/vr/ - Retro Games

that looks fun as fuck dude

>>5733809
Nostalgia. I don't think I've ever played whatever game that is, but the graphics invoke strong feelings of nostalgia anyway.

>>5733809
This essay answers your question.
>In both tech culture and the broader media landscape, the 90’s were a decade defined by the notion of limitless untapped possibility. Though game devs were far more hampered compared to the gargantuan strides made by filmmakers, their in-house pre-rendered art gives a window into the worlds they could imagine but not yet conceive.
https://medium.com/mammon-machine-zeal/pre-rendered-ephemera-the-missing-tenebrism-in-2-5d-a1b1047fef9b

>>5733809
Good low poly can convey a consistent, stylized artstyle in the same way good spritework can.
>>5733812
>>5733819
It's Tech Romancer, and it's pretty okay.

>>5733809
What's the appeal of anything that mimics reality without being photorealistic

>>5733827
This guy nailed it.

"Good low poly can convey a consistent, stylized artstyle in the same way good spritework can."

>>5733860
Too new to even know what greentext is.

>>5733809
its comfy

>>5733809
It kinda makes me wanna take a huge shit in your mouth.

Being able to use primary colors without a shader blurring them into smudge

>>5733809
Soul. Photorealistic graphics are soulless. Limitations create more imagination.

>>5733910
More imagination = more fun. Modern games forgot how to have fun and be happy with limitations.

>>5733809
They are able to accurately convey what it is they are trying to portray without needless amount of noise and visual clutter distracting the player.

>>5733914
SOUL

>>5733809
Uniquely beautiful. Nothing else looks like it. Closest is the cubism movement of the early 1900s.

>>5733921
I miss brunette Tina

It's a style, just like impressionism or cubism or pixel art. And I happen to like the style.

Fuck nostalgia.

Better suspension of disbelief, errors aren't as noticeable

>>5734072
This is also a point. Better graphics might generate expectative, which in turn, may lead to deceptions.

>>5733809
Much like 2D games, low poly 3D is now an art style that you deliberately choose and is as good as a hyper realistic or cel shaded game.

>>5733809
It lends itself toward creativity and artistic expression much more freely than modern high poly stuff does, which frequently lures people into attempting realism - which, while impressive and certainly requiring of great (and beyond a certain point, greater) skill, is often a creative step down.

You can look at two dozen games from the last 5 years and they're almost impossible to tell apart if you're not intimately familiar with that game, but you you can look at games with aesthetics like that one and distinguish one game from another even if you've never seen or heard of the game in question.
I don't know what game that is, but I know I've never seen it before.

On top of that...

>>5734072
>Better suspension of disbelief, errors aren't as noticeable

This.

A near photorealistic model looks absolutely ridiculous if, for instance, its feet don't properly connect with the floor and the walking animation doesn't match the movement speed closely enough, or when it turns on a dime in single frame.

When a 400 poly model doesn't move in a realistic manner, it doesn't matter. When 40,000 poly, highly realistic model moves like that, it's jarring.

We instinctively expect realistic looking things to behave in a realistic manner. The fidelity of a game's simulation should match the fidelity of its visuals, but a complex simulation does not necessarily mean a fun game. Indeed, it often means the exact opposite.

So from both an artistic point of view, and a gameplay point of view, having a gorillion polys is not always more desirable.

>>5734494
I should have added:

Pic related, a poly count increase that would have ruined the look of the entire fucking game.

>>5733809
There isn't one.

>>5733809
They look more mysterious. Since they aren't 1000% realistic, they actually encompass both what is possible in reality and what is not possible in reality.
It taps directly into the psyche and imagination of the children we were, when we speculated endlessly about what might come next in a videogame we had recently started, what secrets the game held.

>>5734571
>the children we were

This is the real reason you think it looks good.

>>5734571
>we
You don't speak for anyone, idiot.

To answer this seriously, there is none. There just happen to be low poly games that have such a great art design that they look great.

>>5734641
Pretty much. And any artist who needs forced limitations to be creative and stylize is a hack.

>>5734652
You're a jew.

>>5734686
I am not, but I am a professional artist so I know a little something on the subject. Anyone who needs artificial limitations to produce something decent sucks to begin with. There is some nice looking low poly art, but it's good in spite of, not because of it.

>>5734710
Then why am I so infatuated with low poly graphics?

