Graphics in Video Games: Dragon's Crown

Dragon's Crown, an co-op action role-playing game made by Vanillaware and Atlus (the ones who also made Odin Sphere), was so far a great game. You basically play as one of the six characters, and you go through different levels in the game (through quests), either alone or with CPUs or other players. And to compare, it's similar to the gameplay style of Dungeon & Dragons and Golden Axe, with some differences. The thing I liked about the game, besides the gameplay, was the paint-like look of the entire game. Just like Odin Sphere, everything looked vibrant (and sometimes ominous), from how the scenery looked to how the graphics were animated. I wonder how long it took the designers to design all of the things in this game? Another question to be unanswered, until later...

How NES Box Art Were (In my Opinion)

From what I saw (through the internet), most NES box art look realistic, or, in other words, bad-ass. It looks like the art would be for a cover of some "epic", action-packed movie, but probably back then, it was a way to represent what the game is (or to mainly get consumers to buy the specific game). To contrast, Super Mario Bros. had a simple box art showing Mario's sprite in it, which gives the idea of what the game will look and might be like. For Ninja Gaiden, however, its box art shows a ninja with a burning city in the background, representing how awesome the game will be, but not what it will look like in the game. So basically, Super Mario Bros.'s box art sticks with the spirit of the graphics itself, while Ninja Gaiden's box art went to more of a movie look  to make itself more appealing to the consumers. I'm not saying they're bad, just that some bad-ass box art were too emphasized. But, I do like them though. I guess it was a way to get them on the market.

Graphics in Video Games: Rayman

Rayman (PS1 | Sega Saturn | Atari Jaguar | PC | GBC | GBA | DS

Ah, Rayman. Loved the first game that came out for the PlayStation One, but I hated it for being  pretty hard (in my opinion). Besides the difficulty, the stages and characters were designed pretty well for a 2D Platform game, consisting of cartoon-y sprites and fantasy-cartoon stages. Later,  Rayman 2: The Great Escape came out, but the game went to more of a 3D platform style with fantasy-cartoon looking graphics like before, but little "darker" at points of the game. This use of graphics and models  had continued in games like Rayman 3: Hoodlum Havoc, and it stayed for a while with other games of the franchise, but Ubisoft, the original studio that made the games, went back to what was originally, well, Rayman. So, we got ourselves Rayman Origins and Rayman Legends, and both are great games. They both brought back the original gameplay from the first game, but with more features in it. The graphics looks awesome; Rayman Origins took on a cartoon look with "painted" worlds (not painted, but close enough to be), while Rayman Legends took on a paint-like look entirely, making both games appealing to a wider audience. I can say, it was a good choice. It's a good thing Rayman's back.

*Sorry again for how the images are placed

Rayman 2 (PS1 | PS2 | N64 | Dreamcast | Windows | GBC | DS | 3DS | iOS

Rayman 3 (PS2 | PS3 | Xbox | Xbox 360 | Gamecube | PC | N-Gage | Java ME)

Rayman Origins (PS3 | Xbox 360 | Wii | PC | PS Vita | 3DS)

Rayman Legends (PS3 | Xbox 360 | Wii U | PC | PS Vita)

Evolution and Reincarnation of Video Game Design

Super Mario Bros. (NES)

As we all know, when the video game home consoles came to existence (somewhere inbetween 1970-1989), they had 8-bit graphics; all coded for everything character-like, enemy-like, and stage-like. Not much color can be embedded within these 8-bit games for like Atari and the Nintendo Entertainment System (NES), but it made what those games are to this day. When time had passed, the SNES came out, and it had more memory capacity then the past consoles before it, meaning that more colors can be used, resulting in what is called 16-bit Graphics. This was also the time when game designers were able to draw out their work in the games instead of coding it. More years has passed, and more consoles came in with more memory capacity, making it possible for 3D models and slightly better graphics. And so on so forth, we see what we see today: full-on animated 3D models with high definition graphics. You might think the 8-bit and 16-bit graphics extinct from video games, but they didn't, actually. Some people these days bring back these kind of graphics in their games in a way to bring back the good old days, and as a result, worked great. It's a surprise to still see these graphics back to life, and hopefully they will stay for a while longer.

*Sorry how the images were place

Earthbound (SNES)

Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time (Nintendo 64)

Portal 2 (PS3 | Xbox 360 | PC)

Terraria (PS3 | Xbox 360 | PC | iOS)

Graphics in Video Games: Odin Sphere

One of the video games that fascinates me was Odin Sphere for the PlayStation 2. It's a 2D fantasy action RPG video game where you play as characters from 5 different opposing clans while you follow their story. The game is great (even though I didn't beat the game yet), but what was interesting was the design of the entire video game itself. The characters, the scenery, the stages, the enemies, everything looks like it was kind of painted; including the animation was great. The thing is, I wonder how long the game designers took to make all these animations what it is now? Who knows. It's a good game though.

What Annoys Me in Certain Compositions of Ads

What annoys me in certain compositions of ads is when a design doesn't portray the product, or it presents something else. The designers do a good job with their designs, but the message sometimes get thrown off. An example was an ad that a classmate showed during a Graphic Design class during the time I was in High School. I couldn't find the ad, but as far as I remember, it was a young woman's head that filled the entire left side of the ad, and her eye was on fire (but she wasn't in pain; it's, of course, fake). I thought it looked like an ad for some kind of make-up, but you want to know what it really is trying to sell? A fireplace. Yep, An ad that presents a fireplace as a product to the young adults. I understand what the ad is doing, but it almost looks like that the fireplace is used to burn your skin or something. The ad just doesn't work.