I hate what Unreal has done to modern triple A artstyles - Tim Sweeney is an enemy of Christ

Destacado
Otis Mallebrok dijo:
Nothing about the looks of the halo thingie is caused by the unreal engine. You can make a game look like anything you want, using the unreal engine. Its all about art direction.
Presiona para expandir...
You really can't, not without extensive modifications to the engine source. You can't add custom shading models without engine modifications, you can sort of but not really have a custom tonemapper. Most of the things in the halo remake are straight UE5 features, the sky is a sky atmosphere, the clouds are the volumetric clouds, the water is the default single layer water shader with some barely modified wave settings, most of the environment is megascans. All the flicker and pop in and smear is a result of UE5 features like nanite and lumen, and there is the stutter clearly visible in all the released footage that is inherent to the engine
 
Otis Mallebrok dijo:
There is no UE5 art style. It's just an engine. The art style comes from the artists.
Presiona para expandir...
They have things in UE that automate the process, make things easier, and those automations make everything look samey.
Most people will choose spending way less time on a game and hand over the busywork to an AI over doing everything themselves.
It is an issue that there is no real way to solve in the current industry model.
 
This "semi-realism but not so much realism that it actually has to look realistic" shit is so dull.

The "art style" of Exped33 is this exact shit. Grating, "realistic", yet looks like the default for unreal demos.
 
1761496564060.png
Fuckkkkk
 
Otis Mallebrok dijo:
Why do everyone use it?
Presiona para expandir...
Many, many products in tech (or anything, really) are dominant because of compatibility and legacy support reasons rather than competing on purely technical merits. I find it very hard to believe that game engines are immune to that.

I'd be willing to bet "it's what our people know" would be the off-the-record answer a LOT of developers would give for that question.
 
Ibanez RG 350EX dijo:
Many, many products in tech (or anything, really) are dominant because of compatibility and legacy support reasons rather than competing on purely technical merits. I find it very hard to believe that game engines are immune to that.

I'd be willing to bet "it's what our people know" would be the off-the-record answer a LOT of developers would give for that question.
Presiona para expandir...

But that opens the question: What engine is better?
 
⋖ cørdion ⋗ dijo:
This "semi-realism but not so much realism that it actually has to look realistic" shit is so dull.

The "art style" of Exped33 is this exact shit. Grating, "realistic", yet looks like the default for unreal demos.
Presiona para expandir...
Otis Mallebrok is right. An engine is just a glorified code library, sometimes with an IDE attached. People nowadays seem to think it's a more powerful and customizable version of a tool like Mario Maker and hence it dictates the looks. It does not. Even by default with the lightning and shaders you would get if you were very lazy, UE games don't look like the "UE artstyle", they look like Travis Strikes Again or that bird skateboard game.

What the UE artstyle TRULY is, is pseudorealistic assets made by asset making companies/contractors mostly in Europe and India. They have either the generic realistic look or alternative the fortnite-esque/crash 4 "gummy cartoon" look because they have to be very generic as they will have to be bought by a vast amount of different developers, hence they aren't customized to a specific artstyle, and if anything, are made devoid of artstyle. In turn, the gaming industry has started to pivot to these two artstyles in order to be able to exploit these generic assets farm instead of producing them in-house. I think that's fine when it comes to indie games actually, because probably a lot of them wouldn't be able to make the 3d game they wanted to if they had to make all these 3d assets in-home. That was the case for exp33, which started with that fortnite-esque artstyle and then became more realistic, but by their own admission the devs bought a shitload of shit from the marketplace and they wouldn't have been able to ship a game that big, or make a 3d game at all, if they hadn't. But this is downright embarassing and not excusable for big companies considering their budget. especially when the games don't even have redeemable qualities anyway and run like shit.

To make shit even worse, normies are downright braindead and have been conditioned to think realistic open world = good game. I am not a Game Freak apologist, far from it, but every time a pokemon game was released normies go "uuh why doesn't this look and play like Red Dead Redemption 2? They make so much money hence they should make the game like that!" Normies believe anything else but GTAslop is a worse game and everything has to move towards that goal if they are successful, mocking and crying about everything else. This is why Devil May Cry moved to realistic-slop with mo-cap. This is why CDPR changed course halfway through CP2077 hiring Keeanu Reeves and mockup actor. ANOTHER further layer of bullshit is that Geoff Kneightley created a meta-videogame environment of promotion where the games which are the most exposed by his shows and the press are those with pseudorealistic graphics, generic hollywood soundtrack and actor mock-up performances, all of which encourage the realistic "UE5 look approach"

It's a giant uroboros eating its tail, a vicious cycle of saving money on assets and pandering to the brain-deadest of normies. By default, UE5 is shit and destroys performance, but the fault for the generic look is 100% on the developers.
 
it's feeding into the competency crisis thing. a while ago I tried to look up how to make something for an environment and all I got were tutorials on how to drag and drop stuff from asset packs. fuck that.
 
Destacado
Debes iniciar sesión o registrarte para responder aquí.
Atrás
Top Abajo