The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
Contrast in games / good vs. evil
Henroid
Mexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered User regular
Mexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered User regular
This past week I finally found the right words to summarize my appreciation of The Legend of Zelda: Wind Waker (let alone the reason why it is my favorite game in the series): a great depiction of good vs. evil. I was happy to find those words because now I can back it up more than ever (be more specific that is).
I started to take a look at games sitting on my shelf, or games I see discussed now and then - moreso at the games that have that general theme of good vs. evil. Not a lot have them have that exactly (that is, just because there is an enemy or 'bad guy' doesn't mean they are evil, necessarily).
The Diablo series is probably the most direct, what with the player venturing into Hell to kill the devil himself. The entire experience in the game shows us the world with demons in it. The player is a step behind the enemy, and the evil is always there waiting for him or her. So we don't see the contrast, we don't see the world when it is normal, more at peace, without demons murdering everyone in their homes and leaving corpses on pikes and stuff. It's just a grim setting, and nothing more. The color use in the game is also a very strong buffer to that. Everything is dull. The music, as well, doesn't stray far from the general theme of the game. It was a fun game, but it didn't necessarily bring about any excitement.
Sticking with Blizzard for a quick moment - The Warcraft series has always been about exaggeration in everything. With the third game and WoW, however, we finally have a faction to identify as being evil. And its members are generally gray or black in color, with very dull color use (aside from the Mountain-Dew-green the Legion adores, or the felguards being bright colors in their unarmored parts).
Castlevania has the good vs. evil setting as well. Again, the areas in the latest round of games in the series are generally grim and dark. The color use has more of a mix to it, because nothing has been absolutely dull, due to a mix of the occasional vibrant color (or hell, just pure use of it; I think the GBA games generally had that because it was the GBA though) (exceptions off the top of my head being Symphony of the Night and Lament of Innocence). The contrast (what I like, that is) would be the music, whenever it manages to be upbeat (Portrait of Ruin has a lot of that going on, and now that I wrote that I find it no surprise it is my favorite in that series). The series works well with toned down, slower / appropriate music, or with the above I noted. The contrast gives the game life, or its sparkles, I believe.
Disgaea put a fantastic spin on good vs. evil, but more than that it was just as animated (not literally) as Wind Waker. The characters had a lot of personality to them, and the abilities in the game were so exaggerated it was simple nonsense. But it was different, and it was a great tone to eat up.
Now would be the best time to bring up Wind Waker I suppose. I remember the "More like Cel-da" crap just as much as anyone. People either liked it, dismissed the art because they enjoyed the game in some other way, or didn't like the sailing or couldn't get over the art. The game in its entirety is the best depiction of good vs. evil (as I've said). I remember someone quoting the original maker(s) of Zelda, saying they wanted their music to be a blend of charm and menace, and this game hits it just right (with more than the music). Ganondorf is massive, and his most outstanding features, color wise, are his hair and the yellow crests on his forehead and his chest. In his movement he is either very subtle (nods, or walks slowly) or extremely quick. He speaks well, clashing with his brute size. Just awesome.
Our hero is the opposite of Ganondorf in just about every way. He's very vibrant in color, very animated, doesn't speak at all. We also get constant reminders of him being what he is - a kid. It would be the facial expressions, or any other silly going-ons in the game (firing from the canon at the start is great).
The game's pace and settings do a good job of getting that good vs. evil bit across as well. The fortress island is devoid of an array of colors. We know it is a bad place looking at it. Yet in the safety of Outside Isle and other towns, we know things are just peachy keen there. There's the island that has been assaulted already, broken into pieces, and appears more dull in color (while it is perpetually raining there, the color theme is still what is setting that). And I don't need to bring up those shots of Hyrule, as they're fairly obvious.
If there was a simple point I wanted to say, all of the above being evidence, it'd be that I absolutely adore diverse and / or exaggerated things in video games.
When everything takes a "Let's make it as close to real looking as possible" standpoint in the design, it becomes bland. It's like the difference between getting a cake on your birthday that's just like, y'know, some candles and frosting, and then getting a cake that has a lot of design on it, maybe some M&M's sprinkled on it too. Both ways are good, but why not be impressed and feel like you're getting something special, right?
There are people that believe that games where bright colors, or characters or settings, are used aren't meant for adults, that they are 'tehkiddy' or whatever the hell they say these days. I really disagree. Whenever the industry gets a bright, vibrant kick in the ass, I gladly accept it.
Edit - I missed a few words toward the end there.
I started to take a look at games sitting on my shelf, or games I see discussed now and then - moreso at the games that have that general theme of good vs. evil. Not a lot have them have that exactly (that is, just because there is an enemy or 'bad guy' doesn't mean they are evil, necessarily).
The Diablo series is probably the most direct, what with the player venturing into Hell to kill the devil himself. The entire experience in the game shows us the world with demons in it. The player is a step behind the enemy, and the evil is always there waiting for him or her. So we don't see the contrast, we don't see the world when it is normal, more at peace, without demons murdering everyone in their homes and leaving corpses on pikes and stuff. It's just a grim setting, and nothing more. The color use in the game is also a very strong buffer to that. Everything is dull. The music, as well, doesn't stray far from the general theme of the game. It was a fun game, but it didn't necessarily bring about any excitement.
