What gives a game S O U L?

[Anonymous No.6656452]

I know soul has become a retarded meme lately. But what is soul exactly? What qualities imbue a game with that elusive soul feel? Serious answers only please. Do not troll.

[Anonymous No.6656467]

>shit from my childhood = soul
>shit from your childhood = soulless
It's the largest bullshit ever.

[Anonymous No.6656485]

>>6656467
haha, look at the zoomer

[Anonymous No.6656495]

>>6656467
It's not always a meme though.
It's doubly true of things that are massive merchandise giants now because they've become extremely rigid about how the IP is able to be potrayed so being too fun and expressive is seen as too risky for the IP owner for some god forsaken reason.

Also lots of corners get cut to save money.

[Anonymous No.6656502]

[Anonymous No.6656513]

>>6656495
I agree, yes. I think if a game's look is set by the artist's interest or some decision made about what's best for the game, it has soul. If the game's look and feel is set because it's an IP and they have to be on-brand, it's soulless.

[Anonymous No.6656515]

A passionate individual or team creating a specific experience without the sole intent of making money

Or

An individual or team constructing an original idea regardless of if that idea follows conventional wisdom or is even particularly sound in theory

So basically people with passion not compromising on their vision

[Anonymous No.6656578]

>>6656452
Unique characteristics give something Soul. You take, like, these mobile games. Most of them are made to sell and rarely there's some artist behind wanting to create something there. It's all formulaic, do this, this and that and you get a game that's attractive and that will sell, and games made this way end up feeling same-y or, as most would put it, generic. All you see are pieces that follow a strict formula with little to no artistic freedom, hence, soulless. That's an ever increasing problem with modern games, as nowadays we have so many things that are tried and true cosumer bait that it's just too easy for big corporations to create canned games that attract a mindless mob and takes space away from us getting new works of art. This also applies to devs being lazy and using generic methods to manufacture new games, and this usually happens remakes/remasters, like the shit that were those mobile FFV and VI "remasters." That art was utter canned crap, the only thing that retained identity there were the characters pictures, the rest was Square being greedy mofos

[Anonymous No.6656650]

>>6656467
retarded, but best answer yet

[Anonymous No.6656721]

>>6656578
Poor example. The sprites in that remaster are in fact "new art" based more closely on the Amano designs (if using concept art invalidates the sprite art, the same is true of the original). It's ugly as hell, but you've defeated your own argument as to why; and this leads us right back to the fact that soul means nothing more than "I like it".

[Anonymous No.6656797]

>>6656721
Good try, but you completely missed my point. The problem there isn't what the sprites are based on, but how they're drawn. The sprites were redrawn using canned methods of lighting and coloring, which gives them that generic mobile game mark that completely ruins the original's style and makes it look like utter crap, just because Square can't care enough and just needs to milk that cow with the least effort possible

[Anonymous No.6657028]

>>6656452
A clear vision materialized through people who understand it. Many modern games lack "soul" because they're made by thousands of people with concepts decided in meetings instead of one madlad forcing his shit down of everyones throat. That's why modern games often feel like theme parks.

[Anonymous No.6657035]

>>6656452
Soul is style over substance
Souless is substance over style

[Anonymous No.6657060]

>>6657035
The whole "style over substance" meme never made sense to me.
At least SOUL vs Soulless has a degree of truth to it, even if it's done in a cheeky way.
When people use the "style over substance" skit, they always do it in a very serious tone, and it still is empty as fuck.
I'd say the very "style over substance" phrase is, in itself, very soulless.

[Anonymous No.6657068]

>>6657060
The real chads understand that style is part of the substance.

[Anonymous No.6657098]

>>6657060
Style over substance means you like the game's art direction, graphics, music, story, or other superfluous aspect about the game more than the real meat of the game, the game's design and controls.

[Anonymous No.6657146]

>>6656467
As far as I've been able to tell, pretty much this, but sometimes I'll also see people say "soul" when they actually mean is "charm".

