Do you think modern games with a retro look have the same charm?

[LiberoVulpesLiberoVulpes's icon]

Devs being bad at optimizing their games is a trend nowadays... I wouldn't blame the Unity engine for it.

Unreal Engine on the other hand? F it.

 

[RetroLaw]

No, but I love the fact that these games look like old school games while still obviously being impossible to run on older consoles. At the end of the day they still have their own charm, but do not appeal to my nostalgia.

If I want real retro games there are a lot of them still worth playing / replaying today.

Now if you'll excuse me Streets of Rage 1 is waiting for me.

 

[Deleted member 25310]

No, they are products of their time and limited by their technology.
Everytime I play a "retro" game I always see it through the eyes of the era it was made, sometimes it pushed the envelope foward in gaming desing and asthetics or simply just wanted to do their best with what they had. I find very, VERY few games that do use the retro style nowdays to be charming, since they are using modern game dev software to develop games that are made to "old" without understanding why they looked that way.
I very much value a game that does its own thing without trying to capture a retro feel with its graphics, if or if not it is using pixel art or some for of low poly count for its "feels".

 

[fishboneKiller]

some games that i think nail the aesthetic they're trying to mimic are VVVVVV, the two Princess Remedy games and World of Horror. (those aesthetics being the Commodore 64, 16 color DOS, and classic MacOS systems respectively) i also think there's a point to made that not every game that uses pixel art is trying to evoke a "retro aesthetic", since pixel art is a very valid art medium. now, low poly 3d models, on the other hand...

i think one of my least favorite examples of the recent trend of "low poly horror games" has to be Shipwrecked 64. it doesn't try at all to replicate the limitations of the hardware its trying to mimic, it just feels so LAZY. it's also drawing inspiration from stuff like FNAF, analog horror, and "ARGs", all of which are tropes that i simply can't stand these days. it's so overdone and dry at this point, and yet i still see people praising that game! i dont wanna rain on anyone's parade if they're into it, but personally it just drives me nuts.

 

[Evaccaneer Doom]

Mega Man 9 and 10 said yes, so I believe yes

Some more than others at least. Sunblaze as fun as it is, doesn't stand out graphically to it's contemporaries and that's likely why its so overshadowed
Whereas Mighty No 9 and YiiK stood out so much it was a laughingstock

There's also stuff like Touhou ADiA, which was a massive refresher because no one else has tackled old school Shin Megami Tensei or Rosenkreuzstilette, both of which could be put in with the mainline Mega Mans and no one would ever know

 

[99nereids]

Probably a little bit of both. If Godot hadn't nuked itself to the public eye, Unity would still be in rather dire straits.

godot only really nuked itself to certain people, it’s still very popular among many indie devs next to unreal, as it should be imo as it’s a great engine to work on with a lot of community support.

 

[sysuah]

they're cool but I don't think they have the same charm, graphics have progressed so much they're not special anymore, sure they have some special use cases but if anything, getting games with consistent art direction, fun arcadey gameplay with this transitional style(?) of computer graphics between late sixth gen mid seventh gen consoles where on the lowest of graphics settings (including messing with graphics .ini files) the game still look nice would be more interesting to me than either ends of the spectrum where its sprites and blocky z-fighting or 4k unoptimized ultrarealistic skin pores thats a glorified techdemo instead of a videogame

 

[99nereids]

I wouldn’t say that

they're cool but I don't think they have the same charm, graphics have progressed so much they're not special anymore, sure they have some special use cases but if anything, getting games with consistent art direction, fun arcadey gameplay with this transitional style(?) of computer graphics between late sixth gen mid seventh gen consoles would be interesting to me than either ends of the spectrum where its sprites and blocky z-fighting or 4k unoptimized ultrarealistic skin pores View attachment 23271

this! I hope more indie projects trend towards low poly graphics without the specific theme of “retro/psx/n64”, in terms of graphics they’re generally quicker to produce and cheaper to commission, as well as making said games much more accessible to ppl who don’t have expensive gaming pcs
Lunacid, Dungeons of Blood and Dream, dread delusion are all great titles with beautiful art direction even if you’re not into the faux retro look, and all have the added bonus of not needing a gaming pc to run smoothly without sacrificing much or any of the graphical fidelity

 

[RageBurner]

godot only really nuked itself to certain people, it’s still very popular among many indie devs next to unreal, as it should be imo as it’s a great engine to work on with a lot of community support.