Sticking with Blizzard for a quick moment - The Warcraft series has always been about exaggeration in everything. With the third game and WoW, however, we finally have a faction to identify as being evil. And its members are generally gray or black in color, with very dull color use (aside from the Mountain-Dew-green the Legion adores, or the felguards being bright colors in their unarmored parts).
Castlevania has the good vs. evil setting as well. Again, the areas in the latest round of games in the series are generally grim and dark. The color use has more of a mix to it, because nothing has been absolutely dull, due to a mix of the occasional vibrant color (or hell, just pure use of it; I think the GBA games generally had that because it was the GBA though) (exceptions off the top of my head being Symphony of the Night and Lament of Innocence). The contrast (what I like, that is) would be the music, whenever it manages to be upbeat (Portrait of Ruin has a lot of that going on, and now that I wrote that I find it no surprise it is my favorite in that series). The series works well with toned down, slower / appropriate music, or with the above I noted. The contrast gives the game life, or its sparkles, I believe.
Disgaea put a fantastic spin on good vs. evil, but more than that it was just as animated (not literally) as Wind Waker. The characters had a lot of personality to them, and the abilities in the game were so exaggerated it was simple nonsense. But it was different, and it was a great tone to eat up.
Now would be the best time to bring up Wind Waker I suppose. I remember the "More like Cel-da" crap just as much as anyone. People either liked it, dismissed the art because they enjoyed the game in some other way, or didn't like the sailing or couldn't get over the art. The game in its entirety is the best depiction of good vs. evil (as I've said). I remember someone quoting the original maker(s) of Zelda, saying they wanted their music to be a blend of charm and menace, and this game hits it just right (with more than the music). Ganondorf is massive, and his most outstanding features, color wise, are his hair and the yellow crests on his forehead and his chest. In his movement he is either very subtle (nods, or walks slowly) or extremely quick. He speaks well, clashing with his brute size. Just awesome.
Our hero is the opposite of Ganondorf in just about every way. He's very vibrant in color, very animated, doesn't speak at all. We also get constant reminders of him being what he is - a kid. It would be the facial expressions, or any other silly going-ons in the game (firing from the canon at the start is great).
The game's pace and settings do a good job of getting that good vs. evil bit across as well. The fortress island is devoid of an array of colors. We know it is a bad place looking at it. Yet in the safety of Outside Isle and other towns, we know things are just peachy keen there. There's the island that has been assaulted already, broken into pieces, and appears more dull in color (while it is perpetually raining there, the color theme is still what is setting that). And I don't need to bring up those shots of Hyrule, as they're fairly obvious.
If there was a simple point I wanted to say, all of the above being evidence, it'd be that I absolutely adore diverse and / or exaggerated things in video games.
When everything takes a "Let's make it as close to real looking as possible" standpoint in the design, it becomes bland. It's like the difference between getting a cake on your birthday that's just like, y'know, some candles and frosting, and then getting a cake that has a lot of design on it, maybe some M&M's sprinkled on it too. Both ways are good, but why not be impressed and feel like you're getting something special, right?
There are people that believe that games where bright colors, or characters or settings, are used aren't meant for adults, that they are 'tehkiddy' or whatever the hell they say these days. I really disagree. Whenever the industry gets a bright, vibrant kick in the ass, I gladly accept it.
Edit - I missed a few words toward the end there.
Henroid on
0
Posts
Wind Waker spoiler
Edit: Haha, there was a pretty bitter recap of the monologue here
Here are some end-game Ganondorf quotes, spoilered:
And my favorite...
I think more can be said about a game that doesn't just use plainly obvious good vs evil characters.
Take KOTOR 2 for instance. Not only does it make the characters more interesting and engaging but it makes them seem a lot more human when they aren't just cardboard cutouts.
I never asked for this!
Is that shit supposed to be funny?
And you put way too much emphasis on the colour pallet. It sounds like all you care about is the cell shaded art and that's why you make Wind Waker the best game evar. Twilight Princess went the dingy 'next gen brown' route, but Link to the Past, OoT and Majora's Mask still destroy Wind Waker in terms of story, originality (all 3 introduce new concepts, WW is devoid of anything except the fact you spend more time sailing than actually playing), innovation and a little thing called fun.
You can like WW. I have no problem with it, but your whole argument about colours is way off and you choose to compare WW to a couple of Blizzard games that were far from being story based and weren't even trying to do anything along the lines of what you were looking for. However, you should have compared it to previous Zelda games, not other unrelated series. YOu may as well have used Mega Man for your examples since you didnt care about using fair comparisons and just want to make Wind Waker look better to prove your point.
Simple fact is, out the beautiful cell shading, Wind Waker had nothing to offer. It was rushed, had dungeons scrapped, such as the third one where you bomb the fish out, forces the player to sail around for hours on end looking for triforce pieces or just to get anywhere in the game and offers nothing new to the series. No unique weapons or new characters people should care about and no new dungeon or boss concepts. The cell shading is all it has going for it and it is easily one of hte worst Zelda games in the series. That doesn't make it a bad game, but it's like Mario Sunshine. It's just not the same quality as the rest of the series.