>>5734756
Tastes vary and why something appeals to a certain person can be hard to pin down. And it's not like you can't make something that looks good with limited polygons, it's the saying that limitations like that are important for creativity or not making something photorealistic that's hogwash. That said, if I had to guess, you were likely between 5 and 10 or so when you started seeing and playing low poly video games so that style imprinted on you in a way that it will always feel comfortable.

>>5734710
>>5734652

>I am a professional artist so I know a little something on the subject.
>proceeds to go on with his shit opinion and proving modern art is trash
An surprisingly uniroinc and truthful post.

>>5734710
Completely incoherent argument. Is someone imposing an artificial limitation on your brain, or is your low IQ natural?

>>5734710
>Anyone who needs artificial limitations to produce something decent sucks to begin with.
How is this relevant to us? We're talking about what we see. The only thing that matters is the end result.

>>5734962
>>5734980
Lol
>>5734990
Just replying to what's being discussed.

>>5735006
About the only decent modern art is art with limitations. Otherwise it's just splatter paint shit or some trash pushing a political point. That goes for art in general really.

>>5733809
I earned and still earn my money with them.

>>5735035
You're so clueless it's delightful.

>>5735053

>>5735056
:)

>>5735053
Modern "art" is hideous to look at.
It's also a money laundering scheme.

t. art history major

>>5735073
Not all art is meant to be aesthetically pleasing as it's goal.
>art history

>>5735053
Pot calling the kettle black...

>>5735130
Lol keep telling yourself that.

>>5734072
>Scene from GSC/HGSS
>Player model is from DPPt

>>5735185
I don't remember such a scene, are you basing that just on Ho-Oh and Lugia being there

>>5735056
Modern art as plagiarism. An engineer designed that and the modern artist gets the recognition.

>>5735073
Modern art IS wretched and is a symptom of everything that is wrong with the world. I'm not joking. Post-modernism and "subjectivity" is what will be the final nail in the coffin of our culture.

>>5736645
You're not joking, you're just stupid.

>>5733809
Most of low poly games were very stylized, because they didn't attempt to just look realistic.

>>5738657
Thief was attempting to look realistic though. There's just a handful of weird levels.

>>5738661
I thought everything looked intentionally spikey and cramped with lots of weird colors, especially compared to the sequel - it's definitely more realistic than Mega Man Legends though.

>>5733809
>>5733827
>>5734072
They are adorable, like cartoons.
And it's neat to really "see" how the graphics work, because you can see the indivual polygons as you can see the individual pixels in sprite art (and textures even).

>>5736891
He's 100% right and your brilliant retort is a reflection of the type of genius that is defensive over the abomination known as modern "art"

I liked how the differences between developers were more apparent back then.

>>5733809
Maybe it's because it takes real skill/talent to make low poly graphics look appealing. Just a guess. It's like how great retro sprite work looks great despite the limitations, but modern indie pixel art shit looks ... shit.

>>5733809
good framerate

>>5736638
not him, but thats not ho-oh, and also Red is on the other side of the snowy mountain like the final battle at the end of gen 2

>>5740246
>but modern indie pixel art shit looks ... shit.
You make it sound as if there is no decent pixel in indie games at all. With indie games, most of it is shit to some degree, so the failing in art is just one of the common missteps. And that's not limited to pixel art either.


If you didn't mean it that way, my apologies.

>>5734494
>>5734072
Ignoring hats, I'd say this one of the primary reasons for TF2's longevity is the simplistic-yet-distinct caricature and slightly cartoonish setting.

You can crank the graphics on the game up to the standard min and max without losing too much of the aesthetic appeal.

>>5738859
Yep, and the platforms.

>>5740246
This is true to an extent but the limitations also mask a lack of skill and taste, and restrict the mediocre artist from realizing his shitty, ugly, or generic vision.

>>5740363
Oh shit you're right, I didn't even look at it properly

>>5733812
Tech Romancer is animu robot fighting kino

>>5738816
You speak from a place of pure ignorance. You not understanding something doesn't make you right.

>>5740929
It can mask poor skill and that's why it's often used as a crutch.

>>5740929
>This is true to an extent but the limitations also mask a lack of skill and taste, and restrict the mediocre artist from realizing his shitty, ugly, or generic vision.
true on multiple levels. It's interesting how a medium's limitations can actually strengthen a mediocre story where unrestricted resources cheapens the effect

>>5743701
>It's interesting how a medium's limitations can actually strengthen a mediocre story where unrestricted resources cheapens the effect

So you're saying games have better story than novels because it has to be simplified down so much?

