/vr/ - Retro Games

>>7494820
That gif >>7493769 wasn't really in support of a statement. This is a thread about nice photography-based visuals, so I contributed nice photography-based visuals while I was replying, as I'm doing now.

Again as I said in both posts above, I'm not claiming a modern game with digitized assets can't work, simply that it is actually more difficult to pull off properly to an equivalent level of final quality. The smart thing is to take an extreme stylistical approach, as is the case of The Swapper >>7494840 (the harsh lighting and small scale help), or Armikrog (nearly abstract characters and environments, and everything being made of clay as a unifier). Both do an ok job of compositing independent elements into a cohesive whole, but a more naturalistic look like in the Famitsu dioramas would be way trickier to achieve.

My point of view can be argued as any other, but I did mention the argument I'm basing it on: the more information there is, the easier it is to tell what's wrong with it. It's a pretty simple and universal concept, and specially true for visual arts. Proof and arguments aren't quite the same thing but since the former is rare, it's a good idea to at least provide some of the latter. Else all you've got is an opinion for the sake of itsel, and believing that a failure to volunteer anything to support it that could be argued against counts as proving it right by default is, if not silly, at least difficult to call "discussing" at all.