User, do you prefer very detailed and beautiful graphics or you prefer pixel art ?

...

depends on my mood. if i'm nostalgiafag i go for pixel shit, if i'm normalfag i go for 3d waifubait shit

Well then, let's expand the subject : Generally, what is better for a game to make it look good and appealing, pixel art or beautiful 3d-ish graphics ?

Why not very detailed and beautiful pixel art?

Not pixel art.
Its made high quality sprites but there is no emphasis on individual pixels or size/color limitations

I like low poly ps1-like graphics.
I think realistic shit is overrated and very rarely actually has good art direction.
In the same way pixel art is mostly of poor quality nowadays.

I'm a toasterfag, but i would take the graphics on the right. I don't see the point of using pixels unless the sprites are Metal-Slug tier or you're sacrificing looks for depth.
Low-poly does look kinda cool though.

Of course it is, as long as it looks kinda retro and is 2d it's pixelart.

It's still technically composed of pixels at the most basic level, though.

?????????????????

But thats wrong.

Also "low res" lacks any kind of quantifiable limit or technical definition. And if you really want to be pedantic all images on a screen are going to be pixel art (even more so: what about CRTs which arent pixel based? :^))

The first one looks life a flash game, the second pic looks like it had actual work done in the art direction and programing an engine. Pixel art done well though is still good for certain games like 2D platformers. But for action games and RPG's, I like graphics that push the limits of their console or tech at that time (pixel art counts if the game is old). Any ways Art direction > overall graphics any day, Persona 5 is a great example of this. I would rather have a PS3 looking game with a good art direction and a consistent frame rate than anything else, except on PC then do whatever you want with the graphics.

I just want an excuse to post KoF backgrounds tbh

I actually prefer PS1/N64/Saturn era blocky 3D for some reason.

I prefer detailed graphics because everyone has developed the Notch mentality that 2D retro means low effort 8bit pixelshit where everything is colored using the paint bucket tool in mspaint.

Should we give a clear definition to "pixelart"? I may be wrong or vague about it in my post.

Also pic is from a J2ME Devil May Cry game.

These days, devs have taken "pixel art" to mean what outlined in his post

Not every dev thinks like that, take for example the Scott pilgrim game, they made efforts to give it a retro look while keeping the original artstyle used in the comics. Also deadcells, this game's graphics are gorgeous, yet they're pixelart.

No thanks.

It means you draw it pixel by pixel. If you take a photograph and shrink it down to a Doom texture it's not pixel art.

They don't even fucking know what 8bit actually means and it triggeres my autism severely.

You can't draw pixel by pixel everything, can you imagine the time it would make to do a game like terraria if they did that ? They mostly use pixel brushes or programs designed for these kind of tasks.

if you prefer pixelated you are a hipster

Just give me a 3D world that lets me explore it in three dimensions. I have some standards, but it doesn't have to be 100% pretty 100% of the time.
Post-1998 2D is ahistorical cancer.

So you hate Chess?

So you like chess?

Fuck muh grafix. Burn in hell.

No, I hate chess, I was just wondering if he did too. I also hate all card related games as well.

I prefer games with no graphics at all and like it when they make it to where you can play the game by sound alone.

Soundcock was the best game

Except Pixel Art can be very beautiful and detailed.

you mean normal art?

pic related, its art and its made up of pixels, its very beautiful and detailed

Holy loaded question batman! Do you want to maybe try rephrasing that?

Do you mean 3d vs 2d? because "very detailed and beautiful graphics" is a pretty broad range.

The original is not, it is shown to me as pixels on the screen but the Mona Lisa is made out of paint.

I prefer pixel art, but SNK can't make every game so I'm not too picky as long as the aesthetic is interesting and well-executed. Which I'd say was with Automata's drab, washed-out colors and spectacular particle effects.

Let me rephrase my original post :
user, do you prefer beautiful and detailed pixelart or beautiful and detailed textures.

You're really bad at phrasing these questions. For example, a game can be incredibly low poly but use really fancy megatextures and it would probably look like shit. I think in the end, it's all about what fits the aesthetics of the game.

i respect pixel work immensely but i ultimately prefer 3d games. older 3d titles aged like milk especially but i think we've crossed the hurdle where 3d models will age badly since we're in the area of diminishing returns now. games that look good now will probably still look good because they made smart design choices, kinda like how mgs2/3 still look pretty good for what they worked with

I am not pleb enough for that.