>>5743764
>So you're saying games have better story than novels because it has to be simplified down so much?
Apples to oranges, really. They're different mediums with different strengths and weaknesses. No medium can convey emotions and ideas like a novel, but no medium can juxtapose interactive visual elements like video games.

What I'm saying is that, say, for the medium of cinema, there was a lot of goofy shit that Lucas in the 1970's couldn't do because of technical limitations that Lucas in the 1990's could assure everyone was actually the correct vision for Star Wars as he was going back and tweaking old movies while spewing out uninspired new ones.

In the same way, retro video games can have a more impactful story than modern ones even though they're simpler and touch on fewer ideas. In a way, it keeps the creator focused, and forces him to condense a story around its principle concepts as opposed to being all over the map and needing the better part of the game just to describe who the characters are and what kind of world they're inhabiting (cough, FF13)

>>5743786
Well then I agree and disagree. I don't like how some ofthe stuff in the Star Wars special editions came out (like Han stepping on Jaba) but that was also due to technical limitations. Or some of the changes decisions he made like changing the Greedo shooting, but that's purely an artistic decision that I disagree with. With the prequels I think he over extended himself and hubris caused a few bad decisions as well but overall I think they are much better than are usually given credit for and the last thing I'd call them is uninspired.

I will say this though, generally games work better with minimal story because because it leaves more room for player agency. A simple story can just give context to the player to let them create their own narrative to a degree. That's when I think they work best since putting effort into making it story is a waste in the first place. But I also read a lot so that may influence it. I've certainly never played a game where I thought the story abd characters it portrayed were even on the level of a middling genre novel. It's just not a good medium. And of those that did get close that I can think of are mostly modern. Batman AA, Red Dead Redemption. Legend of Mana did have some nice little stories in it though I'll give it that.

>>5743479
You speak from a place of pure projection, purposely conflating disdain for the abomination of modern art with "not understanding it" is as lazy and ignorant an attempt to shut down resistance to the garbage you are pushing as I would expect from somebody with such abhorrent taste.

>>5743872
No. There is for sure lot's of bad visual art just like there's lots of bad writing, singing, video game making etc. But when you declare ALL contemporary art is crap you're literally being the stereotype of an old guy walking into a gallery and saying "what is this crap? My kid could do this!" You're a punchline to jokes and it's not simply because you're ignorant. There's nothing wrong with not understanding something, we all have plenty to learn. It's that you are happy in your ignorance and assume that because you don't get it there's nothing to "get". That is why I look down on you.

>>5743837
>I think they are much better than are usually given credit for and the last thing I'd call them is uninspired.
They're shit. They're only "good" by the standards of the modern Disney Star Wars

Their "vision" was fine, but the scripts were laughably bad and rushed, and the directing/editing was beyond lazy. When they weren't too busy tossing computer-animated garbage at our eyeballs, it was people walking and talking about srs bsness. It was like eating a cake that was 80% frosting: it doesn't actually make the cake taste better, it just makes it so rich that only a sugar-addled child could take more than 2 or 3 bites and still be enjoying themselves. There was a ton of wasted potential, too. Like instead of the climax of Ep2 being Yoda's "le epic laser sword duel no.4328" with Count Dooku, what if General Grevious in his prime wtfpwning a bunch of Jedi, so we actually perceive the droids as real threats going into the third movie instead of just the background fluff that the Jedi are cutting through to get to the plot?

>I will say this though, generally games work better with minimal story because because it leaves more room for player agency.
There has to be some happy middle-ground, between JRPGs whose narratives are complex to the point of being obtuse, and WRPGs where all everyone does is ape Dungeons and Dragons or Vampire: The Masquerade

>>5734571
This anon is right in the sense that Cartoons can overall do unrealistic things and get away with them, e.g., stretchy limbs, Unrealistic lighting colors. But real life cannot have these unrealistic lightings so by going to drab brown and grey real life art styles you lose out on what you're able to do

>>5733809
It's a nostalgia thing. Which idiots call "comfy" "soul" etc.

>>5744550
Lingo changes but it's always the same stuff.

>>5733809
Video games were about fun stunning visuals. Not grey and brown boring soulless gross photorealism cinematic hollywood garbage.

