I'm wondering if I'm the only one who really, really hated the shift in art direction from ME1 to ME2. Everything in ME1 was sleek and beautiful and inspired curiosity in the game universe - it was a truly superb atmosphere. Everything in ME2 looked like someone had thrown a bucket of black paint on it. I'm not sure whether this was an attempt to create a darker atmosphere for the game, but if so it really didn't work, as I felt ME1 was much more suspenseful.
Oh, and the armor in ME2 looked blocky and absurd. I'd take the spandex suit light armor over that any day.
Art Direction
Débuté par
Oblarg
, oct. 21 2010 03:43
Retour en haut
#2
Posté 21 octobre 2010 - 04:47
MrFob
-
- Members
- 5 413 messages
That is something I wasn't entirely happy with either. It was definitely intended that way since they wanted to go for a darker and grittier atmosphere. It is also the places you are in. In ME1, you were in places like the presidium or Novaria, centers of power and wealth while in ME2, mos times you are on Omega, in the wards or on Tuchanka, kind of out in the the slums.
What worries me a little is that they say they want to make ME3 even darker. I think the right way to do that is like it was done on Novaria. I found the world very dark. Morally ambiguous people plotted and schemed and quite a few times people die. But it all happens under a surface which is sleek and shiny. Illium tried to do the same thing but didn't quite accomplish it as well IMO.
I hope BW remembers that it is often more interesting to tell the darkest plots in the brightest environments.
What worries me a little is that they say they want to make ME3 even darker. I think the right way to do that is like it was done on Novaria. I found the world very dark. Morally ambiguous people plotted and schemed and quite a few times people die. But it all happens under a surface which is sleek and shiny. Illium tried to do the same thing but didn't quite accomplish it as well IMO.
I hope BW remembers that it is often more interesting to tell the darkest plots in the brightest environments.
#3
Posté 21 octobre 2010 - 05:15
Foolsfolly
-
- Members
- 4 770 messages
I don't think of Noveria as a place of power and wealth. It's like a giant nearly empty train station. And Ferros was utterly crap looking, the ship in the middle of the colony didn't even look like a ship.
Over all, the style of the game didn't change that much. This is also shown by the simple fact that much of the NPC outfits, tilesets, and the like are completely reused in ME2.
It still felt like the same art direction.
Over all, the style of the game didn't change that much. This is also shown by the simple fact that much of the NPC outfits, tilesets, and the like are completely reused in ME2.
It still felt like the same art direction.
#4
Posté 21 octobre 2010 - 06:32
SSV Enterprise
-
- Members
- 1 668 messages
I thought the art direction was fantastic in both games. I don't think the direction changed between the games, only the locations at which the direct was applied. Tuchanka is a bombed-out world littered with rubble, and Omega is a crime-ridden, grimy space station. The "sleek and beautiful" look doesn't really work for them. Meanwhile, the Citadel, Ilium, and Cerberus facilities maintained that futuristic look. There's also the organic feel of Collector environments, and the varied atmospheres of uncharted worlds (whereas the first game had no atmosphere to the uncharted worlds at all, other than blahhhhhhh)
#5
Posté 21 octobre 2010 - 06:37
GodWood
-
- Members
- 7 954 messages
I hated the 'sexing up' of squadmates armour.
#6
Posté 21 octobre 2010 - 06:45
SSV Enterprise
-
- Members
- 1 668 messages
That's not so much an alteration to the design of armor, but rather a decision to remove armor-wearing entirely.
To which I say: This is stupid!
To which I say: This is stupid!
#7
Posté 21 octobre 2010 - 08:00
kraidy1117
-
- Members
- 14 910 messages
Oblarg wrote...
I'm wondering if I'm the only one who really, really hated the shift in art direction from ME1 to ME2. Everything in ME1 was sleek and beautiful and inspired curiosity in the game universe - it was a truly superb atmosphere. Everything in ME2 looked like someone had thrown a bucket of black paint on it. I'm not sure whether this was an attempt to create a darker atmosphere for the game, but if so it really didn't work, as I felt ME1 was much more suspenseful.
Oh, and the armor in ME2 looked blocky and absurd. I'd take the spandex suit light armor over that any day.
#8
Posté 21 octobre 2010 - 12:17
Water Dumple
-
- Members
- 706 messages
Mass Effect 2's art direction changed?