Well, that's good then. It's indeed a great engine. It would be a shame to see it sink due to gross community mismanagement of some.

 

[Ikagura Ikagura]

Unity isn't capable of making good games

This is like saying "You cannot make good musics with a flute".

If we're talking about pixel art games it's a straight up no. Pixel art displays differently on modern flat screens and all modern pixel art games. Whenever paying homage to retro games or not, they target such displays. You can't pull the same sub pixel tricks there you could pull in CRTs, instead they count on pixels always looking sharp, which do affect the art style quite a lot.

I suppose a few games that imitates the NES or something similar could pass as genuine as not many games from that time were using advanced sub pixel CRT techniques, but that would be it.

When it comes to 3D games however, a few devs have done their homework.

View attachment 23059

First game is Zera, directly inspired by Spyro. Or should I say, inspyro'd LMAOO
If I remember it correctly it even simulates the jaggy triangles from ps1.

Second is Pseudoregalia and goes for the N64 aesthetic. It clearly takes a few liberties as the N64 wouldn't be able to handle such amount of polygons at 60 fps for example, but as far as the visuals go it feels very much the N64.

Of course, a lot of other indie devs don't do their homework. They put low poly models, a pixel filter and call it a day, yet they have the audacity to let multiple complex lights with ambient occlusion and real time shadows affect everything in the scene indiscriminately.

I liked Zera despite barely touching Spyro outside of two DS games. Sadly it's apparently cancelled.

I need to try the second one someday.

By the way what do you think of the visual of these game?

Lunistice's

The Big Catch

And even PsiloSybil?

Oh I forgot about Zortch

 

[Waffles's iconWaffles]

I don't think so (although, there ARE exceptions)... Most look and feel like they had just put on a mask.

 

[Ikagura Ikagura]

I don't think so (although, there ARE exceptions)... Most look and feel like they had just put on a mask.

A mask? I don't fully get it.


Honestly a retro styled game not having the jank of the era isn't a good thing?

Although it's funny if a retro inspired indie game also kept the same design philosophy but that would cost them negative reviews from people that haven't grown up with them or just don't wanna have to bother with the tedium.

On a side note I absolutely love the "pixelating screen transition" this game got

(at around 1:49)

 

[Koreandr]

Like those simple Android games. They're free, and that's the charm. You know when parents give you a game for your birthday. That's why I'm here: a gift to myself every day

 

[DragonMals]

Judging by this thread alone , looks like im not "factually wrong" by this statement! Hopefully my opinion doesn't get swatted like what happened after the message posted.

What is my opinion about modern indie games? They're great, but they need to come up with more original ideas rather than taking a AAA game and slightly "enhancing it" with changes to make it something else. When someone always talks about this, I always refere to Summitsphere, the producers behind Cruise Elroy's Annalyn (80's Namco game; primarily Mappy and Pac-Man) and Tony Grayson's Anton Series. Before Anton Blast, there was Anton Ball (Mario Bros meets Arkanoid), Punch Ball Anton Ball (same premise snd the same goal as the PC98 Hudson Soft Punch Ball Mario Bros except its Anton) and Antom Ball Deluxe which essentially are the two games combined together. Grayson would eventually make Anton Blast, which is WarioWare, and Crash Bandicoot with other 90s animated shows shoved into the mix. I dont think these games are inherently bad cause they do put a lot of effort into them, but what happened to games like World of Goo, Lost Winds, BIT TRIP, and others??? Those are indie games that are actually different and felt like they were trying to come up with a new idea that other developers didnt hsve on mind. Nowadays, in order to make a quick buck, peoppe would look at Miachief Makers for instance, and wonder how do they make it their own, and create an indie game thats "inspired by it" and bam, make money due to nostalgia and the game essentially being a reboot of a pre existing franchise.

 

[Tonberry]

I think it’s fine for indie games because there are no rules there, but games made by big companies trying to look retro usually just looks like those kind of fake games you’d see someone play in a TV show.

I have a hard time grasping why so many people are seemingly so against different graphical styles nowadays, because that's all they are. Styles. The people who get the angriest at AAA games also seem to be the quickest to dismiss smaller-scale games because they don't look like a trillion dollar PS5 title, which perplexes me.