>>5744408
>Their "vision" was fine, but the scripts were laughably bad and rushed, and the directing/editing was beyond lazy

Lucas was never a great writer but it was deffinitely not lazy

>>5746114
>Lucas was never a great writer but it was deffinitely not lazy
The production values certainly weren't, but everything that Lucas himself had to contribute was: which is a tight script and nuanced directing

>>5735056
To play devil's advocate, that piece of "art" was purely a shitpost. There was an art gallery that had some bizarre restrictions on what could/couldn't be shown, so someone submitted something that technically followed those restrictions to the letter.
The problem is people who interpreted as serious and said "man, this really says something, I'm going to copy it."

>>5746773
>Going through hyperspace ain't like dusting crops boy.
>'George! You can type this shit, but you sure can't say it! Move your mouth when you're typing!'
>t. harrison ford

Go back and actually rewatch A New Hope. George Lucas was never a great writer, or even a particularly skilled director. His main genius is in ideas and overall structure. Empire and Return are better overall because he had a ton help from Kasdan on the actual script. Help that he mostly did not use on the prequels. As a result they're quite rough around the edges because of that (also because ge had to re-work what was happening with Jar Jar part way through) but they're certainly not lazy in any fashion. If anything his biggest problem was too much ambition that he couldn't deliver on.

>>5736645
Postmodernism is a necessary evil. History has always had a trend in art of
>standards get made
>people follow those standards to the letter
>people question if these standards are really necessary
>experiment and break those standards to determine what does and doesn't work
>create new standards and metrics to judge art
>cycle repeats in a couple generations
Eventually we will get out of postmodernism and people will start making good art again. Really the world never stopped, it's just not in vogue right now so it doesn't get called to attention, just like how whatever your favorite style of music was in the past is still getting made, it's just that those bands are obscure and niche since it's not what's popular right now.

>>5746813
>Go back and actually rewatch A New Hope.
Yes, and that strikes to the heart of my point: In many ways, Star Wars was a better movie in spite of Lucas rather than because of him. He exercised much less control over the actors which allowed them to veto idiotic script ideas. Budget constraints forced them to rub props down with dirt to make them actually seem like junk instead of spiffy sci fi tech. His directing was bad but the entire movie was saved from B-movie infamy thanks to famously brilliant editing.

>but they're certainly not lazy in any fashion.
They're lazy by technical standards

Phantom Menace's script was incoherent and did not have a clear protagonist or villain. Right off the bat, it gets bogged down in trade war politics before abruptly segwaying into "le epic laser sword duel no.0001". Why would the Trade Federation want to bring the heat down by murdering Jedi? Why would they use visible gas to try and kill the Jedi when Carbon Monoxide is odorless, colorless, and tasteless? It's like their motivations were never really thought out, and the fall-back answer always becomes "Palpatine did it" because it's [the force], I ain't gotta explain shit. Jar Jar Binks is a notorious example of a superficial character whose role in the plot is strictly minimal and his entire existence is to be dangling keys to amuse the children. Darth Maul never achieves the level of presence that Darth Vader made look easy. The script has "lazy, rushed, turned in after 1 draft," written all over it. And the directing style was even lazier. "Walk down this hall talking about serious business while I sit here on my fat ass not making the camera do anything interesting."

>If anything his biggest problem was too much ambition that he couldn't deliver on.
Nonsense, George's biggest problem was that he started buying into his own bullshit, and surrounded himself only with people who told him "yes", and this resulted in an effort that amounted to a well-polished turd

>>5746858
>Phantom Menace's script was incoherent and did not have a clear protagonist or villain. Right off the bat, it gets bogged down in trade war politics

Phantom Menace's real problem compared to New Hope is that while he'd always hoped to tell a bigger story George's assumption was that Star Wars was going to be a one-off so everything wraps up (well sort of). But with Phantom Menace it was planned as the first chapter in a trilogy and a lot of what's set up doesn't pay off till much later. Combine that with his less than great writing skills and the hubris of thinking he could or should do it all on his own the movies are pretty rough. (Though again so is New Hope)

Jar Jar is actually a very important character and central to what's going on, but the backlash to him was so severe that it impacted how much he was used in the other movies and though unconfirmed is probably why we got Dooku in the end. Here's a quick breakdown of what's actually going on in PM.

We learn later the whole trade war is a sham, Palpatine was playing both sides to start a glalactic conflict which he can use to overthrow the Jedi and become a glalactic emperor.

