Why do people still make pixelated graphics?
Sometimes, you want to be able to destroy anything like in Worms and Liero but you don't want to spend years developing a voxel engine like in Outcast or get holes from rounding errors like in RedFaction.
Most personal computers are *perfectly* capable of displaying 3D models which have already been created. This is because, one a model has been created and released, it has also been finalized. Finalizing a 3D model is a form of compression that causes it to need vastly reduced amounts of memory to display.
Unfortunately creating 3D models is a very different story. There are, at present, very few, if any, home computers that are capable of handling this very system intensive process. If creating a 3D model by yourself were a feasible process, I think most indie game devs would go that way, but it's not. It's just not possible.
As someone that has created some rather complicated and polygon intensive 3D models on my home PC, which was out of date when I built it four years ago, all I can think to say is: "WHAT?!"
"Finalized 3D model?" "Compressed?"
There are quite a few reasons to go pixelated, space is rarely the case, in indie projects the most important rule is to go with what you have, most people would go pixelated mainly because it comes easy to them, Indie teams if not one-men armies, tend to be very reduced and get together through circumstantial availability rather than to supply specific needs, like searching for a 3D modeler because you want your game to be 3d, you work with what you got with the people that wants to work, so if your artist is good with vectorial graphics, thats what you go with, if its pixelated, you go pixelated.
It is also a pretty effective style choice if you do it right, a lot of people like pixelated games out of nostalgia, or mere taste, that's why from time to time larger companies also choose to go pixelated.
State of the art high definition graphics DO NOT make a game good, that is a rule, I've seen some of the worst games in the industry have the most overproduced high tech graphics of their time, and they still suck.
With current download speeds and storage capabilities, and as far as an indie developer would be concerned and able to produce, striving to make a game super low weight is rarely a concern unless you go crazy with insane amounts of content, which as an indie project is bound to fail to publish due to eternal unfinishedness
(yeap, made up word, but descriptive enough)
Indie developers tend to do their projects parallel to their day job, few indie developers are self sustaining and have the luxury of being full time indie developers, the focus of any indie project is to produce a fun, creative game in as little time as possible and withe the few resources they tend to have at hand reach.
It is also a pretty effective style choice if you do it right, a lot of people like pixelated games out of nostalgia, or mere taste, that's why from time to time larger companies also choose to go pixelated.
State of the art high definition graphics DO NOT make a game good, that is a rule, I've seen some of the worst games in the industry have the most overproduced high tech graphics of their time, and they still suck.
With current download speeds and storage capabilities, and as far as an indie developer would be concerned and able to produce, striving to make a game super low weight is rarely a concern unless you go crazy with insane amounts of content, which as an indie project is bound to fail to publish due to eternal unfinishedness
(yeap, made up word, but descriptive enough)Indie developers tend to do their projects parallel to their day job, few indie developers are self sustaining and have the luxury of being full time indie developers, the focus of any indie project is to produce a fun, creative game in as little time as possible and withe the few resources they tend to have at hand reach.
My indie game is going NES like. 56 colors to choose from with 8x8 being my smallest sprites. I am doing 16x16 for tiles and sprites mostly.
Why am I making an 8-bit game when I can do it with better graphics?
1. I suck at making graphics. If I have a small palette of colors and a small canvas. I can make some good pieces of work.
2. I want to make a RPG that is 8Bit style.
3. There is strangely a market for it. Capitalize!
Why am I making an 8-bit game when I can do it with better graphics?
1. I suck at making graphics. If I have a small palette of colors and a small canvas. I can make some good pieces of work.
2. I want to make a RPG that is 8Bit style.
3. There is strangely a market for it. Capitalize!
1. I suck at making graphics. If I have a small palette of colors and a small canvas. I can make some good pieces of work.
#1 is actually a misconception too many people have. There is a big difference between shitty graphics and retro graphics. Retro graphics were still created with traditional art skills. No amount of color or resolution limiting is going to make bad art look good. A big part of making good low res graphics is using proper art knowledge and experience to overcome the limitations.
I'm surprised how few games there are using flat shaded polygons to make 2D graphics. Resolution independence, yum....
Pixel art is harder to make than regular art. Have fun manually dithering your everything.
Pixel art is harder to make than regular art. Have fun manually dithering your everything.
I will take that challenge, I will be working on my art assets this weekend. I will show you what I will come up with for my map tile set next week.
Specs I will be using:
52 color Palette (same as NES)
16x16 tiles
64 tiles in total.
I love the pixel style. Don't try to make 3D games if you're not a 10+ years experienced animator with all the best tools.
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement