Graphics vs Aesthetics

[DarkReed]

Isn't TheEscapist run by a bunch of people openly despise Final Fantasy and automatically claim any game with it in its name is a failure before its even released?

No, not in the video that I am talking about, in this situation they actually something good about the FF series.

[Augury]

Isn't TheEscapist run by a bunch of people openly despise Final Fantasy and automatically claim any game with it in its name is a failure before its even released?

Negatory- Russ Pitts (the editor-in-chief) dislikes jRPGs (if I remember correctly), but he has no say in how people throw their opinions around in their articles (just how well supported or thought out their article may or may not be). But The Escapist is actually pretty well rounded and the community's opinion on Final Fantasy is actually in good esteem (usually).

[RabidSquirrel]

You guys wanna know of a couple games with amazing aesthetics using the little graphical power they had on the PS2? Persona 3 and 4.

[Vesperia]

I like the aesthetics of FFXIV.

[Vesperia]

Okay, let's face facts.

• GW2 looks like crap.
  
• FFXIV looks okay at a cursory glance until you realise the grass is a pixelated mess and only 10% of the plants actually sway in the wind, the water is a flat tile, the world is a fancy background rather than something you can interact with, shadows are all wrong if they exist at all, etc etc.
  
• ArcheAge and Blade&Soul, on the other hand, look awesome in almost every way.

People who use FFXIV and GW2 as bastions of MMO graphics are obviously ignorant. Only Koreans know how to design games. People say "GW2 Isn't made by Koreans!" like it's a good thing. LOL. You serious?

In ArcheAge and B&S, grass actually moves, zones are seamless, character models look reasonable. Nothing is so excessive to the point of tackiness (unlike everything in GW2 for example).

http://www.archeage.com/pds/media/show/432

[Tonka]

Okay, let's face facts.

• GW2 looks like crap.
  
• FFXIV looks okay at a cursory glance until you realise the grass is a pixelated mess and only 10% of the plants actually sway in the wind, the water is a flat tile, the world is a fancy background rather than something you can interact with, shadows are all wrong if they exist at all, etc etc.
  
• ArcheAge and Blade&Soul, on the other hand, look awesome in almost every way.

People who use FFXIV and GW2 as bastions of MMO graphics are obviously ignorant. Only Koreans know how to design games. People say "GW2 Isn't made by Koreans!" like it's a good thing. LOL. You serious?

In ArcheAge and B&S, grass actually moves, zones are seamless, character models look reasonable. Nothing is so excessive to the point of tackiness (unlike everything in GW2 for example).

http://www.archeage.com/pds/media/show/432

ArcheAge and Blade & Soul are examples of games with nice aesthetics that also require a fairly powerful computer. ArcheAge especially so. GW2 employees test using video cards that aren't even on the market any more. It's designed to run on average computers. Some people may not like their stylized approach to their art direction, but for it being designed to be so accessible, it looks amazing to me.

It's not a debate on which looks better.

[Vesperia]

ArcheAge and Blade & Soul are examples of games with nice aesthetics that also require a fairly powerful computer. ArcheAge especially so. GW2 employees test using video cards that aren't even on the market any more. It's designed to run on average computers. Some people may not like their stylized approach to their art direction, but for it being designed to be so accessible, it looks amazing to me.

It's not a debate on which looks better.

I have a pretty low end computer and FFXIV seems to run fine on medium settings for me. So I shudder to think what demographic GW2 is targetting.

If a game targets really crappy PCs then it will only become out-dated faster.

[Gramul]

I shudder to think what demographic GW2 is targeting.

...You shudder? The very idea that GW2 wants to expand its player base to as many people as possible by making sure their visuals run well on old computers causes you to shudder?!

Aesthetics can't be outdated, they are not graphical components. It's just a use of visual style to grip the attention and imagination of their players. Some people will obviously get bored of it eventually, but good aesthetics are not so easily forgotten. That's exactly why games like Parappa the Rapper still hold a visually interesting motif. It's why games like Okami, will still keep people entertained even years from now. It's why Super Metroid can still give people a feel of exploring a bizarre alien world.

And yes. GW2 has an appealing design.

Amusement parks are fun. They amuse.

[Vesperia]

...You shudder? The very idea that GW2 wants to expand its player base to as many people as possible by making sure their visuals run well on old computers causes you to shudder?!

Gosh, it's a figure of speech.

But anyway, look at it this way, in pursuing one demographic you risk excluding the other group who would scorn playing a game with such inferior graphics. So technically it's not the smartest thing to do.

And yes. GW2 has an appealing design.

Amusement parks are fun. They amuse.

They can also make you hurl.

[Vesperia]

It's not a debate on which looks better.

As if there ever could be a debate.

Anyway.

Even as a graphically inferior game, I dispute the fact that GW2 uses what few assets it has to its advantage. I mean, come on. I don't know about you, but a gameworld should at least make sense. The cultural disparity between the races in GW2 is so huge it's almost absurd.

But that's what you get for playing a game made by western developers (no eye for beauty and cliche voice-overs).