The Jedi themselves point out it's strange they'd be called to a trade dispute because it was all a ruse from the get go. The real reason was to get them tangled up with Jar Jar who is Palpatine's minion (either by choice or because he's so easily manipulated) so he can tamper with their ship forcing a landing on Tatooine where they will notice there's a kid with force energy that's off the charts and naturally take him for training.

That's the crux of what's going on in Phantom Menace, Palpatine had created Anakin and he was directing the Jedi to find him and begin the first stage of his training.

>>5748396
Cont

It might seem random but it's all carefully orchestrated and the seeds of his fall are all sown there. He's raised as a slave, taught that the republic as is is deeply corrupt already and he's introduced to a literal space princess who he would inevitably fall in love with and be part of his fall as a Jedi. It's far from perfect, there's some bad writing and goofy shit, but the absolute last thing it is is lazy.

>>5748396
this. Jar jar was supposed to be the original surprise antagonist but lucas chickened out because of the abysmal audience reaction. It would have felt insulting to the audience if he had turned out to be anything but a doofus. This was confirmed by several actors.

1. shouldn't have made jar jar such a hate able character
2. anakin was miscast with a piece of wood
3. the movies feel like a bunch of random things happening in sequence

>>5748434
He didn't really retcon him though, it's still clear if you pay attention that he's in league with Palpatine. We just never got the Darth Jar Jar we may have.

I am partially responsible though, I was one of those Star Wars super fans who was incredibly pissed and let down seeing PM when it first came out. And I didn't give Lucas any credit that he knew what he was doing. Ahh well.

>>5748396
Relying too much on background filler to provide context isn't the mark of a strong movie, it's the mark of a profoundly flawed movie that uses extra material as a crutch to justify lazy writing. ANH didn't need all this external exposition, because limitations forced the makers to weave it into the plot, omit the extraneous bits, and focus on the real important meat and potatoes of what's going on. The limitations forced there to be a sense of mystery that fans could fill in the gaps with their own imagination. The prequels did not have these gaps in the right places because they were too busy shoving light-saber fights into the audience's faces.

Jar Jar was simply not an important character in PM, at best a supporting role, and his character simply had no arc. Chewbacca could get away with it because he didn't talk or make a nuisance out of himself. That Jar-jar may be important later is extraneous to the fact that all he's doing in the present is acting like a doofus in a clear ploy to amuse children in the audience. Not only do people dislike doofy characters, they certainly aren't about to take them seriously as any kind of villain. Meanwhile, "Palpatine did it" becomes the star wars version of "it's just how magic works in this world, okay guys?!", you may have convinced yourself that everything checks out logically, but in practice, all you did was justify weak, lazy, writing, and people reacted accordingly

>>5748612
It's not background filler though, it's information you don't learn till later movies. I already explained why ANH was different in that way.. What you're saying about limitations is irrelevant. And Jar Jar is extremely important to what goes on. Screen time doesn't equal importantance.

>>5748626
>It's not background filler though
I'm not speaking from the context of a star wars fan. I'm speaking from the context of a general movie fan who ain't got the fucking time or patience for a movie that is going to "withhold" information from us for the promise of a future pay off, or tell us to go read companion material when something about the movie just doesn't make sense. That's just bad writing no matter how hard you try to rationalize it.

And no, Jar Jar could have been written entirely out of the story with extremely minimal change. That makes him a weak character. Again, this wasn't such a big deal with Chewbacca who acted more like a loyal dog than a proper character.

>>5748642
>I'm speaking from the context of a general movie fan who ain't got the fucking time or patience for a movie that is going to "withhold" information from us for the promise of a future pay off

It's okay if you only like stand alone movies but setting up events that later pay off is pretty common storytelling.

If you think Jar Jar could have been written out with no change then you obviously didn't understand even the simplified version of the plot I gave you which is pretty funny. He's Palpatine's tool with which the actual events all center around. He's central to everything that happens.

>>5748653
>It's okay if you only like stand alone movies but setting up events that later pay off is pretty common storytelling.
All movies, even sequels, should be good enough to stand on their own merits. ANH stands on its own merits. The Matrix stands on its own merits. Terminator 2 stands on its own merits. Even Marvel capeshit movies know well enough to stand on their own merits. 2 hours is about the upper limits of people's patience to sit and focus on a single story from start to finish. If you can't condense your idea into a block of time as small as that, you don't understand your idea as well as you think you do.

