they look very appealing if used right. I remember a picture of The Witcher 3 with 2D graphics style and I liked it very much.^Yasssssssss! Yesterday I saw the trailer and I loved it! ^_^ I like big pixels when it comes to graphic adventure games (I replayed Gabriel Knight not so long ago... Laura Bow II too, and I must continue with the MI series).
Wow, yes, nice image!they look very appealing if used right. I remember a picture of The Witcher 3 with 2D graphics style and I liked it very much.
New video from Eurogamer:
Whoa, I feel you! I don't want to see much material from this game, but yes, what you describe is awful. At least that's my opinion, too.I've been following the development of this game with great interest since it was first brought to public, as a real monkey island fanboy, and I believe it will be great.
but since this is a graphics forum...
Gosh I hate how they've delt with the pixel art in here. I don't mind pixel art games, but it must be done right. Everything must fit within the same pixel grid/resolution on the same screen. That is not the case here. Certain elements are slightly higher resolution than others. There is stuff that occupies half-pixels, or 1,462384653 of a pixel... Ughhh. When characters move away from the screen and are scaled down, the scaling is done according to the full screen resolution and not the game's artificial low-res resolution. In fact, this game deals so slopply with resolution that I'd say it barely qualifies as having an actual defined simulated low-resolution. It hurts my eyes, I swear it does.
interesting, I didn't notice that,you might have a keen eye for that kind of detail. It looks like your typical classic game to me. Maybe it's harder to recreate graphics like those accurately than we thought it would be.I've been following the development of this game with great interest since it was first brought to public, as a real monkey island fanboy, and I believe it will be great.
but since this is a graphics forum...
Gosh I hate how they've delt with the pixel art in here. I don't mind pixel art games, but it must be done right. Everything must fit within the same pixel grid/resolution on the same screen. That is not the case here. Certain elements are slightly higher resolution than others. There is stuff that occupies half-pixels, or 1,462384653 of a pixel... Ughhh. When characters move away from the screen and are scaled down, the scaling is done according to the full screen resolution and not the game's artificial low-res resolution. In fact, this game deals so slopply with resolution that I'd say it barely qualifies as having an actual defined simulated low-resolution. It hurts my eyes, I swear it does.
No, I don't think it's harder than what most people think. You just have to output everything in real low resolution. There are even free engines (such as AGS) specially designed to create old style adventure games.interesting, I didn't notice that,you might have a keen eye for that kind of detail. It looks like your typical classic game to me. Maybe it's harder to recreate graphics like those accurately than we thought it would be.
interesting, I didn't notice that,you might have a keen eye for that kind of detail. It looks like your typical classic game to me. Maybe it's harder to recreate graphics like those accurately than we thought it would be.
someone brought the issue, I think it looks like the same problem you are mentioning, in this Ron Gilbert's post.Yes I do have a keen eye for that kind of detail. It's both a blessing and a curse. It's part of my trade though, as I work as art director and graphic designer for ad agencies. It's thanks to this kind of nitpicking that I'm pushed to putting out polished work.
to which other person called Falvio repliedRon Gilbert âś“ - Apr 02, 2015 at 13:39
The scaling is done in the with OpenGL and on the GPU, so the pixels do shrink in size. Scaling was really hard and time consuming back in the SCUMM days (and it looked like crap). Scaling today is basically free. I went back and forth on scaling and if I should use hardware or do the old style. I think I'm going to use hardware, there are too many benefits over doing it in software. For of the game, characters will remain at 100%, so it will only for special things, like walking off into the distance.
have to say I think the opposite is actually true, the pixel shrinking looks really out of place :S
The SCUMM scaling might have looked like crap, but if you are working with certain resolutions constraints they should be respected, imho
wow, interesting stuff there. I like how they compare graphics from the original SNES and smoother scaling methods you could use to avoid too much pixel deformation.Ron is quite behind on modern graphics programming. He is talking as if to mantain pixel proportions he had to do it all on the CPU, which is silly. He can still use open GL and all the nice performance of GPU's, abilities to do shaders, etc. All he has to do is to not render everything directly to the final screen buffer, but to a low-res texture, and than stretch that texture over the final screen. Preferebly, he should do it the closest integer number he can x2, x3, x4, x5... using nearest neighbor filtering (to preserve the pixel shapes) and scale that again to the exact screen resolution using bilenear filtering (to avoid distortion caused by scaling directly to the final screen resolution that is not a integer - the NES mini made that mistake)
Here is a link to a website dedicated ENTIRELY to this issue.
http://2dforever.com/fix-your-pixelart/