the paper is grossy or matt. In fact I prefer matt finishing only because I like the paper feel better, and it's not related to the art in my view. The textures may be low, but I didn't notice or pay attention to it at all. Even if it uses more detailed textures, it also does not mean that VC will automatically look better (or worse) than SotC.

Naturally, this post is not intended to stretch the beautiful VC argument. You're part of the discussion too, and I'm certain you're not interested in stretching the beauty of VC.

 

[vazel]

...

 

[patsu]

I'm curious, do you also gloss over sub-par special effects in movies?

If the sub-par effects are not noticeable in the grand scheme of things. It wouldn't become a topic of discussion. Or put it another way, people may be attracted to other aspects of the movies that the effects don't come into play. That perception changes with time too. It's not uncommon for me to watch an old scifi movie and notice the flaws; yet when I watched it the first time (or first few times), I was astounded.

Like I said above, having higher textures in VC does not necessarily mean that I will rate it better or worse than SotC. I need to see the entire result.

Videogames, like digital effects in movies, rely on a technical base in delivering a vision. A higher polygon/texture/etc. count goes a long way towards executing a higher quality of the art design which makes it look better. As another example look at how much better movies look in Blu-ray over DVD due to its higher resolution allowing a better rendition of the image.

Do Valkyria Chronicle's visuals look good? Yes, but it has problems.

And to some, it can also look gorgeous with these problems. They don't need to have an ulterior motive to blow the beauty up. It appears to me (at least) that the poly count and textures are sufficient. In fact, you pointed out that the polycount was low initially, and then corrected yourself (It's good enough ?). It's about how people perceive the final image.

You may be able to pick out the low quality textures better than those who raved about VC. That's all. The devs can max out the resolution, polycount, framerate and texture quality all they want, it does not mean the final result will be the most appealing either.

 

[obonicus]

Can I ask you something, are you a weeaboo? Hope you don't get offended. I've noticed weeaboos are flocking to this game practically declaring their undying loyalty to it. The anime is only going to make this situation worse.

That not even necessary. I didn't want to enter this conversation since you're allowed to dislike the art style, but folks are allowed to find it very attractive as well. The 'canvas effect' does give it a very unique look, unlike other cel-shading. This plus the art choices is why folks might find the game very pretty. Sure, maybe when this technique is aped in a million different games we can look back on this and go 'gosh, ground textures sure do suck', though I doubt it.

 

[patsu]

What's a weeaboo ?

EDIT: Ah, found out from the web. Short answer is no. Long answer is you may need to be more open minded.
[size=-2]Hmm... learn something new everyday.[/size]

 

[vazel]

...

 

[deepbrown]

But it wasn't 2D and flat. There were polygons and textures being rendered. And the intention wasn't to recreate a cartoon but to have a manga/comic book feel.

These arguments aren't even making sense anymore.

I'm not understanding your point. Of course it uses polygons - how else would the game be made? It's the same with Naruto - polygons are used, but the final effect is a 2d sketch/anime.

Sketch's don't have textures - they have an impression of a surface. VC does almost everything it technically has to do to produce the sketch look it's going for. In fact most reviewers feel that it's has the best cell-shading (look at thread title). Of course, there's ways to go - but it can still be called beautiful and gorgeous.

 

[vazel]

...

 

[deepbrown]

What exactly are you seeing in this game? I see 3D polygons and textures with a sketch filter on top, those two elements are clearly discernible. These arguments have gotten downright ridiculous it's good that you people like the game but stop bending reality for it.

I mean, do you honestly look at this game and say "WOAH am I seeing a videogame or an anime???!!!".

And btw, the game isn't supposed to look like a sketch. It's supposed to have manga and comic book elements. Manga uses sketchy lines for shading purposes. And the onomatopoeia is more from western comic books.

What are you talking about?

It uses 3D polygons as it's played out in a 3D space - but the flat textures and sketching is to make it look like a 2D sketch/water colour (or 2.5D we can call it). It's still one of the most impressive games to perform this kind of look. Naruto and perhaps SFIV are attempting to achieve the same type of look.

As far as I can tell, it's meant to look like a watercolour with sketch - hence the beginning of the game starting as a pencil sketch being painted in with colours. Or the colour draining out to be left with a pencil sketch when a character dies.

Moreover with the outside of the screen not being coloured-in on a paper like white texture (and the whole game being told through a book) the game looks (and is meant to look) like a watercolour painted onto a page, with sketched pencil lines for outlines and shadows. It achieves this look fully.

 

[vazel]

...

 

[deepbrown]

Do you... actually think it looks like one?

If you're asking if I think it looks like a watercolour with pencil sketched lines - then yes. I don't see how they could possibly improve upon this. Think - their only methods to create detail are a pencil and a paintbrush with watercolours. How exactly would they create high-res 3D textures - and why would they? It would destroy the look of the game. The only way I think they could improve upon the look of the game is with more polygons on characters and in the environment, as well as less jaggies.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Do you... actually think it looks like one?

It's gorgeous! Those stills will fool 99% of the people out there into thinking they're seeing hand-drawn artwork. In motion the uniform sketching gives it away far more than 'low resolution' textures (note I've only seen the demo live) - textures which don't need to be pin-sharp due to the soft nature of the medium they are representing. I've developed graphics plugins and post-effects to simulate natural media from photos and 3D, and Valkyria is as good as anything I've seen in this field. I'm sure an analysis can tear it apart, but in the realms of artistic response, even if its not your preferred style, I don't see how anyone can look at Valkyria and be disappointed with what they achieved. It surpasses Okami in simulating natural media and Okami was way ahead of the pack in its day!

I'm certainly didn't look at those screenshots and think to myself 'eegads, look at all those polygon edges! What an abomination!'