All modern GPUs work in terms of floating-point values, and even a simple sprite or UI window is drawn in respect to a flat 3D quad with an orthogonal view plane.

I meant real chess. It's effectively 2D, yes? Why do that when you could go out and beat the crap out of a horse yourself?

Of course pixel art can be high res. I hate when people make such arbitrary restrictions.
It's like people say it's not cel shaded when a cel shaded game has realistic proportions, you can give any model cel shaded looks, it's just a lighting effect you apply after everything else.

guess what user?
this kind of answer has no fucking meaning whatsoever, are you talking about resolutions? your eyes won't even make the damn difference if it's high enough
and 'm about to bow your mind right now
DIGITAL ART
it's made of pixels, it's made of pixels, and it can be very beautiful but again beauty is subjective, so let's say that it corresponds to general standards of beauty in art
i don't know if i answered an obvious bait, but i really don't care, here's your (you)

...

Great textures with low-poly models looks better than high-poly models with shit texturing (which is what we mostly get these days).

Oh. Well, I don't play chess, but I do enjoy playing Go. But I don't have the same set of standards for board games that I do for vidya.
Your question is stupid.

No user, people are not made of paint

It depends on the game mechanics. Some game mechanics lend themselves much more nicely to 2D than 3D. Likewise, 3D does other things better. I'm a big fan of 2D action RPGs, sort of like the 2D Zelda games. Also, Metroidvanias have a certain charm when they're done in 2D that's just not there in 3D.

(checked)
I can't think of any mechanics that work better in 2D than they do in 3D.

I love shitty sub-PS1 3D.

Why did you post terrible examples of both?

That is not sub-PS1 at all. Looks more like early Xbox.

I prefer a game that looks ok enough.

Platforming comes to mind. Lose the third dimension, and figuring out where you're going to land is much easier. Also, 2D gives you a bit more freedom in tweaking physics and having it still feel "right". For example, it makes more sense for a 2D sprite to do a sudden horizontal flip to the other direction than for a 3D model to suddenly change its facing direction without rotating.

2D gives you a degree of abstraction that lets you get away with a lot of things you couldn't really get away with in 3D without it affecting the feel of the whole package.

Do you even remember the PS1?

My nigga

Really forced devs to focus on what was necessary for the game to be good.

It certainly looks worse than an average Playstation game despite having better graphical technology. Animation wise it's definitely sub-PS1-tier, the swings are like a slowed down version of the swing animations for the swordsman enemies in Quake.

I might be getting the PS1 and the PS2 mixed up. My brain is broken.

NA looks very foggy. Not exactly a beautiful game, despite 2B's delectable rear end.

Which one is Nier supposed to be?
Game looks like ass, and fitting since most of the budget probably went into 2B's buttocks.

Both are garbage
Text adventure or ASCII is where it's at

feels bad tbh

Either of the two if it was years ago. Depends what the gameplay and graphical style is going to be like, and which one it would benefit the most these days.

pixel art should be unrestricted by the limits of detail and style with well thought color selection and placement, but the majority is all this minimalist dog shit you see with occasional filters washed over them.

If I had to prefer one over the other in the current game market, it would 100% well drawn 2d illustration and 3D graphics. 'pixel art' in a lot of indie games today is a disgusting joke for people that either don't know how to draw or missed the point entirely of the graphical limitations which are now entirely self-imposed.

sure, whatever you say old man

I like the part where you suggest that the two categories are mutually exclusive.

okay

pic related, its art and its made up of pixels, its very beautiful and detailed

and has been made on computer, which was only a stipulation created all by yourself

whether an image has been computer generated or an analogue signal has been converted into a pixelated image doesnt make a difference as to whether the final product is art in pixels ie pixel art

consider that even low res pixel art can be scanned into the computer, a la mortal combat sprites etc.

How about it's not comparable to any console at all?
It's custom content for a PC game.

People are so shit at remembering what graphics looked like. I see people thinking Morrowind was a 90s game, when you show them PS2 games they think it was PS1 and when you show them actual PS1-quality graphics they don't believe it could have looked like that.

it's funny to see someone from Holla Forums here on the reddit

I like the style that best fits the game.
Some games are so shit that you need flashy visuals to foster sales.
Some games are so good that shitty visuals are forgivable.
Some games are so chaotic that minimalist visuals are necessary.

Why not have both?

Very detailed and beautiful pixel art. Faggot

which cotton is that

i mean witch cotton, damn i had a chance and i blew it