[Anonymous No.6658642]

>>6656467
this reeks of zoomer butthurt someone shittalked his favorite game.
Soul is real but difficult to quantify, and has nothing to do with age. Rain World [2017] has more soul than Mario Advance 2 [2001]. mocking "old good new bad" is just a shield for the laziness of modern game design.

If the developers loved the game they were working on, you can just tell. I consider that to be "soul". Look at Super Metroid, or the Metal Slug games. It's all about the attention to detail and creativity/elegance of the game design.

[Anonymous No.6658646]

>>6657146
Honestly a lot of people say soul when they just mean "this image has lighting"

[Anonymous No.6658647]

>>6657060
When a game looks and sounds good, has flashy animations, etc, things that are related to production value, but has shallow mechanics and lack depth. Symphony of the Night is the shining example of style over substance.

[Anonymous No.6658729]

>>6657035
You can have both an appealing style and substantial gameplay though. In fact, when designing a game it's important for it to both look good and be fun. 'Soulless' games usually lack both a defining style and interesting gameplay, eg smartphone games like Homescapes.

"Soullessness" is a lot more prevalent now, or at least easier to spot, because the tools to create video games are now able to replace a lot more of the human input that used to be necessary to make a game. It's why so many smartphone games look so similar despite being made by people living in different continents.

[Anonymous No.6658735]

>>6657035
Spoken like a true 80 IQ zoom.

[Anonymous No.6658959]

>>6656452
I've always taken SOUL to mean that feel when you suspect the devs of the game really cared about what they were making beyond just what was required as part of their job. Games where you can really feel their love for what they're creating, and for the hobby in general. Still too broad and subjective to really be a concrete definition.

[Anonymous No.6658964]

There are two ways a game can be soulful in my opinion.
1 (the more accurate one). you can tell the developers and designers really put a lot of love into the game, tried their best, and honestly wanted to make a great and fun product for the sake of the love of video games.
2. a gut reaction from seeing something that resonates with your childhood memories of playing video games

[Anonymous No.6659161]

>Mass market consumer throw away product sanctioned by a large corporate company
Yeah you can really tell the dev's "cared" about putting out whatever they thought the target demographic were into so they could get that paycheck at the end of the week.
M U H S O U L

[Anonymous No.6659175]

>>6656467
>implying video games aren’t getting shittier

[Anonymous No.6659178]

There is some irony that indie devs who most obviously put love and effort into their work because they love games and are doing it as a hobby instead of because their corporate masters are paying them for it are the ones whose games are most frequently derided as soulless.

[Anonymous No.6659203]

>>6656452
I think a lot of it has to do with the number of people working on it. The more people work on something, the less responsible they feel for the end result. It's way easier to pour "soul" into something that feels like it's actually yours. That is really what has changed in more recent times. Games are more and more controlled by shareholders, marketing people and management types. The people making the decisions are often not the people who actually implement them and sure as fuck not the people who actually love playing games.

[Anonymous No.6660672]

>>6659203
>>6657028
This

[Anonymous No.6661187]

[Anonymous No.6661195]

>>6661187
This is a weak example since the different costumes thing was in that game only, while MP1 and MP3 are still soulful.

[Anonymous No.6661201]

>>6656467
It's just coincidence that you were born in a soulless era, zoomer

[Anonymous No.6661203]

>>6661195
2 is more soulful and 1 and 3 tho

[Anonymous No.6661214]

>>6656452
>But what is soul exactly?
Simple:
>Thing I like: SOUL
>Thing I don't like: SOULLESS
>>6656467
This too.

Every nigger actually trying to rationalize this meme made for inarticulate retarded zoomers is just being pretentious and is clearly from reddit considering they're taking it seriously.

[Anonymous No.6661480]

>possesses more soul than all console games combined in your path

[Anonymous No.6661523]

>>6656452

the lack of soul is characterised by 1 of 2 things, as near as i can tell. Either,

> the recycling, rehashing, porting, or otherwise re-releasing of a title who's development seems to have missed the point of design choices made in the original and discarded them in ignorance or incompetence.

or

>development/design choices that mimic other projects for superficial or nonsensical reasons that make no sense in the overall's game design, or failed to understand why it was used originally in what they were mimicking.

