Goblin Squad Member
|
Cartooney doesn't mean animated, every pixel of the game has been animated. So what is "cartooney"?
We have seen buildings, trees, grass, linen and leather clothes, armor, etc. in photo realistic resolution in real life or movies or, you know, photos. A few animated lines and color fills are too stylistic to be mistaken for an attempt at reality- like how you see them in SpongeBob. Pixels with enough detail and context are symbols for real things like an inn and our brains can plug the photo realistic concept of an inn into the mental movie of what's happening on screen.
Pixels that are symbols for an ogre (no matter how detailed) have no photo realistic stock images in our brains' storage files. They don't get that step our brain does of remembering what real life ogres look like. When we know what real trees and meadows are supposed to look like that can contrast with unenhanced pixels that represent an ogre.
The parts of a screen that are ogre will always fall short of the parts of the screen depicting real life objects because our brains can only latch onto and make photo comparisons with concepts that exist in meat space.
That's why I'm not worried if I don't get the feeling that the ogres in the sample photo look "real enough". They're roughly the same level of detail as everything else, they don't look like Shrek, and they're not wearing any articles of clothing that by Newtonian physics should make them tip over and pin them to the earth by sheer mass. So I am quite pleased we have ogres and are one step closer to introducing them to the persuasive part of my pointy stick.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Isn't cartoonish an art style with exaggerated features, saturated colors and contrasted shadows? Are depicted imaginary objects that don't exist in the real world always cartoonish is a matter of an opinion I think. It just might be that we just haven't seen them. Who says one has traveled all the planets... :)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Someone pointed out to me once (might have been Pagan) that often when animators attempt to make people (humans or human-like humanoids such as Elves and Halflings) look too realistic, our brains pick out all the little mistakes. Our brain tends not to have this problem when the animation is more "cartoony". For instance, I really dislike most of the Elf and Halfling faces in Lord of the Rings Online...they try to seem too realistic, but knowing they aren't real people, my brain focuses on all the things that are "wrong" from what a real face should look like.
Long story short - I'd rather have more realistic scenery, armor, weapons, and buildings, and slightly less realistic avatars.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It was indeed me and the effect we were talking about was the one known as the uncanny valley
see here uncanny valley
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I think "cartoony" means making the tone safer and softer and less serious? This might increase broader appeal but that can be at the risk of losing dramatic tension maybe? At least that is what I believe is being considered for discussion. It is a delicate balance between the two.
That's why I'm not worried if I don't get the feeling that the ogres in the sample photo look "real enough". They're roughly the same level of detail as everything else, they don't look like Shrek, and they're not wearing any articles of clothing that by Newtonian physics should make them tip over and pin them to the earth by sheer mass.
I agree it does not need to look real at all. But I think dangerous and "air of menace" which perhaps if in combat mechanically it really "hurts stats wise" then it should combine (form -> function) which is the other side to produce dramatic tension. So maybe we can have our cake and eat it if baked at the right temperature.
I also agree 100% on the importance of physics, solidness and right scale: I don't think those things can be 'cheated'.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
... our brains can only latch onto and make photo comparisons with concepts that exist in meat space.That really makes sense and I'm glad you said that. I had never looked at it that way before.
Thank you for the appreciation if there are only two things I'm an expert in it's science and pointy sticks, not necessarily in that order.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Some of my reference points are the many games I have played in the past. In WoW, the character art was obviously animated characters, but there was no mistaking the races, the sexes, the facial expressions. WoW had the best facial expressions in any of the games I have played in the last 15 years or so. I think it is because they did not try to make them "realistic". You could easily tell when a character was laughing and happy by the emotes and facials. The voices helped, but even muted you knew what was being expressed.
In Ultima Online there were barely faces, characters were in 2D and your character was a flat icon moving on a flat surface textured to appear 3D. It worked great for its day, but they tried to overlay a 3D engine (enormous patch that failed miserably imo) over the 2D and the character art just wasn't acceptable. It needed too much work and changed the way your brain interpreted the images.
Lord of the Rings Online had some really fun art, the characters were clearly different races, but they had NO facial expressions as all whether dancing, fighting, dying...all the faces were dead as a mannequin.
The shot of the two ogres (I am assuming they are ogres, but whatever they are they are ugly as hell and I'll probably be running away from them for a long while) look like Pathfinder art to me and hold close to the imagined world we have seen for so long on paper. all these naysayers are looking at games that a futuristic or are trying to be picture perfect recreations of humans. That is a silly comparison. Seen the art for Wildstar? or GW2 (the Asura and Sylvari look silly to me but many players are devoted to both races).
There are many games coming out, all with different art styles. So far I like what I'm seeing here.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've found in games that from an art perspective that any attempt to go for a realism centric aesthetic or anything resembling it - think Everquest, Mil Sim shooters, some RPGs, darkfall is another example - end up with their graphics dating very quickly. This could mean that 2-3 years at the latest your game looks like ass.
