Board 8 > What the hell is up with ugly games these days

(+) 1 Yeah! (+)

lmao

Plum thinking that artistic taste can be objective is not very surprising

The issue in calling something "objectively" beautiful or ugly is a matter of humility. One should never feel comfortable that one's own opinion is objective truth, or that a single person could ever know what objective beauty is.

That doesn't mean there is not objective beauty*. At the very least, that should be what an artist is working towards. Anything else is an artistic dead end.

*Or truth, transcendence, whatever you want to call it.

Yeah thats not what I said at all but ok

I mean I think pong looks fine for what it's trying to do

I'd rather have a discussion with someone who says say for example Hydlide for the NES is a beautiful game that is trying to achieve some sort of style and succeeding at it when you've got a bunch of other games in genre and presumably with the same aesthetic objectives on the NES that actually look good.

masterplum posted...

I feel like we are half a logic hop away from someone claiming pong doesnt have worse graphics than anything made today, it just has a different art style and you are wrong if you think its objectively worse

Pong had great graphics by the standards of its day

Yesmar_ posted...

The issue in calling something "objectively" beautiful or ugly is a matter of humility. One should never feel comfortable that one's own opinion is objective truth, or that a single person could ever know what objective beauty is.

On the flip side I'd argue that true humility is realizing the thing you like can be objectively ugly and being at peace with it. Trying to give equal value to every opinion and thinking what you said is some sort of mortal counter argument to any form of objective truth is the exact opposite of humility.

LeonhartFour posted...

Pong had great graphics by the standards of its day

Which is irrelevant to this argument!

Lopen posted...

Something that some extremely high percentage of people on the earth finds unpleasant to look at when they look at it.

This sounds like, the most subjective definitive of objectivity imaginable, lol

Natalie posted...

There's a reason no sprite-based game in the last 25 years has matched the visual impact of Symphony of the Night: nobody has the time and budget to put in that work.

I mean, SotN cribbed a lot of its sprites from Rondo of Blood, so this one feels like a slight miss? Like yeah that game is fuckin beautiful but they also took a lot of shortcuts.

Xiahou_Shake posted...

This sounds like, the most subjective definitive of objectivity imaginable, lol

That's extremely boiled down because I don't have the knowledge on the subject to know how to quantify it.

With my very basic level of understanding there are things like use of contrast that have a "wrong" way to be used in art that invoke a feeling of revulsion if abused.

Like I said I'm not the one who can properly tell you what the "objectively ugly" decisions are in a way that sounds like a bullet point factual list, but I know what they are when I see them.

I ain't reading this whole topic but I'll personally take stylized, anime, or pixel art over realistic-but-everything's-brown

AriaOfBolo posted...

I ain't reading this whole topic but I'll personally take stylized, anime, or pixel art over realistic-but-everything's-brown

Realistic but everything is brown is also bad yeah.

None of those styles are bad and I can think of games I thought looked really good in every one of those styles. It isn't about style as much as people being accepting of things that look like garbage under the guise of it's an indie game so it's fine to look like trash or it's art so not liking it means you don't like art

the speed at which the argument has literally progressed to "objective" quality being equivalent to "normative" society's tastes is frankly incredible

I never said "normative"

99%+ is not "normative"

It's basically "everyone finds this offensive but a few extra special flowers out there that feel their outlier opinion invalidates everyone else and means objective truth with respect to subjective tastes can't exist"

Kenri posted...

I mean, SotN cribbed a lot of its sprites from Rondo of Blood, so this one feels like a slight miss? Like yeah that game is fuckin beautiful but they also took a lot of shortcuts.

Replace Symphony with Rondo, then. Either way, they represent the last era of major devs funneling real resources into sprite artwork.

I can't believe we're having an "aesthetics are/n't objective" debate in 2023 honestly. There's no objective view into what is and isn't visually pleasing. And don't hit me with that "okay then, I'll wear clown makeup to my daughter's wedding" example because it's missing the point: we view clown makeup as informal and tacky and inappropriate for daily wear not because of some inherent quality in the makeup, but because culturally we've reached a consensus that certain things are and aren't commonly acceptable. You see this come up a lot when people with implicit racial biases will talk down on people from other cultures, almost pitying them - what a shame these black youths don't know that baggy pants are wrong and dumb looking, or that these people from Saudi Arabia dress in such gaudy colours unlike our refined and mature formal wear.

