StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Interesting little article:

Realism vs. Style: the Zelda Debate"
By Bonnie Ruberg

*
With the stylized aesthetic of Wind Waker all but gone, Nintendo has implemented carefully rendered, highly realistic polygons in its place - perhaps in response to the outcry of fans who disapproved of "kiddy," cel-shaded Link. The game's release date has even been pushed back in part to allow developers more time to perfect the new look.
The question of realism versus style is one that has plagued art for centuries, and video games are no exception. Since the 2003 release of Wind Waker, a title both adored and despised, the Zelda series has come to epitomize that debate for the gaming industry, and heated words have been exchanged on both sides. Now, with Twilight Princess on the horizon, the old argument has been rekindled. What better time to take a look back at the issue and ask, once and for all: Is this really just a question of a pretty face?

When The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker came out two years ago, it's cel-shaded graphics caused a big stir in the American gaming community. Since then, debate over the value of the game's stylized aesthetic continues to be a popular topic in online video game forums. While there are some gamers who openly defend the title and its style, it seems the majority of voices express disappointment, even disgust. Many feel that the cel-shading gave Wind Waker a "cartoon-like" or childish look.
One fan writes of encountering the new aesthetic for the first time, "I felt as though something had been stolen from me." Other forums-users remark, in comments that mirror thousands by like-minded gamers, "The graphics ruined the game," and "[Wink Waker] destroyed everything Zelda stood for."
Now that Nintendo is taking the series back in a more graphically realistic direction, one precedented by the artistic approach in Ocarina of Time, those same disappointed fans are starting to rejoice. "These screens are exactly what i have been waiting for [sic]," writes one forum-user. Another: "All I can say is wow!!! I am so glad the cartoonish Link is gone. That is what kept me away from the whole Zelda franchise."

*
The press too seems glad to see the return of realism. After playing the demo at E3, Gamespy called the change in graphics an "upgrade," noting that "the overall style is a lot more grownup" and that "the game simply looks more alive."
Gaming Age said realism "seals the deal" on the title, which is "by far one of the best looking games Nintendo has ever made," while Gamespot simply refers to "the undeniable appeal of realistic Link." According to Eiji Aunoma, the director of Twilight Princess, the decision to move away from the highly stylized aesthetic of Wind Waker was based partially on fan reaction.
It was also dictated in part by the new game's storyline, which follows an older Link and a more serious adventure, and therefore needed a more "adult" graphical style. Still, even this decision to focus the game on a mature hero was affected by criticism from gamers who didn't enjoy playing as younger Link. As Planet GameCube notes, in the end, "The fans asked for a realistic Zelda, and Nintendo is delivering in a big way."

While it's understandable that players would have opinions about the looks of a favorite game, the debate over the aesthetics of Zelda has gone beyond friendly banter.
What makes the topic so important that gamers just can't let it go? It's not really all about looks. If Zelda weren't Zelda, no one would make such a big fuss.
As it stands, the series has so strong a fan-base, full of so many die-hard followers, that it has come, in a way, to represent video games as a whole, if not the industry itself.
This makes the question of realism versus style in Zelda a much larger one than if it were applied to an unpopular, or even moderately well-known game. The issue has been further complicated by Zelda's close association with Nintendo, which struggles constantly with its already "kiddy" image. While the developers of Wind Waker made an artistically bold decision in utilizing cel-shading, their choice may have weakening Nintendo's mainstream image - one which must remain welcoming to adult gamers if the company is to compete against Sony and Microsoft in the current market.