[Anonymous No.6661717]

>>6656452
SOUL
>Castlevania 1, 3, 4, Rondo of Blood, Bloodlines, Symphony of the Night, Lament of Innocence
>Tomb Raider 1, 2, 3, 4
>Mario 64
>Banjo Kazooie
>Syphon Filter
>Metal Gear Solid
>Crash Bandicoot 1, 2, 3
>Spyro 1, 2, 3
>Twisted Metal 2, 3
>Donkey Kong Country 1, 2
>Thief 1, 2
>Half-Life
>Ultimate Doom
>Quake
>Duke Nukem 3D
>Earthworm Jim 1, 2
>Street Fighter 2, Third Strike, Alpha 3
>Mortal Kombat 1, 2, 3
>Chrono Trigger
>Ape Escape
>Resident Evil 2, 3
>Dino Crisis 1, 2
>Elder Scrolls Daggerfall, Morrowind, Oblivion, Skyrim
>Dead Space
>Demons Souls
>Pokemon Blue, Red, Yellow, Silver
>Ducktales
>Nioh
>Ico
>Rainbow Six 1, 2, 3


SOULLESS
>Uncharted 1, 2, 3, 4
>Last of Us 1, 2
>God of War 4
>Thief 4
>Final Fantasy XIII, XIV, XV
>GTA 5
>Portal 2
>Journey
>Heavy Rain
>Far Cry 3
>Little Big Planet 2
>Dark Souls 1, 2, 3
>Assassins Creed (all of them)
>Killzone (all of them)
>Borderlands 1, 2, 3
>Death Stranding
>Overwatch
>Doom Eternal
>Soul Calibur 3, 4
>Tekken 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

There's no explanation for it. That's just the way it is.

[Anonymous No.6661730]

>>6656452
Easiest answer is, "they put effort into the game."

Even if it was just trying to push it out the door for money, if they still put effort behind it, it will have "soul".

[Anonymous No.6661785]

>>6661201
Based

[Anonymous No.6661807]

>>6661717
>SOULLESS
>Dark Souls 1, 2, 3

[Anonymous No.6661971]

>>6656467
It literally doesn't mean anything other than this
It's just like virgin vs chad thing. Regardless of whatever it originally mean, lowest common denominator always brings it back to thing I like good, thing I don't like bad

[Anonymous No.6662081]

>>6656452
soul = developer limitations based off of hardware, budget, and imagination combined with trial and effort to realize the functional limitations of not only your efforts in your field you are working on in the game, but also the technical side.

[Anonymous No.6662315]

>>6661717
I'm with you on 4 but Soul Calibur 3 had soul incarnate

[Anonymous No.6662432]

>>6659178
Indies are soulless for different reasons. All they end up doing is creating inferior copies of games that they like.

[Anonymous No.6662532]

I think smaller and more personal projects are innately more soulful. Older games in general tended to be made by smaller teams, so the soul was more apparent.
When you play the original Doom you can feel the influence of a group of 20-somethings in the early 90's who love Aliens and D&D and heavy metal, and that's soul.
When you play modern Doom, all you feel is Bethesda, their committees, their play-testers, endless grunt artists modeling floor textures or little bits of gristle, and that's not soul.

[Anonymous No.6662547]

>>6662432
Some indie games have undeniable soul. Touhou is pure soul. Minecraft has a lot of soul, love it or hate it.

[Anonymous No.6663821]

>>6661717
Dark souls 1 and Portal 2 are fucking good, I enjoy Zelda more but Dark souls 1 gave so much of a zelda exploration, for lack of a better word, vibe and advanced 3d zelda combat. Portal 2 is portal 1 but better in every way and SO many people fucking enjoy it, I bought it for my 12 year old niece before the virus and she LOVED it. Just cause you dont like a game does not at all =/= souless. Oh god, and dont get me fucking started on yellow and silver.

[Anonymous No.6664429]

>faggots are actually trying to pretentiously rationalize retarded memespeak for thing I like = good, thing I don't like = bad
I wish normalfags never came here.

