feel free to explain. but be nice enough to stick around when i point out where you're wrong/why i disagree. i don't like to talking to type half a page only to realize i'm talking to myself
is a failed attempt at making the game look real. It's an attempt to make the game look photo-realistic. did they succeed? no the characters look like shit. It's great for a video game, but if you compare it to real life people they look like sweaty plastic and are polygonal. they tried to make it look real. they failed.
can you point where (if ever) namco said they are going for real life depiction of characters. all namco has ever tried to do is emulate real aspect of MA and that too for the most part of it because they still incorporated some exaggeration and effects (lighting, fire, smackng people several feat in the air etc and not to mention the insane feats they have for the characters).
they never went for reality faithfully.
also, the game isn't even finished yet since these are from T6BR and are demos. and I'd love to see what you consider a real depiction of wings sprouting out of a man's back and horns and three eyes at his forehead. i don't know about you, but i never came across such things in real life 😂
is an attempt to make their game look like a cartoon. did they succeed?
proof that they were going for a cartoony look?
yeah they did; beautifully.
the characters are ugly as hell and thus, it looks shit. cartoon or not.
disproportional body parts, goofy expressions, vibrant colors. it looks EXACTLY like a cartoon. that was capcoms INTENTION, to make it look like a cartoon. so yeah they succeeded and tekken failed. congrats.
tekken never failed because tekken never went for real nor do you have proof of that. all they ever said was that they wanted to faithfully depict MA in their games.
so what is the most probable counter-argument? probably something that sounds similar to "well tekken graphics look more realistic so in the end their graphics ARE better!"
the most probable counter argument is that since the characters of SF look fugly and the game itself looks ugly, it is not great graphics. especially since the game looks and feels clunky as hell. tekken on the other hand looks good are smoother and thus look better.
theres nothing in there that says anything about the pictorial representation being realistic. in fact reality or a sub-word for it isnt mentioned once. thats because contrary to what you or anyone thinks the quality of graphics are not determined by how realistic they look. the quality of a graphic is determined by how well the end result matches the artist's intent.
okay, so tekken's original intent was to make the characters look good and smooth and have proper proportions. thus they succeeded right? especially given that the whole thing looks smooth and fluid and actually looks beautiful. as oppsoed to SF which looks and feels clunky, with ugly characters.
~Sado