>He's Palpatine's tool with which the actual events all center around. He's central to everything that happens.
that's retarded on so many levels, not the least of which is you trying to shoehorn the sci fi version of a teletubby into a Sith Lord. You could come up with any number of much more interesting characters to do the things Jar Jar did. He's a character whose importance is, at best, very much forced and inorganic

>>5748674
Now you're just talking nonsense.

>>5733809
To me it’s a couple of things:
>nostalgia, ain’t gonna deny it.
>related to that, it just feels very videogamey. Pixel graphics could be used for computer desktop icons and other such things, but I can’t think of any application of low-poly models other than vidya. 3DCG animation and promo materials allowed for more sophisticated models, so 5th gen-looking models are instantly associated with things that I’ve lived for my entire life.
>the same appeal of Impressionist art, really; it gives the impression of a familiar environmental feature or an object or a character design or what have you and leaves something to the imagination. Banjo-Kazooie is a perfect example of this, being dreamlike in its fairytale theme and character design along with the absurd presentation by game design (tiny, isolated areas that somehow flow from some cavern, populated by things that seem to live perfectly full and fulfilling lives; hell, we could take it one step further and say that the dark, subterranean cave represents the depths of the subconscious, adding another layer to the idea of each world being a dream). The graphics, then, aid the dreamlike presentation by giving it that “almost there” feel—this thing isn’t a mountain, it’s a bunch of jagged edges and blocky sides, and yet you understand it as a mountain. This, of course, aids other games even without such an overt and poignant dream theme; OoT, Spyro, and Mega Man Legends are obvious examples of games that benefit from having detail left to the player’s imagination.

>>5748742
I don't have nostalgia goggles for the prequels that you probably have. I saw them as teenagers and even then they left a sour taste in my mouth. Looking back as an adult and analyzing them without the fan-blinders on, but as just another movie series in an endless array of them, their shortcomings become obvious, and they only seem like "the good old days" in the sense that modern Disney Star Wars movies are even shittier

>>5748781
I was 25 when Phantom Menace came out and as I mention here >>5748438 I also had a very negative reaction when I first saw it. It was only after the whole trilogy was out, time passed and I revisted them that I started picking up what I'd missed and I gained a better apprecatiin for what he was doing with PM.

And just to be clear I've never been saying it's as good as ANH or that either of them are perfect. But the ways it's less good aren't due to the limitations he had making the first movie or that he got lazy. It was all hubris.

>>5748674
>ANH stands on its own merits.

Well yes and no. A New Hope is probably my favorite as well, but it's not really as self contained as people imagine. If it was the only Star Wars movie ever made then it's weird fir there to be so much focus on Luke getting a magical laser sword handed down from his father. Which he then only ever uses once, to train badly with a robot drone.

That's some clumsy ass storytelling. It's like setting up a gun in the first act, following it closely through the second and then pretending it doesn't exist for the rest of the movie and it never goes off.

Another appealing thing about low poly graphics is that they're modder friendly.

Something I dislike about modern games is that the graphical bar is raised so high that you're pretty much locking modders out of the creative process. Either the tools don't exist or asset creation is so resource intensive that it's no longer feasible for amatuers. Compare the amount of user made content for Doom and Quake 1/2/3 to Rage, Doom 2016 and Quake Champions.

>>5750967
That is a solid point.

>>5750928
>That's some clumsy ass storytelling. It's like setting up a gun in the first act, following it closely through the second and then pretending it doesn't exist for the rest of the movie and it never goes off.
Not necessarily.

One of the running themes of Obi-wan's tutelage with Luke was how a jedi was more than simply waving a laser sword around, and we see multiple instances of him refraining from using the laser sword and using his wits, only pulling the sword out when he absolutely has too.

That Luke is some wet behind the ears farmboy who got his ass kicked by a sand-person and still mostly reaches for the blaster when he means business just shows his inexperience and vulnerability, and that's what makes us like him, and root for him when he uses the force in a way that complimented his farmboy skill set ("I used to bullseye womprats in my T-16...") to help him make a shot that was 1 in a million.. Compare that to Ren in the Disney Star Wars beating up a gang of miscreants by herself and by the end of the movie is going toe-to-toe with a sith lord even though she's never even held a lightsaber before

The ones that stand out do so due to good art direction

Good art direction is timeless