Are you even capable of discussing graphics alone?
To some extent I think I am, but then I'd argue you cannot completely remove a piece of art, in this present discussion the in-game art, from its context when discussing its qualities. You wouldn't hold any game art to the same "quality standards" as Leonardo Da Vinci paintings, would you? Similarly, "ranking" cave paintings by the same quality standards you would appply to classical paintings would be rather retarded, I think.
Similarly, directly comparing pixel art to say ink drawings is a bit meaningless as they're very different mediums. Well, comparing ink drawings to photographs to oil paintings wouldn't make too much sense either, to be honest.
In the same vein, trying to rank 8-bit and 16-bit pixel art on the same scale is rather pointless too. No wonder there are separate categories for each type of art in demoscene competitions for each category (e.g. "oldskool pixelgfx", "modern pixelgfx", "raytraced gfx", "freestyle" which could include scanned traditional art, etc.)
they're making their new game on unreal. Now why would they do that if it looks "perfect"?
I could think of a very long list of reasons for switching the engine, none of them having anything to do with the quality of the graphics. But if you *really* want to know, perhaps ask them?
Wtf do you even mean by perfect?!
Thanks for asking! By perfect I mean the graphics of Age of Decadence continued to amaze me and evoke feelings of awe and wonderment while I was roaming its desert filled landscapes illuminated by the golden light of the dying sun. And that quality has nothing to do with a few blurry textures here and there, or some blocky low-poly models. Those are technicalities, and art is greater than the sum of its parts.
Yes, otherwise the game is great, one of my all time favorites, believe it or not.
Mine too, and I believe you.
And yet it's rather ugly. Like, below average on a scale from atrocious, offensively ugly to breathtakingly beautiful. Distractingly enough ugly.
Sorry to hear you had been distracted by the graphics. It never happened to me -- quite the opposite, as I described above. Many times I just stood there for minutes, taking in the scenery while listening to the phenomenal soundtrack. *Never once* did I think "oh this game could be so great if it wasn't ruined by the horrible graphics".
...
Yet all this doesn't say that much about the art of Age of Decadence in an "absolute" sense, I hope you realise that. We just enjoy different things.
Now I am genuinely curious, and I'm asking this without irony: can you list your top 5 games where you're 100% happy with the graphics? Preferably RPGs, but it can be anything.
if you need "better" gfx, I think you're in the wrong forum...
Now this is just retarded.
Not really. Fans of more cerebral types of games (RPG, Strategy, Adventure, etc.) have always prioritised subtance over style (both the creators and the players). All the kids in the 80s who only cared about gfx were playing actions games and shot'em ups, then FPSs in the 90s and beyond. This hasn't changed much at all to this day.