That said; do they have the same charm? Usually no, but I don’t think that’s a detriment unless that’s what the developer set out to do and fell short, which doesn’t seem as common as people sharing their prototypes online.

 

[Ikagura Ikagura]

Judging by this thread alone , looks like im not "factually wrong" by this statement! Hopefully my opinion doesn't get swatted like what happened after the message posted.

What is my opinion about modern indie games? They're great, but they need to come up with more original ideas rather than taking a AAA game and slightly "enhancing it" with changes to make it something else. When someone always talks about this, I always referee to Summitsphere, the producers behind Cruise Elroy's Annalyn (80's Namco game; primarily Mappy and Pac-Man) and Tony Grayson's Anton Series. Before Anton Blast, there was Anton Ball (Mario Bros meets Arkanoid), Punch Ball Anton Ball (same premise and the same goal as the PC98 Hudson Soft Punch Ball Mario Bros except its Anton) and Antom Ball Deluxe which essentially are the two games combined together. Grayson would eventually make Anton Blast, which is WarioWare, and Crash Bandicoot with other 90s animated shows shoved into the mix. I dont think these games are inherently bad cause they do put a lot of effort into them, but what happened to games like World of Goo, Lost Winds, BIT TRIP, and others??? Those are indie games that are actually different and felt like they were trying to come up with a new idea that other developers didn't have on mind. Nowadays, in order to make a quick buck, people would look at Miachief Makers for instance, and wonder how do they make it their own, and create an indie game that's "inspired by it" and bam, make money due to nostalgia and the game essentially being a reboot of a pre existing franchise.

I'm not fan of sharing Discord screenshots so I removed it from the reply

But I agree because fundamentally almost every modern 3D games existing are reusing game design elements from Zelda Ocarina of Time in 1998 to some extent.

The current gen took also a lot from the PS360 era.

I think it’s fine for indie games because there are no rules there, but games made by big companies trying to look retro usually just looks like those kind of fake games you’d see someone play in a TV show.

I have a hard time grasping why so many people are seemingly so against different graphical styles nowadays, because that's all they are. Styles. The people who get the angriest at AAA games also seem to be the quickest to dismiss smaller-scale games because they don't look like a trillion dollar PS5 title, which perplexes me.

That said; do they have the same charm? Usually no, but I don’t think that’s a detriment unless that’s what the developer set out to do and fell short, which doesn’t seem as common as people sharing their prototypes online.

It's funny because some of my fav indies are not that great looking.

It's nice when an indie has the same visuals as AAA to teach them how they could manage but in the same way we need more variety in art styles.

 

[Egg (McMuffin) Man]

Not at all. There are a few games which do nail the look and feel, but they are exceptions.

 

[ZombieFish]

Nidhogg

Owlboy

Cultic

Hits good for me. I hear you can still make cool art with charcoal pencils and oil paints too. Remember; Sturgeon’s Law still applied when these styles were brand new.

 

[Tonberry]

It's funny because some of my fav indies are not that great looking.

It's nice when an indie has the same visuals as AAA to teach them how they could manage but in the same way we need more variety in art styles.

Yeah that's sort of my point, since this thread was about the style, not the actual gameplay.

People are constantly going "graphics don't matter, style and gameplay do!" or whatever. But for some arbitrary reason this is forgotten when it comes to small-scale niche games made by two people who has less than 1% of the budget and manpower that AAA companies do because then they're suddenly either vampires trying to ride the coattails of a usually long-buried game series, or they're dismissed because "the graphics are bad", which somehow matters all of a sudden.

Like I said several weeks ago in some other thread; I don't understand why gamers are so against video games taking inspiration from other video games and wearing it on their sleeves when in literature, music and film, this is usually something that's applauded, because when done well it just proves that the classics were more than just toys for those who grew up alongside the medium, and that Hollywood/AAA/pop/NY Times Bestsellers doesn't always know best just because they're the biggest.
So many video game enthusiasts self-sabotage their own enjoyment because they like being snobs.

 

[tranzittruther]

View attachment 23345

Judging by this thread alone , looks like im not "factually wrong" by this statement! Hopefully my opinion doesn't get swatted like what happened after the message posted.

