/3/ - 3DCG

>>964332
The appreciable qualities are the efficiency of them. Which even the least artistically literate can still perceive on an subconscious level. It's sort of like how isometric pixel art is more satisfying to look at than top down 3D. The rigid perspective of the 2x1 pixel structure creates some kind of harmony we perceive on a subconscious level, which is absent in 3D top down.

But the thing is, you spend all this time and effort learning how to make models that are less clean than if you were to make contemporary work. Like it made sense when all the indie devs were crazy about pixel art. Because pixel art saves a lot of time over HD2D animation. Less effort yielded pretty good results, thanks to the magic of the pixel. But now that low poly is the indie trend, it makes less sense. Because you still have to do a shitload of work to make low poly models. Where you could put equal or less work working with proper quad loop modelling and get better results.

Here, I just googled this random game. Looked for "simple 3d art style". This style is simplistic, and yet you can see by the edges that it's not afraid to use more polygons. Neither is it using a ton of polygons. It's just clean. Making stuff like this is equally as easy as making the low poly stuff. Maybe even easier, because you don't have to think of ways to cut corners. If you need more polygons to bevel or inset, then you just *make* them. And you get less jagged results.

You can take something like this, and texture it any way you like. If you want something more graphic, then make graphic textures. If you want something smooth, then make smooth textures.

>nobody loves 2017 models
Now that's just delusion. There is beauty to modern models. How can you look at an image displaying clean edgeloops and not be awed?