Similarly, the dismissal of "modern art" as not being legitimate is in no way objective. The culture surrounding the art world has built up a sense of exclusivity and reverence that emphasizes the difference between insiders and outsiders, between serious art and pop art. It's the reason certain styles are seen as sophisticated and others, like "fantasy book cover-core" works, are considered common. A lot of the abstract and postmodernist art displays that draw flack aren't made because the artist believes a banana is a culturally significant aesthetic marvel; they're created and displayed as a metacommentary, a reaction to the forms and barriers that exist throughout the art industry. That somebody is able to have a toilet or a cold brutalist slab placed inside a velvet rope and captioned as an exhibit is less a statement about those objects and more a statement about what we consider to be "art" and why, not dissimilar to John Cage's 4'33" in the music world.

the idea that "objective" qualities change depending on context/the people that are judging it is pretty bizarre

if your definition of "objectively ugly" is that "most people say it's ugly/don't like its appearance" then i disagree with your definition of objective

that doesn't mean discussing how ugliness as a trend isn't worthwhile; it just means it's worth qualifying and identifying the characteristics that make something ugly to you

i think the sensation of things appearing "cheap" is worth examining and discussing, for example. and i think that's fair to criticize even if that is enjoyed by some people it is even the intent of the creator

Like normative is more like 70% of society. Standard deviations is what you should be thinking about if you're bringing that word into the discussion. If you're not okay with that, then ok, use a different word that accurately expresses what you're saying instead of trying to come off as intelligent by misusing concepts.

A normative opinion is something like "I find pixel art unpleasant" because I guarantee you in society as a whole (or even the gaming community as a whole) well under 30% of people are digging that pixel art in video games vs something shiny.

When you say "Axiom Verge 2 is wonderful art and anyone who disagrees doesn't understand art" it's more like "Murder is a perfectly acceptable form of resolving disagreements" in terms of a stated 'opinion.' There are objective truths to subjective artforms at some level, that's why art is a field people can study and why AI can be written to emulate art styles or make aesthetically pleasing things. That doesn't mean that you can't defy those truths and still end up with good art but there is a method to it and certain choices are made not out of a willful style choice but out of negligence or lack of ability/resources, and it's naive to say that's not the case. You arguing otherwise just means you don't understand the artform well enough. That doesn't mean that you can't like things that are objectively 'bad' but just understand your position in liking something that is rightfully called bad on an objective level and be okay with that, because the very nature of subjectivity is that you can subjectively like something that's objectively inferior to something else.

Being humble or enlightened or whatever is not saying that literally everything that you can form an opinion on is subjective, it's realizing that the objective truth isn't always relevant and that you and many others can subjectively enjoy it anyway.

Lopen posted...

It's basically "everyone finds this offensive but a few extra special flowers out there that feel their outlier opinion invalidates everyone else and means objective truth with respect to subjective tastes can't exist"

in other words, things that deviate from a social norm? interesting.

the objective truth isn't always relevant

look. if "objective truth" isn't always relevant then it doesn't have any use to me as a concept. I truly have no idea what you are even talking about at this point.
if you say "this is objective truth" and then say "well, 30% of the time it isn't true" then who cares

Have people seen artists do those "here's an updated version of a work I did a year ago" type things where the artist wants to show how proud they are of how much they improved? Are people here saying the new versions of those aren't objectively better?

HeroDelTiempo17 posted...

if you say "this is objective truth" and then say "well, 30% of the time it isn't true" then who cares

I said 1% (if that) of the time it isn't true. I'm not the guy who said "normative" you did. I was explaining you misused the word.

HeroDelTiempo17 posted...

look. if "objective truth" isn't always relevant then it doesn't have any use to me as a concept. I truly have no idea what you are even talking about at this point.