On the other hand games that go with a strong individual stylistic aesthetic - think World of Warcraf, XIII, Legend of Zelda Wind Waker, Bastion etc - look good for years after their technical (poly count/texture resolution) sell by date. I mean compare games that came out around the time WoW came out and even games after, WoW is clearly and aestheticall superior game because they avoided the pitfall of trying to compete with a ever advancing technical world and instead forged a strong aesthetic that still stands quite well some 11(?) years later.
Its for this reason I have very little time for people who complain about cartoonish artstyles, especially for MMo's which are supposed to be played and experienced for years. Its very costly to keep the graphics on par with the ever advancing capabilities of modern computers, which is why many mmo game developers just don't. Its the difference between attempting to update every single character model and texture in the game every year or two and just occasionally bumping up the resolution every now and again.
A strong aesthetic will be with us for basically forever, but graphical fidelity dates incredibly fast. I'm very glad they have gone with the style they did.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I would be completely fine playing a game that's visually identical to WoW if it had the features and gameplay I'm looking for.
That being said PFO isn't styled after WoW, it's styled after the art found in Pathfinder books, and it looks great.
This pretty much sums up my own thoughts actually. I really like the art style of the pathfinder books and think they have been doing really well at replicating it and giving the same vibe.
Being the first one to bring this up in the other thread, I'd like to go on record as stating that the game doesn't look cartooney to me at all... with the exception of the two mobs we've seen, particularly the goblins (though the ogres need a bit of work too).
Personally, I think the character models and environment look fantastic, which makes the cartooney mobs look even more out of place in the world they've created... kind of immersion breaking imo. But, most of it looks great, as I said.
Edit: Also, I'd like to dispel the false idea that the mobs' art style in the game has to stay loyal to that of the books, there's no reason they have to.
For example, here's a goblin that would fit in better with the rest of the realistic-looking world: http://www.ironrealms.com/sites/default/files/midkemia_goblin_large.jpg
But that's not a Pathfinder Goblin.
No, I was just saying, it fits better in with the rest of the world you've created. :)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Edit: Also, I'd like to dispel the false idea that the mobs' art style in the game has to stay loyal to that of the books, there's no reason they have to.
There's no reason they "have to" call it Pathfinder, or set it in Golarion either.
I like the art style, and I think their decision to follow the art style from the books and game products is a very good one.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I would be completely fine playing a game that's visually identical to WoW
Some of it was fine, but I couldn't stand playing a human male for long because of the freakish Popeye-arms they had.
it's styled after the art found in Pathfinder books, and it looks great.
I mostly like it, and in the case of the creatures in the screenshot, I like the Golarion ogres far more than the anthropomorphic bulldogs that 3.X D&D passed off as ogres, but Golarion trolls unfortunately took their place as the giants with an even more giant underbite. It looks like the troll's lower jaw was permanently dislocated, and I'd much prefer they went with something more like this one. Give Swamp Thing a nose (and perhaps a slight pruning) and that'd make a great troll.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
But that's not a Pathfinder Goblin.No, I was just saying, it fits better in with the rest of the world you've created. :)
I think it's really hard to say because that pic is concept art and when you transform it into a model with textures it could look quite the same as the goblin we have already seen in game except for the shape of the model of course. Because the pathfinder goblin model is really cartoonish(oversized head, skinny legs) I think it would look silly with textures that are not cartoonish. About the rest of the world, I don't mind if it would be even more cartoonish, although I like the fact that the cartoonish mobs(imo) stand out nice from the rest of the scenery. But of course if the rest of the world looks bland compared to the mobs, that's not a good thing either.
Here's a goblin that has a very low poly count(1000tris like some wow characters). It's from some old game not sure what. The textures are WoW goblin male textures that I put on the old model. Even without any lights, shadows, complex shaders etc(there's a small smooth shader) you can make decent looking stuff if you know how to make awesome textures imo.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Edit: Also, I'd like to dispel the false idea that the mobs' art style in the game has to stay loyal to that of the books, there's no reason they have to.There's no reason they "have to" call it Pathfinder, or set it in Golarion either.
I like the art style, and I think their decision to follow the art style from the books and game products is a very good one.
I must agree. It is the aesthetic we have been (majority wise) expecting and I like it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
But that's not a Pathfinder Goblin.No, I was just saying, it fits better in with the rest of the world you've created. :)
No, it does not fit in with the world they're creating.
They're creating Golarion, and on Golarion goblins have very wide heads full of very many sharp teeth. They're pyro-maniacal cannibals who hate dogs & horses so much their weapons are the "dogslicer" and "horsechopper". If they were built much sturdier or made plans that focused more on their survival than the damage they can cause, they'd probably have eaten half of the other races into extinction by now. There's a free adventure called "We Be Goblins" with lots of examples.They're the Pathfinder mascot; that's why the PFO team named themselves Goblinworks and those who pledged to the Kickstarter are the Goblin Squad.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I think it's actually Realism vs Stylism
Where Cartoony is a possibly direction of Stylism? Cartoony as said I think draws appeal and lightens the atmosphere up eg playing and accentuating proportions usually towards a cuter/more friendly direction.