A game can be good for its presentation y'know, You seem to focus on whether or not you're having fun. Which is fine, that's not a wrong way to like a game.
I had fun with Wind Waker.
While I am using Wind Waker as an example in my thoughts on things, the thread isn't about it solely, nor was I comparing the other games to it. I was giving my point of view on how they stack up their good vs. evil portrayal.
I don't know, it seems pretty brainless to me.
OoT was all like "Hey, you happen to need the Forest Medallion next and it just so happens that the Forest Temple just became accessible."
You can tell instantly if a supposedly good character is going to turn out to be evil judging from their eyebrows.
Spot the villain!
Steam BoardGameGeek Twitter
Ive always preffered Fallouts view of things : Sometimes good men do bad things,but that dosent make them evil. Likewise,Sometimes badmen do good things,against,dosent make them good.
And the best games for depicting good and evil have nothing to do with colors and such,its all about presentation. In Diablo 2 evil is obviously evil,but in the end of act 3 cutscene you find out how evil evil really is. No fucking misguided children here.
I don't really like The warhammers depiction of good and evil,because that universe is empty of hope and so gets dull really fast because you know no matter what game your playing or book your reading good never gets more then a temporary pyhrric victory at best.
Edit: And also eyebrows arent the sole determinator of evil. Long flowing hair and effeminate features and generally oversized swords are good indicators too. Not to be confused with Spiky haired people with oversized swords. There's something about spiky hair that allows the evil to flow out keeping the person good.
Oh shit. American Boxart Kirby is gonna start eating everyone! Oh wait, he already does that. Carry on.
You, my friend, get it.
I really see this whole push towards photorealism as the slow death of style in video games. Everyone is so concerned about making their game look super real that they've forgotten that style is what really makes a game stand out.
Colour pallette, character design, continuity in scenery design... these are some of the things that game devs are totally overlooking nowadays. Photorealism has caused people to go with really muted colour pallettes which are VERY boring to look at (Gears of War = brown and grey).
I sincerely hope that there never comes a point where photorealism is the only way to make video games. Style should never be overlooked and is much more endearing than photoreal FPS #23124841.
There are good guys in 40K?
Are you serious? Do you really not understand why Gears of War has a muted color pallette and when there are more interesting colors, they're faded and dull? You really think photorealism made them do it and it wasn't an artistic decision? Or am I just making excuses?
Even with graphics getting better and better, stylization hasn't gone anywhere. Maybe it's more subtle, but it's easier to be. Even Crysis has a slightly exaggerated and unrealistic look to a lot of its characters and that's often cited as one of the most profound examples of photorealistic visual design.
There are innocents in 40K, but they're used as sacrifices to powerful, malevolent psionic entities.
If they're lucky.
Also Eldar.
Well when I think about it, this photorealism nonsense is showing off how close we are getting to replicating what we really see. And that time is just about coming up, so once we reach it I don't think it's going to become the goal anymore. Been there, done that, what else can we do? Probably nothing much.
The closer games come to realism the more freedom designers have to amaze and enthrall.
The alien spaceship in Crysis is spectacular artistic design in the middle of a game built around the concept of photorealism.
I wish these stupid 'art style > graphic hurf durf' assholes would get off their high horse for once and realise games since day fucking one in the 70s have always been, without exception, about making you believe the world they are presenting.
It's not a case of realism. It's a case of coherency.
Gears of War isnt somehow less valuable as an art style because it is brown and grey. Thats such bullshit to say that. Least of all because 3/5 of Gears of war dont feature grown and grey levels, and the people who constantly whine about its colour palette probably havent even played it.
likewise, okami or sotc arent somehow 'superior' by default because they dont aim for realism.
?
It doesn't make older games look that much worse if they weren't that great to begin with. Good-looking PS1 games still look good, for example. I can boot up the Spyro games or Final Fantasy VIII and they still look fine.
In fact, Id argue the opposite. Older games attain a level of nostalgic retro feel to them. I'd also argue that a huge number of 16/8 bit games would still be acceptable today, especially with the outlets for games of that type becoming one of the forefronts of the current games industry (XBLA/DS)
I'm pretty sure that they're are somehow responsible for the downfall of a utopian, unified humanity under a benevolent immortal badass with mastery of genetic engineering just because Slaanesh or Tzeentch piped the image of the Imperium of Man as it is "today" into the heads of some poor sap from Ulthwe.
We probably need to invent a blasphemous colour or subliminal watermark that causes reality to bend, somehow.
So we can play Call of Cthulhu based games.
But the best part about 40k is that no one is really evil, but everyone thinks that certain guys are the bad guys and that they're the good guys. Except only Eldar are right about not being bad.
But really, the beauty of 40k is that the other guy is the bad guy, not you.
Didn't Edar's hedonsitic way of life and selfishness spawn the chaos gods? I woudln't categorise that as a good thing.
Edit: I was way late, sorry about that.
Oh I see, the old Eldar don't count. I suppose Horus doesn't, either?