*
But for the video game community, the question of aesthetics is also a cultural one. Whereas, in the Japanese market, unique style is highly regarded, realism in games is more often an American ideal
This can be seen in the supposedly negative link that critical gamers draw between Wind Waker's cel-shading, officially called "toon-shading" by Nintendo, and cartoons themselves - considered by most Americans to be a juvenile form of entertainment.
Yet in Japan, anime and manga (the Japanese equivalents of cartoon shows and comic books) are regarded as legitimate art forms, and though some are designed for children, men and women of all ages enjoy these products, which lack the "kiddy" connotations they hold in the United States. Similarly, the gender expectations that are so rigid in mainstream America are not as clearly defined in Japanese culture.
Japanese gamers are less concerned with appearing "masculine," at least in the American sense of reveling in games that flex their graphical muscle. The comments of U. S. gamers, especially those participating in forums, are influenced by the need to protect a certain macho image, one in favor of "grownup" realism instead of "childish" stylization.

*
The larger question at hand, however, is perhaps unanswerable: Is the point of gaming to recreate reality, or should it go beyond realism, into the realm of art?
Video games confront this issue directly through the use of interactivity. Developers must decide whether to make a gaming experience as realistic as possible, allowing the gamer to step inside the character and his actions, or to keep him at a distance through an unfamiliar visual style.
Certain types of games logically benefit from an inclusive aesthetic; racing and fighting titles rely on increasingly robust graphics technology to bring you more believable interactivity. With other categories of games, such as action-adventure, the genre into which the Zelda series falls, the decision isn't so clear. Neither is who makes the call: Should it be the developers/creators/artists themselves, or the game's fanbase, its potential consumers? If gamers demand graphical prowess in a quality game, as their response to both Wind Waker and Twilight Princess implies they do, they also have to face the possibility that all games, if rendered as realistically as possible, may soon look the same - not so much art as playable photographs of the world around them. Then they must ask themselves, honestly, whether or not that's a bad thing.


linky
Nice read, btw from personal experience: Twilight princess looks even better than the screens in the link show

The larger question at hand, however, is perhaps unanswerable: Is the point of gaming to recreate reality, or should it go beyond realism, into the realm of art?

I've gotta say, no. Because no matter how much they try to recreate reality, they can never perfect it, and it will always look like a pale imitation of reality.

But if the games don't TRY to imitate reality, then you stop judging the graphics by comparing them to something they can never match, and become that much more immersed in the game.

I'll use a comparison of two Spider-Man games.

Right now, the game I'm looking forward to the most this month is Ultimate Spider-Man.











I'd take this over realistic graphics any day. Compare.






The realism looks fine, but it's just not as vibrant as Ultimate Spider-Man. Why? Spider-Man 2 tries to imitate reality, but of course cannot succeed. The people don't look or act like real people; they're pixellated imitations. Instead, forget trying to look real; Ultimate Spider-Man tries to look like a comic book, and succeeds.

When it comes down to it;
Spider-Man 2 tries to imitate reality, and fails (because it is nearly impossible).

Ultimate Spider-Man tries to look like a comic book, and succeeds.

Therefore, Ultimate Spider-Man looks and feels more natural.



Granted, I love the new Zelda style, but I also loved the Wind Waker cel-shading. I don't know which is better. I hope Nintendo makes another Wind Waker at some point.

I prefer more "animated" style over hyper realism (Zelda:WW is slightly over the line though, with Halflife 2 being an easy exception to make).

Also when is the USpiderman game coming out? Is that a pic of you playing as Wolverine?

No, you're playing Venom and kicking Wolverine's butt


USM is scheduled for September 26th. I can't wait 20 days


You can play through the game as Spider-Man or Venom, each with seperate storylines. Venom plays sorta like the Hulk in Ultimate Destruction, with huge bounding leaps that smash wherever you land, and ripping into walls to climb around. Spider-Man plays like the Spider-Man 2 one, but highly tweaked. And now there's double jump so you can webline and jump off that...

Spidey's moves are also highly tweaked and a lot more acrobatic, there were some pretty cool moves I saw including him jumping on a guy's shoulder and doing a backflip

Watch the videos. I highly recommend Yellow Line, Aerial, and Venom Down.
http://media.cube.ign.com/media/694/694999/vids_1.html


The entire thing plays like an interactive comic books; the cutscenes have characters travelling between the panels of a comic book page. Really cool stuff.