I personally HATE wow's style as being too Cartoony. I respect the high standard, good animation and longevity and also good performance choosing stylisation but the drama becomes slapstick "pow-wallop" instead of "cut & thrust, slash & tear" eg compare those old tv batman series with Errol Flynn's Adventures of Robin Hood where the sword play is both playful AND dramatic an looks skilled etc.
I think where Pathfinder art is really working is slightly cartoony but still high fantasy control: I mean a dragon needs to look fiercesome not gormulous as imo a lot of cartoon dragons degenerate into. The other thing that I like is the vision seems to characterise beyond a stock looking fantasy design ie the artists have added their interpretation which comes across as "careful" which I like, cartoony does this but so unsubtle and perhaps that's why I hate wow's style of cartoon - I think it's really easy vision.
Oh well aesthetics is about opinion and I hope I've expressed mine. Keep it "careful" and I'll like the designs a lot as well as "balanced" between tone and tension.
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
But that's not a Pathfinder Goblin.No, I was just saying, it fits better in with the rest of the world you've created. :)
I think the art directors would disagree. In a very real sense, the Pathfinder Goblin is a big part of what the world was made around.
If the Pathfinder Goblin doesn't fit into the world, it is the world that is wrong.
Yes, Avena, good post. I was merely pointing out that the vast majority of the game is realistic, and the mobs we've seen are stylized, which doesn't really go together, that's all. I don't really care about loyalty to the artwork in the books, but then again, I'm CN IRL if you know what I mean.
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
I think that style decisions can encode information on several levels; in particular, if player characters are 'realistic' while mobs are stylized (or, equivalently, if characters marked by Pharasma are 'realistic', and others stylized), then there is visually accessible information about the character, regardless of whether the player has learned the models and can instantly recognize the role and equipment level.
And even that is assuming that the final character artwork deviates from the source artwork style.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Ok, so environmental realism vs character Stylism? They fit for me at least. The characters are not too cartoony and are not too bright and flashy and garish (I find wow and a little bit GW2 both have too garish designs of chars and environment). The world looks NATURAL so it looks attractive imo is better / I like the fluorescent scenes in avatar but I could not take it for long. Our eyes evolved to be able to not get fatigued and in fact like eg tinkling water in streams, wind in the leaves and the fractal asymmetry (I think that's right) of forests etc. The characters as animated I think you can get away with more outlandish perceptions? All that's just my guess I mean could you imagine a kangeroo if you'd only ever seen placental mammals?! But even the kangeroo has basis in more fundamental rules that "make it work".
Would need to see more tbh but don't make either the chars or land too bright. I like more subdued colours that help everything fit in with everything else. So far colours seem right to me but I'm no adroit artist!
Edit: I really like a lot of the art in GW2 but it's a little too jumbled together nonsensical imo.
Concerning sticking to pathfinder it's a good idea: It already has vision and wealth of having achieved it's own rules for it's own "look" that is called "oeuvre"? Just have more physical touches in 3d for biomechanics which seems already in eg Goblin works a peach!
The character models we've seen look good to me as well, it's only the mobs I was taking issue with. :)
You'd prefer THAT over a pathfinder goblin? Wow, talk realism over good taste at any cost.
For example, here's a goblin that would fit in better with the rest of the realistic-looking world: http://www.ironrealms.com/sites/default/files/midkemia_goblin_large.jpg
Better than the unfortunate love child of the D&D goblin and Hey Arnold. Yea.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I really like the Pathfinder Goblin. Sure I got the "frighteners" from EQN's cartoony models. The problem there is that they've accentuated the appeal at the cost of the character fitting into the world. But that's not their intention as it is with PFO to create a virtual world. I think the Goblin's role in the hopefully large and increasing cast we'll see to populate the world is that of the vulture on the savannah?!
In fact I think GW has improved the goblins from the source material in this case. :)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Better than the unfortunate love child of the D&D goblin and Hey Arnold. Yea.You'd prefer THAT over a pathfinder goblin? Wow, talk realism over good taste at any cost.
For example, here's a goblin that would fit in better with the rest of the realistic-looking world: http://www.ironrealms.com/sites/default/files/midkemia_goblin_large.jpg
Do you wear Wranglers?
j/k. Eye of the beholder I guess, but Pathfinder Goblins are almost like the game's mascot. They are well loved, backed by one maybe the greatest source book in RPG history (classic monsters revisited) and even sell plushies.
They stay.
*shrugs* I just play Pathfinder for the Sorcerer bloodlines.