Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why "next-gen games" went gray, brown, and grey.

allegory-of-the-game.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 40 posts

Re: Why "next-gen games" went gray, brown, and grey.

#11

Post by tjic »

It's long been the case that we invent tools, and then tend to do the things that the tools make easy.

You can see that the distribution of furniture varieties changed a lot when machine tools were introduced. Furniture got a lot cheaper, but because table saws make straight cuts a lot easier than curved cuts, even in higher end furniture, we ended up get a lot more style choices that utilized what was easier.

I'm looking forward to seeing what stylistic changes happen in clothes, furniture and more with the rise of small-lot production, CNC, and other technologies. I expect that we'll see big changes.

Re: Why "next-gen games" went gray, brown, and grey.

#12

Post by mullr »

maryrosecook wrote: post #7

Interesting that the palette of the original Quake game was browns and reds, also for technical reasons, but different ones.

What technical reasons are those? I remember hearing this when I was 15 or so, as part of a "Unreal Sux"/"No Quake Sux" debate. (I was observing) It didn't make any sense to me then, nor does it now, how a 3d graphics engine could be limited in color palette to just, say, brown. And I distinctly remember the color blue showing up in that game anyway...

Re: Why "next-gen games" went gray, brown, and grey.

#13

Post by dgallagher »

TrevorJ wrote: post #3

Excellent article. Good insights into the tech that has influenced the art direction of recent games. I do think though, that art directors should pull themselves out of that rut and strive for more variety in upcoming titles.

I wonder if art directors purposefully choose darkness, or maybe they simply stumbled upon it by experimenting? "We this game to look realistic, and out of all of our mock-ups, darkness wins."

Many Sega games have a very specific look to them that's colorful. Jet Set Radio Future (Xbox) was an extremely vibrant game. Most Nintendo games are too. Though some of those types of games tend to be more cartoonist-looking than realistic-looking.

How about special effects in movies? They use similar technology that's used in video games. Is there a trend here that's more into dark/brown/gray?

Re: Why "next-gen games" went gray, brown, and grey.

#14

Post by michael_dorfman »

scott_s wrote: post #10
michael_dorfman wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...and the author's point in using both? That he lives in Iceland, and is trying to straddle the fence?

He probably doesn't have a point in doing so. Do you?

My point was that it was odd to repeat a word in two different spellings in the same sentence, unless you have a point in doing so. Different strokes, I suppose: some favor "favor"; others favour "favour".

Re: Why "next-gen games" went gray, brown, and grey.

#15

Post by peregrine »

dgallagher wrote: post #13
TrevorJ wrote: post #3

Excellent article. Good insights into the tech that has influenced the art direction of recent games. I do think though, that art directors should pull themselves out of that rut and strive for more variety in upcoming titles.

I wonder if art directors purposefully choose darkness, or maybe they simply stumbled upon it by experimenting? "We this game to look realistic, and out of all of our mock-ups, darkness wins." Many Sega games have a very specific look to them that's colorful. Jet Set Radio Future (Xbox) was an extremely vibrant game. Most Nintendo games are too. Though some of those types of games tend to be more cartoonist-looking t…

Cell Shading makes colors easier cause its not trying to be realistic.

Re: Why "next-gen games" went gray, brown, and grey.

#16

Post by ken »

ajuc wrote: post #9

This photorealism makes new games very boring artistic-wise. Old games with hand-drawn graphic had some artistic value in them, they made pepole imagine other worlds etc. Now it's just photorealism everywhere. I wonder, when game graphic dadaism and cubism will appear. Art is not about making more realistic copies.

He mentions Okami in the comments -- I don't think that's quite dadaist but it's certainly not photorealistic.

Re: Why "next-gen games" went gray, brown, and grey.

#17

Post by erik »

mullr wrote: post #12
maryrosecook wrote: post #7

Interesting that the palette of the original Quake game was browns and reds, also for technical reasons, but different ones.

What technical reasons are those? I remember hearing this when I was 15 or so, as part of a "Unreal Sux"/"No Quake Sux" debate. (I was observing) It didn't make any sense to me then, nor does it now, how a 3d graphics engine could be limited in color palette to just, say, brown. And I distinctly remember the color blue showing up in that game anyway...

I could be mis-remembering, but I think Quake started out with a software renderer that operated in VGA mode. So the game has a 256 color palette.

Re: Why "next-gen games" went gray, brown, and grey.

#18

Post by jcromartie »

ajuc wrote: post #9

This photorealism makes new games very boring artistic-wise. Old games with hand-drawn graphic had some artistic value in them, they made pepole imagine other worlds etc. Now it's just photorealism everywhere. I wonder, when game graphic dadaism and cubism will appear. Art is not about making more realistic copies.

> Art is not about making more realistic copies.

Indeed, but maybe it's just that (certain) games and film are getting closer. Films use realistic special effects to get you to suspend disbelief when the setting includes magic or aliens. We have sci-fi and horror games that try to evoke emotions and senses of otherness/horror, and I think the photorealistic approach does that more effectively.

Re: Why "next-gen games" went gray, brown, and grey.

#19

Post by miloshh »

So he says that games are becoming more realistic in most aspects, but not in the lighting. That is probably true, but there is no reason why that should cause the game to become grey and washed-out.

Most CG movies and effects (from Pixar, Dreamworks, ILM, ...) also do not have anything close to photorealistic lighting (i.e. correct global illumination), but they do not look grey.

One common mistake that leads to washed-out images is to apply gamma correction (which is the right thing to do) but not apply inverse gamma correction to your textures. That way your surfaces are essentially gamma-corrected twice, which is clearly wrong. I don't know if they're really making such a simple mistake, but who knows...

Re: Why "next-gen games" went gray, brown, and grey.

#20

Post by miloshh »

dgallagher wrote: post #13
TrevorJ wrote: post #3

Excellent article. Good insights into the tech that has influenced the art direction of recent games. I do think though, that art directors should pull themselves out of that rut and strive for more variety in upcoming titles.

I wonder if art directors purposefully choose darkness, or maybe they simply stumbled upon it by experimenting? "We this game to look realistic, and out of all of our mock-ups, darkness wins." Many Sega games have a very specific look to them that's colorful. Jet Set Radio Future (Xbox) was an extremely vibrant game. Most Nintendo games are too. Though some of those types of games tend to be more cartoonist-looking t…

Exactly,movie studios use pretty much the same lighting tricks as games - direct illumination with some ambient occlusion and color bleeding hacks here and there. Yet they do not look brown/gray. I think it might be because they have armies of artists (they call them "technical directors") that tweak the materials and lighting for thousands of man-hours until it looks good. Game companies probably invest much less in this kind of tweaking.
Post reply on HN