What is my opinion about modern indie games? They're great, but they need to come up with more original ideas rather than taking a AAA game and slightly "enhancing it" with changes to make it something else. When someone always talks about this, I always refere to Summitsphere, the producers behind Cruise Elroy's Annalyn (80's Namco game; primarily Mappy and Pac-Man) and Tony Grayson's Anton Series. Before Anton Blast, there was Anton Ball (Mario Bros meets Arkanoid), Punch Ball Anton Ball (same premise snd the same goal as the PC98 Hudson Soft Punch Ball Mario Bros except its Anton) and Antom Ball Deluxe which essentially are the two games combined together. Grayson would eventually make Anton Blast, which is WarioWare, and Crash Bandicoot with other 90s animated shows shoved into the mix. I dont think these games are inherently bad cause they do put a lot of effort into them, but what happened to games like World of Goo, Lost Winds, BIT TRIP, and others??? Those are indie games that are actually different and felt like they were trying to come up with a new idea that other developers didnt hsve on mind. Nowadays, in order to make a quick buck, peoppe would look at Miachief Makers for instance, and wonder how do they make it their own, and create an indie game thats "inspired by it" and bam, make money due to nostalgia and the game essentially being a reboot of a pre existing franchise.

I guess it's just a natural progression of game development becoming more and more accessible with the years, you get a lot of people just trying to cash in on what's already popular... And you get a bunch of people who aren't really that creative even though they're truly passionate about the games they make

 

[Pandaprewmaster325]

they're cool but I don't think they have the same charm, graphics have progressed so much they're not special anymore, sure they have some special use cases but if anything, getting games with consistent art direction, fun arcadey gameplay with this transitional style(?) of computer graphics between late sixth gen mid seventh gen consoles where on the lowest of graphics settings (including messing with graphics .ini files) the game still look nice would be more interesting to me than either ends of the spectrum where its sprites and blocky z-fighting or 4k unoptimized ultrarealistic skin pores thats a glorified techdemo instead of a videogame

View attachment 23271

He lost me at "difficulty: easy" it should always be hard.

 

[Lena CE]

Crow Country certainly hits all the right notes for me, but things like awkward scaling. The lack of z buffering and the typically lackluster framerates are aspects of older games that many devs seem unwilling to commit to, understandably.

That said I like low poly art in general so I don't mind much. A lot of retro 8 or 16 bit aesthetics couldn't reasonably be recreated on 8 or 16 bit hardware so its always been clear that its more of a general vibe choice than a hardcore commitment to fully recreating those aesthetics.

 

[Predrag]

Add Nba 2k12

 

[ciro64]

People are constantly going "graphics don't matter, style and gameplay do!" or whatever. But for some arbitrary reason this is forgotten when it comes to small-scale niche games made by two people who has less than 1% of the budget and manpower that AAA companies do because then they're suddenly either vampires trying to ride the coattails of a usually long-buried game series, or they're dismissed because "the graphics are bad", which somehow matters all of a sudden.

This "graphics don't matter, gameplay do" line emerged from the 7th gen when Wii fans had to defend themselves from the "hardcore gamurz" who liked shaming them for liking colorful Nintendo games with outdated specs. But that line, is, and always has been, utter bullshit. Over time people learned to express themselves better, evolving it to something like "artistic visual style matters over graphical horsepower".

My version of that would be how much a game visual manages to be appealing according to what it is proposing itself to do and how well it deals with its technical limitations. For example, I think Super Mario Bros for NES looks good: all the sprites are expressive and the nature of the simplicity of the graphics gives it a clean, relaxing and charming atmosphere. But it's hard to explain this to people who would instantly dismiss that because it doesn't look like Metal Slug or Crysis.

Anyway, I completely sympathize with developers who has less than 1% of the ideal budget and manpower, and I try to not shut down games immediately when the visuals aren't that great. And I'm glad to live in a time where the gamedev landscape has this much accessibility for people to express themselves. But the discussion visuals does and will always matter, regardless of what games can and can't pull it off and still be good games regardless, because at the end of the day it's something that activates our neuron and will always be interesting to analyze.

 

[Tonberry]

But the discussion visuals does and will always matter, regardless of what games can and can't pull it off and still be good games regardless, because at the end of the day it's something that activates our neuron and will always be interesting to analyze.

Of course. I was more referring to the argument that "Higher fidelity = Better game" which still is a common thing that I've just never agreed with, but I forgot to specify.