[Anonymous No.6664430]

>>6656502
this is delusional

[Anonymous No.6664436]

>>6661717
>SOUL
>Skyrim
>Twisted Metal 3
>Tomb Raider 4
>Mortal Kombat 3
>Dino Crisis
>Lament of Innocnece
Jesus fucking christ kill yourself

[Anonymous No.6664446]

The more effort and care was put into a game the more soul it has

[Anonymous No.6664790]

>>6664430
i know i cant believe they didnt think we'd notice the removed detail, removed tiles, and copy+pasted backgrounds

[Anonymous No.6664796]

>>6656452
>>6656467
Soul is zoomer slang for what everyone here called charm

[Anonymous No.6664828]

>British development team
It's not the only way for a game to have soul, but it basically guarantees it.

[Anonymous No.6664852]

>>6664828
>water drops hurt you
Definitely not

[Anonymous No.6664858]

>>6664790
It’s not supposed to be the same world. It’s a nightmare version of the same world. I don’t know what’s hard for people to get about that. If they wanted the game to be the same stylistically they would’ve kept it the same or similar at least. I also hate these comparisons because they ignore the numerous graphical upgrades in the game.

[Anonymous No.6664868]

>>6664858
>numerous graphical upgrades
>missing details and tiles

its sad to see someone so brainwashed that they defend this soulless garbage

[Anonymous No.6664882]

>>6664868
>put game on gba
>poorly backlight unsaturated screen washes pastel Kirby out against the pastel background
>cliffs essentially look like brown squares with green on top
I don’t know if you’ve ever emulated Kirby on GBA but it’s not nice without a backlight anon. There’s a lot of clear reasons there was a style change. It’s also a different game story wise and not a straight remake. I also don’t think any of the Kirby games keep the same style between them much like Mario games are. They each have their own look. I’m not even saying the new one is better just pointing out a lot of facts you aren’t considering and you’re sperging out about it

[Anonymous No.6664917]

>>6664882
Not the anon you're replaying to, but he's right. The original is clearly nicer, and much better thought-out graphically.

[Anonymous No.6664928]

>>6664917
You're really retarded

[Anonymous No.6664948]

>>6664917
I’m the anon you just replied too. I do prefer the look of the original. I just get why they made the changes they did and there was a lot of technical improvements in all fairness. But cute paste monsters and backgrounds both doesn’t work in the GBAs screen and doesn’t scream nightmare.

[Anonymous No.6664962]

I think soul is a variety of things coming together; for me it's :

- the developer seems to care; minor details show time and attention paid to the game, something that was achievable more easily in a small group of people working on a game together instead of what you have now
- the game tries hard to be fun and interesting, de-emphasizing that it's ultimately just a consumer product meant to sell.
- game has a coherent aesthetic that works
- a certain intangible, magical quality that arises out of the combination of these factors.

My 2 cents.

[Anonymous No.6665597]

>>6662432
That's because many indie games are all substance no style. At least they're better than modern AAA who are no style no substance

[Anonymous No.6666918]

>>6664962
>- game has a coherent aesthetic that works
I think that's a big part of it.
For example, Diablo 2 Act 1. This is such a memorable part of videogames as a whole, everyone who played it, even if only once at someone's house, would remember it to this day. The artstyle, the music, the ambient, the sounds, the lighting, the design of the items, the pacing, the characters, the monsters, etc. It's all near perfect. Only problem I can think of is how the monastery may be a little too big.

[Anonymous No.6667156]

>>6656452
>What gives a game S O U L?
playing it when you were between 5 and 17yo

[Anonymous No.6667651]

>>6667156
Some stuff later than that still had SOUL to me

[Anonymous No.6668174]

A good indicator is how many people's name you can associate with a game.

[Anonymous No.6668197]

>>6668174
The more names, the less soul?

[Anonymous No.6668295]

>>6668197
Usually, yeah. If you have a bunch of faceless business suits making important decisions (like it's done these days) then you just know what you get is a faceless product.

[Anonymous No.6669520]

>>6661717
>skyrim
be a little more subtle with your bait