The fact is, the classic Zeldas were all cartoony. I mean, look at A Link to the Past. Link has pink hair. And even with The Minish Cap, the graphics are pretty cartoony.

There is no 'best' graphical style, only the one most appropriate for the game being made.

Wind Waker's graphics were entirely appropriate to the atmosphere and ethos of the game, Twilight Princess' graphics will, I expect, be similarly aptly designed.

That the shaded models of USM look more appropriate for a Spider Man game don't show that they are 'better' for games, just better for Spider Man. (And, I would suggest, any bold four colour hero would benefit from the same treatment.)

But that's not to say that all games are the same, and that they shouldn't strive towards realism. Project Zero would be a damn sight less scary if Tecmo hadn't made exceptional efforts in designing "realistic" ghosts. (realistic is not the correct word, realism has no place in games, what we actually mean is verisimilitude, the illusion that if ghosts were real, they might look like this)

After all, there's going to come a point when we reach photorealism, or indistinguishable simulation. And then it will stop being quite so important, and we can get back to looking for something interesting to render at photoreal quality.

Vendetta wrote:There is no 'best' graphical style, only the one most appropriate for the game being made.

Wind Waker's graphics were entirely appropriate to the atmosphere and ethos of the game, Twilight Princess' graphics will, I expect, be similarly aptly designed.

That the shaded models of USM look more appropriate for a Spider Man game don't show that they are 'better' for games, just better for Spider Man. (And, I would suggest, any bold four colour hero would benefit from the same treatment.)

But that's not to say that all games are the same, and that they shouldn't strive towards realism. Project Zero would be a damn sight less scary if Tecmo hadn't made exceptional efforts in designing "realistic" ghosts. (realistic is not the correct word, realism has no place in games, what we actually mean is verisimilitude, the illusion that if ghosts were real, they might look like this)

After all, there's going to come a point when we reach photorealism, or indistinguishable simulation. And then it will stop being quite so important, and we can get back to looking for something interesting to render at photoreal quality.

Agreed. I guess I should clarify. Some types of games are exceptions. For example, I wouldn't expect a WW2 shooter to have cel-shaded cartoon graphics. Some games are designed in a way that demands realism. But I tend to prefer the artistic style over realism in most games.

As long as I get to eat that "I lost my balloon! WAAAAH!" kid, USM has my $50

Praxis wrote:But I tend to prefer the artistic style over realism in most games.

I would say that "artistic" is defined by content and composition, not styling.

Things can strive for photorealism and still be artistic. Look at something like Otogi, it uses all the hallmarks of 'realism', but delivers content that is as inspired and fantastic as it is bizarre. It's an artistic game through and through, but it's not really stylised in any way, just well composed and with artistic content.

This is the same argument that arose a century or so ago, with resistance to photographs as art.

Isn't this just a rehash of the 'lolz Zelda is for t3h kids' debate that's been going ever since Windwalker came out?

Of COURSE the graphics have been upgraded: it's a NEW GAME. Some people have hangups on cel shading (which is pretty fucking subjective: some people can't take any animation seriously either), but Windwalker still looked great. The shots Praxis posted show how good cel shading can look, and in A GAME ABOUT A 8 YEAR OLD, cel shading does a lot of mood-setting that realistic graphics wouldn't.

Oblivion looks good: that doesn't mean everything cel shaded is crap.

"Kiddy" graphics or not, Wind Waker was still a fucking great game.

When I play a game, I don't give a shit about "realism" so much as I do about good gameplay and story.

Dalton wrote:"Kiddy" graphics or not, Wind Waker was still a fucking great game.

When I play a game, I don't give a shit about "realism" so much as I do about good gameplay and story.

AMEN, brother!
I've played every Zelda game except 2, the Oracle duology, and those godawful CD-i games, and loved 'em all. Windwaker is wonderful to play; I expect that Twilight Princess will be as well.