Higher level physics and mathematics have myriad objective truths that have no use to you as concepts because you don't understand them. It's the same here. Just because you don't understand the "why" of why certain art is "bad" doesn't invalidate the fact that it is.

And make no mistake about it-- I don't understand the why either, but I'm not the one who is trying to claim that because my opinion is different with respect to a certain game's art that it's impossible to say it's objectively pretty, ugly, or whatever else. It is possible it's just about whether you're secure enough in your world view to be okay with that.

MacArrowny posted...

Have people seen artists do those "here's an updated version of a work I did a year ago" type things where the artist wants to show how proud they are of how much they improved? Are people here saying the new versions of those aren't objectively better?

Yes

Lopen posted...

And make no mistake about it-- I don't understand the why either, but I'm not the one who is trying to claim that because my opinion is different with respect to a certain game's art that it's impossible to say it's objectively pretty, ugly, or whatever else. It is possible it's just about whether you're secure enough in your world view to be okay with that.

No, you're the one claiming that you don't understand what objective truth of art is but are still defending it, which is honestly much weirder to me. I'm perfectly secure with my worldview, it just seems to be incompatible with yours. And that's ok because part of my worldview is that these disagreements are bound to happen when people don't agree on objective truth!

You're secure with your worldview but you're not secure with being wrong. Your worldview is structured with the express purpose of avoiding being wrong whenever possible.

MacArrowny posted...

Have people seen artists do those "here's an updated version of a work I did a year ago" type things where the artist wants to show how proud they are of how much they improved? Are people here saying the new versions of those aren't objectively better?

also I have literally seen plenty of these where I think the old art is more aesthetically pleasing, lmao

My opinion doesn't really matter there because it's more about how the artist feels about their skills improving, and I would never comment on that to their face because my subjective opinion isn't the point.

Lopen posted...

You're secure with your worldview but you're not secure with being wrong. Your worldview is structured with the express purpose of avoiding being wrong whenever possible.

This is an objectively normative worldview so I don't see the issue

Lopen posted...

You're secure with your worldview but you're not secure with being wrong. Your worldview is structured with the express purpose of avoiding being wrong whenever possible.

my worldview is actually structured around that I'm probably wrong about many things and I shouldn't conflate my own viewpoints with a literal objective truth that exists beyond myself

HeroDelTiempo17 posted...

my worldview is actually structured around that I'm probably wrong about many things and I shouldn't conflate my own viewpoints with a literal objective truth that exists beyond myself

Yet you simultaneously say other people shouldn't state anything that could remotely be construed as opinions as though they could be objectively true.

Gonna be honest I still think Okami and Wind Waker look amazing

Im a sucker for a good cel shade

Lopen posted...

When you say "Axiom Verge 2 is wonderful art and anyone who disagrees doesn't understand art" it's more like "Murder is a perfectly acceptable form of resolving disagreements" in terms of a stated 'opinion.'

bad example, lots of people believe this (definitely more than 30%), they just find ways to justify it

Natalie posted...

Replace Symphony with Rondo, then. Either way, they represent the last era of major devs funneling real resources into sprite artwork.

Rondo doesn't look nearly as nice as Symphony though.

(I think I agree with you in general though, I'm just being difficult.)

MacArrowny posted...

Have people seen artists do those "here's an updated version of a work I did a year ago" type things where the artist wants to show how proud they are of how much they improved? Are people here saying the new versions of those aren't objectively better?

Absolutely blindsided by the direction this post went. There's a whole joke that people often can't tell which one is the older art in these comparisons.

MacArrowny posted...

Have people seen artists do those "here's an updated version of a work I did a year ago" type things where the artist wants to show how proud they are of how much they improved? Are people here saying the new versions of those aren't objectively better?

I keep finding myself wanting to explain this, and I have to stop myself, because when someone is this fundamentally incurious it's like I have to hold their hand through basic ideas of art appreciation like we're in a philosophy 101 class to even get to the starting line and I just don't see the point

Para this isnt that complicated.

