Graphics vs. Art

[electrictroy]

I've noticed a tendency on this board for people to confuse these two terms:

- graphics
- art (or style)



To me, "graphics" refers to the technical merits of a game. i.e. Resolution. Flickering. # of polygons per frame. It's measureable & can be assigned numerical value.

"Art (or style)" refers to the creativity of the design team. Whether or not it's good, depends on the person viewing it. Some like cel-shading. Some don't. Some prefer realism. Other don't. It's subjective.




EXAMPLES:
The PS2's Ico has inferior-quality "graphics" (blurring/compression artifacts/flickering/aliasing flaws). Despite these technical flaws, many gamers say the "art/style" of Ico is the best of this generation.

The PS2's Gran Turismo 4 has superior-quality graphics (reflective surfaces/60 frames per second/no jaggies). However some gamers say its art/style is "too sterile".




(NOTE: The above were just examples... don't take it personally as a slam against your favorite game.)

troy

[javeryh]

I agree - the ART is all that matters as far as the visuals are concerned. This is why Viewtiful Joe, Windwaker, ICO, and similar games stand out (as well as excellent gameplay).

[gamereviewgod]

I believe art is created in any form. Those cars in GT are art just as much as someone who paints a car on a canvas. it may not be unique or stylish, but it's still art. I'm not arguing that Ico isn't special, it's just that art can be seen in any form.

[megashock5]

The art I see in Gran Turismo is the dedication and love shown by PD in getting the car models as perfect as the system can display them. The art I see in Katamari Damacy or Space Channel 5 is an art direction or style that is independent of, but enhanced by, high quality graphics rendering.

[SneakyPenguin]

For the whole art discussion, I point to one game: REZ. Face it, it has shitty, simplistic gameplay, is short as hell, and the graphics are all simple vector based. But the thing looks so god damned awesome, that it's elevated to a much higher status.

(Not bashing, Rez is one of my favorite games of al time)

[megashock5]

For the whole art discussion, I point to one game: REZ. Face it, it has shitty, simplistic gameplay, is short as hell, and the graphics are all simple vector based. But the thing looks so god damned awesome, that it's elevated to a much higher status.

(Not bashing, Rez is one of my favorite games of al time)


I think it's a case of the whole being more than the sum of the parts. Any individual element of Rez is okay, but the way the whole things works/looks/feels together is a great experience, above most 'games.'

Lumines is another example. It's a decent puzzler, has pretty good music, some interesting visual elements - but the whole thing works together in a way that almost takes you to another level. And, like Rez, has you almost creating some of the music while you're doing a convential game action (shooting, moving blocks) even though you're not playing a 'music game.'

[RelentlessRolento]

I think half the artistic value of games goes to how well a game plays. That in itself is an art form of its own. when gameplay + art + graphics merge are all A+, then you get a AAA title.

[electrictroy]

bump