If I'm playing a heavily graphic based game, realism is the least of my concerns. If anything, I'll give a game a higher mark for having something unique about its graphics effects than being realistic. After all, if everyone were striving for realism in videogames they'd all start looking the same, or at least incredibly similar. Who wants that?

"All I can say is wow!!! I am so glad the cartoonish Link is gone. That is what kept me away from the whole Zelda franchise."

That's so sad. This person hasn't played a single Zelda game, because Link is "cartoonish", but says "wow" about this new game? Link isn't any less cartoonish in this one than he was in OoT. Just look at those eyes, for example. Does this person think real people really looks like that? No, this is just a different type of "cartoonish". A very detailed one, but hardly realistic.


In fact, I don't think people mean real world realism, when they're talking about realism in games; they mean movie realism. Just look at the one thing that any realistic game cannot do without: The Lens Flares! If your game doesn't have them, it isn't realistic. But unless you have very complicated glasses, lens flares do not exist in the real world. Most movie makers know this, so they try to avoid lens flares as much as possible (because they're actually trying to portray the real world), but in realistic games (or hell, they're in all games), it's the other way around. The more the merrier...


I'm just glad that they've managed to stay away from the godawful and over-used Bloom Effect (once again, a thing that's generally seen as unwanted in film is thought of being more "realistic". Bloom Effect is the effect that makes an image look over-exposed, for those who didn't already know) and did a, far more interesting, depth-of-field blur kind of thing for this game.

Zod put it right. Games should get points for uniqueness rather than realism.



OT: Anyone see today's new Ultimate Spider-Man videos? Shocker looks pathetic, Wolverine looks great, but...

Did the Silver Sable just stick a gun in Venom's head and blow a hole in it?

The whole "let's make all characters look like hyper-realistic portraits of humans" fad is so fucking boring. The old days rocked, when characters and styles could have look they wanted, because you cared about gameplay.

Realistic graphics are for simulations and wargames, not all games.

Praxis wrote:Zod put it right. Games should get points for uniqueness rather than realism.

Actually, I think games should get the most points for gameplay more than anything else.

It doesn't matter how unique a game is, how good its graphics are, if the just plain sucks to play or is boring than it's a bad game. Gameplay is simply the most important aspect above all other factors, with story coming in a somewhat distant second.

I agree with spanky graphics cool and can good game even better, but if the game is boring, too hard or too bug riden, it just isn't possible to make graphic that would so good that they would save the game.

A good example of this (IMHO) are new Warcraft games they may not be as realistic looking as some other games but they make you want to play them regardless.

When it comes to the graphics, there has to be a balance between the "realism" and the "style". For example, I love The Suffering. That game has a great mix of both. You have the "realistic" humans, the "stylistic" demons, and then the ultimate mix of both in Dr. Killjoy.

But as Spanky said, its gotta be about gameplay first. There is a reason why many NES games are superior in terms of gameplay than many games coming out. Another example of great gameplay forgiving everything else is Devil May Cry 3. God I cannot stand the music, the cutscenes, the voices, or the premise to the game, yet it is SO DAMN FUN that I dont mind that everything else is utter rubbish.

Spanky The Dolphin wrote:

Praxis wrote:Zod put it right. Games should get points for uniqueness rather than realism.

Actually, I think games should get the most points for gameplay more than anything else.

It doesn't matter how unique a game is, how good its graphics are, if the just plain sucks to play or is boring than it's a bad game. Gameplay is simply the most important aspect above all other factors, with story coming in a somewhat distant second.

That's a bit of a given, but the whole thread is about the graphics of a game. Not the gameplay.

Anyone spot this in the new videos?

New videos for what? I can barely even make that out.

What the hell is it? Is that even Zelda related?

I beleive that is Ultimate Spiderman, the scene is showing what looks to be Venom being shot through the head by the Silver Sable