If you have never taken an art class before and draw something then take an art class and draw the same thing you are going to be objectively better at it

Video games have been more accepting of the former lately and it is weird.

You will probably be better at expressing your specific vision, a vision that not everybody will agree is superior to the alternatives, even ignoring the many confounding factors that comprise taste in execution and make deciding which is "objectively" superior absurd

Next you're going to tell me Pokemon Scarlet and Violet wouldn't look objectively better with fewer graphical glitches, a higher resolution, and better framerate...

NFUN posted...

You will probably be better at expressing your specific vision, a vision that not everybody will agree is superior to the alternatives, even ignoring the many confounding factors that comprise taste in execution and make deciding which is "objectively" superior absurd

So if I go and sculpt something, having never sculpted anything before in my life, we can agree it is subjectively better than Michelangelos David?

MacArrowny posted...

Next you're going to tell me Pokemon Scarlet and Violet wouldn't look objectively better with fewer graphical glitches, a higher resolution, and better framerate...

turns out some people like glitchy aesthetics

masterplum posted...

So if I go and sculpt something, having never sculpted anything before in my life, we can agree it is subjectively better than Michelangelos David?

I gave you one shot and you blew it. Congratulations

masterplum posted...

people who dont get modern art

That's a good analogy, but I think you're on the wrong side of it. It's highly likely that you ARE one of those people who just "don't get it", unless you're able to prove otherwise.

The alternative is that everyone's opinion is somehow equally important, which would be ridiculous.

And if you're talking about "objectively ugly" then your opinion about this is definitely not as important.

Games use ugly art order to stand out and be "charming" and thus get sales

That's it

Undertale was a big example of that strategy working really well

Lopen posted...

Higher level physics and mathematics have myriad objective truths that have no use to you as concepts because you don't understand them

Are there math & physics rules that are wrong 1% of the time but still deemed objectively true?

well this is as controversial a topic as any for me to mention i think skyrim and fallout are ugly

ew

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/4/0/8/AAE6dmAADdx4.jpg

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/5/7/7/AAUHRBAAEEo5.jpg

God of War Ragnarock is the ugliest piece of shit I've ever seen I hope they bury it like ET how dare they do this

foolm0r0n posted...

Are there math & physics rules that are wrong 1% of the time but still deemed objectively true?

Wrong as in "does not apply" yes absolutely.

foolm0r0n posted...

The alternative is that everyone's opinion is somehow equally important, which would be ridiculous

This is literally the rallying cry of all the people in here saying "b-b-b-but ART" in here lol.

There's no such thing as objectively good or bad art because everyone has their own opinion on it and each opinion is sacred~

If this conversation goes on much longer, I feel like it will need to be imported into objection.lol

Some games have well-designed graphics. Some games have poorly-designed graphics.

Some games have orthodox graphical style. Some have an unusual style they're going for.

These two qualities exist independent of one another. Regardless of how well some people here may or may not be presenting their argument, the crux of this is that the games that have poorly-designed graphics do indeed have poorly-designed graphics, and that they are (I would argue generally, but are at least to some people) aversive and not something to be celebrated.

You know what's ugly? Games that run really badly. I remember recently saying that F.I.S.T. is "ugly but playable" because the framerate just stops for half-seconds all the time. I've improved it a bit with settings since then, but it's still not great. The aesthetic isn't bad at all, just extremely furry.

Also, (Language warning)

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/5/9/6/AAF5_iAAEEpM.jpg

azuarc posted...

These two qualities exist independent of one another. Regardless of how well some people here may or may not be presenting their argument, the crux of this is that the games that have poorly-designed graphics do indeed have poorly-designed graphics, and that they are (I would argue generally, but are at least to some people) aversive and not something to be celebrated.

Do you think Axiom Verge 2 is "purposefully ugly"

I'm not a fan of the art style, but no. I don't think it's ugly at all. Judging from screenshots and a trailer, and it looks better than the original. Then again, these materials might give a skewed impression. Children of Morta (similar art style) has some positively BEAUTIFUL scenes -- especially the house -- and yet most of the game's art isn't very attractive.