Wow, how long until psx graphics are the new pixel shit?

He's talking about shit like Yooka-Laylee, retard.

OH GOD MAKE IT STOP

We're slowly getting there. Remember Devil Daggers?

I hope the anthropomorphic animal mascot character trend returns, I've been getting tired of fapping to the same characters for 10+ years now

No he is not

Yooka Laylee JUST released like a month ago. It wasn't a hipster meme game that was retro'd onto an old system either bit the PC and other modern consoles. Nor is it a furfag OC since its a mascot for the game. The fuck are you on about?

I can dig low poly and low res textures but no sane human would want to replicate that shitty texture glitch the psx had.

Shiiieeet, So you could port Daggerfall to Unity? Looks neat.

nostalgia user.

I wonder how wrong will they get.
Like people creating "8-bit" or "16-bit" graphics don't understand what they're actually supposed to mean so they do shit like using too many colors or not aligning to a pixel grid at all (scaling and rotating in a higher resolution).
My guess people will just use polycounts and texture resolutions too high for 5th gen. I mean people have a poor memory of how graphics actually looked in the past, even here on Holla Forums (I see people think Morrowind is a 90s video game, and if you show them PS2 graphics they think it's PS1 graphics and when you show them actual PS1 graphics they think that's too low quality).

that's like fondly looking back on your uncle molesting you

...

Are you sure? The whole point of it was, remember those old N64 collectathons? Remember Banjo?
It's an anthro mascot platformer based on N64 games, that's what he meant by "n64 fursonas taking over the indieshit nostalgia train." You just saw the "n64 fursona" and immediately assumed consoletans without reading the rest of the post.

I have plenty of nostalgia for the PS1 but I would leave that texture warping behind.

dfworkshop.net/

Good low-poly has always been an art. Getting it to look good while using the least amount of polygons is incredibly hard.
Instead, we'll get hipster shit using it as low effort artstyle to excuse their lack of skill, similar to pixel art.

Most modern "low-poly" shit (like 's fourth pic)
is just crappy models with flat shading, which older 3D games avoided like the plague. Actual low-poly takes a lot of skill and is really useful if you want your game to run on aging toasters or weird handheld consoles like the 3DS as long as you aren't using some bloated modern engine like Unity that will take away all the performance advantages low triangle counts gives you.

The issue with low poly shit is the same as with pixel art in this article
dinofarmgames.com/a-pixel-artist-renounces-pixel-art/
Back in the day it wasn't a style, it was just what people worked with. Some games still look appealing with their dated graphics because the devs took a good advantage of the hardware they were given (I'm a big fan of HL1's graphics for example, which were kinda dated even back then running on a Quake 1-derived engine, but the models in that game are just stylized enough as to not try way too hard with too much realism).
And when people have experience with underpowered hardware, they're just gonna make things look even better. I was surprised to find out that Mario had LESS polygons in SM64 DS than in the N64 original.

The first three pics are exactly the kind of low poly art-style that I love.

The last one is the type that I hate and it's the one all the indies are trying to emulate.

You can complain about this or you can complain about new games being shit, but you can't complain about both you retards.

Thats a pretty good shader

...

Imagine a child coloring book.

Never. PSX-style 3D used amazing texture design to compensate for the low polygon count. Few have the skill to create good textures, much less a whole game's worth just for some uninspired walking simulator.

At best, no-talent indie hipster faggots could only hope to copy Katamari Damacy's design. For the most part, they make garbage like pointed out: Solid colors; low-poly, but for "style," not in a min-maxing way to optimize performance; minimal animations.

Why was the better version of this thread deleted earlier? I wanted to show that one user squiggle vision.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squigglevision

Fuck off back to Israel, Moishe

Every post by you has been terrible so far.

agreed

there are quite a few tools that easily enable this low res 3D style, quake 1 engines are great for it, there is smile game builder, and obviously unity and unreal 4.

Japs have been using a lot of these tools for a while to make low res games like this. good results too.

...

Gay?

Classic 3D art looked charming, because these people were doing the best they could within the confines of hardware power at the time and with the relatively unsophisticated tools they had available to them.

Modern "low-poly/PSX-Retro" shit, will look like shit, because it'll be made by people with all the hardware power and tools available to them - but none of the inherent talent, nor the necessity to innovate clever shortcuts to make it run within meager specs.

Pixel-shit v.2.0

I'd understand going low poly if you were going to make the equivalent of nuts.wad with 3d graphics
other than that, it's just trying to cash in the nostalgia bucks.

I doubt it'll ever take off: PSX-style games would only sell to the people who were actually playing video games at that time, pixelshit games sell to the people who might have occasionally played on someone else's console or have a false nostalgia for psuedo-geek culture.

I'd understand reducing your polygonal standards for performance reasons or because it'd be quicker to model, but why the fuck would you want shaky polygons back?

This is why you don't wait on your dreams, kids.

Never, early 3D aged like milk.
There is kind of a trend right now for low-poly with flat textures, though, which is kind of cool.

It looks ugly for the most part, and is usually used to make up for developer's lack of artistic talent. The games using these don't make good use of them either.

Early 3D games needed good texture work to distract you from all the blocks. And since most indieshit doesn't have good 2D graphics, this is gonna suck.

Still better than sharp pixels, which were meant to be hidden with shitty TVs, but i'm pretty sure they'll find a way to fuck this up. And they will be optimized like shit anyways

Why must everything be so terrible?

I like the PS1s doritos

Can't wait for this
Modern AAA "gaming" is too graphics heavy to begin with, edges are blurry and lines indistinct, its hard to visually process a typical scene.

Back in the old days fewer polygons meant easier to see shit and keep track of where you were in the level.

sooner than you think

inb4 crtfags join with shitty meme opinions

Why do you need more than 24 fps?
Don't you want a cinematic experinece?

Found the fag

Pixel smoothing distorts the image.

Also how can a display device have input lag its not linked to a controller

You know, the display shows what you did, and it adds up to the delay between performing an action and seeing it on the screen.

...

...

wow, how many times are we going to have this thread

The 1st one isn't even low poly, Devil Daggers models have ridiculously high poly counts. Actually, it seems like only the TF2 one is low poly.

N64 doritos should use like 8x8 texture because lolcartridges. Love the jiggle on the PS doritos tho