Really, it looked almost the exact same to me, merely a different setting and more grave situations. Geographic geometry is smooth and shiny, the characters are more beautiful than what is realistic, their personalities are clearly crafted to be liked, and the whole design seems generally better than reality. It's a great art style, and has a way of presenting even the darkest of situations in a beautiful light (literally, in fact, as the lighting in ME2 is great). The main difference is just that ME2's graphics are better in general than ME1's, what with being three years newer and all, so you can see more detail looking closely at textures and geometry.
Really, it looked almost the exact same to me, merely a different setting and more grave situations. Geographic geometry is smooth and shiny, the characters are more beautiful than what is realistic, their personalities are clearly crafted to be liked, and the whole design seems generally better than reality. It's a great art style, and has a way of presenting even the darkest of situations in a beautiful light (literally, in fact, as the lighting in ME2 is great). The main difference is just that ME2's graphics are better in general than ME1's, what with being three years newer and all, so you can see more detail looking closely at textures and geometry.
#9
Posté 21 octobre 2010 - 12:25
SSV Enterprise
-
- Members
- 1 668 messages
Characters are made to be liked, except, you know, Jack.
#11
Posté 21 octobre 2010 - 01:31
Tyrannosaurus Rex
-
- Members
- 10 800 messages
The only thing that slightly bothered me was the whole red/orange colour dominating most the of time, sometimes I just miss the relaxing blue colours of ME1. That and the squadmembers "armor" (but I wouldn't put that in the art direction).
#12
Posté 21 octobre 2010 - 04:26
Marbazoid
-
- Members
- 299 messages
The main difference that I noticed in ME2 is that everything is darker and more metallic. In ME1 everything looks plastic, like a Star Wars set.
Not sure if I prefer one over the other.
Not sure if I prefer one over the other.
#13
Posté 21 octobre 2010 - 05:04
Oblarg
-
- Members
- 243 messages
There was very clearly a change in art direction. The bright colors and large amounts of bloom were gone, and everything looked much darker and less interesting. Shepard's armor looked absurd (especially the shoulderpads) in ME2, as well. Characters themselves (especially faces) looked less smooth and natural, as well.
I think the person who mentioned telling a dark plot in a bright environment hit the nail on the head - in ME1 I felt that there was lots in the galaxy to lose if I failed, because I enjoyed the game environment. In ME2, everything was so damn ugly and uninteresting that I didn't feel that same motivation (though, in all honestly, it could have just been the really weak plot that got to me).
For example, the Citadel - I loved the way the Citadel looked in ME1, even the wards. It felt smooth and slick and neat and really bled this cool sci-fi atmosphere. In ME2, it was just dark and drab and uncompelling.
I think the person who mentioned telling a dark plot in a bright environment hit the nail on the head - in ME1 I felt that there was lots in the galaxy to lose if I failed, because I enjoyed the game environment. In ME2, everything was so damn ugly and uninteresting that I didn't feel that same motivation (though, in all honestly, it could have just been the really weak plot that got to me).
For example, the Citadel - I loved the way the Citadel looked in ME1, even the wards. It felt smooth and slick and neat and really bled this cool sci-fi atmosphere. In ME2, it was just dark and drab and uncompelling.
#14
Posté 21 octobre 2010 - 05:16
SimonTheFrog
-
- Members
- 1 656 messages
The way i see it is that they yanked up the contrast in ME2.
In ME1 the colours are subtle and smooth, pastel even. In ME2 you have a wider graduation range and more vivid colours, darker corners and brighter highlights. Not sure if that's "gritty".
I mean Omega is gritty from its leveldesign, i.e. it has garbage in corners and lots of dark areas, pipes and neon-signs and Tuchanka has it's bombed construction site appeal
But i'm not sure if the general game is grittier from a graphical perspective. I think the gritty refers more to the missions and the subjects Shepard talks about. Btw, i felt, that Novera was dark too. Not graphically but it felt cold and hopeless after doing the sidequests there in a general aftertaste. Its one of my most favourite areas of the two games sofar because of its awesome twisted quest design.
Also, not a graphics thing but a levedesign thing: the details of each level increased heavily. One room on zakera contains more "stuff" than the whole Noveria port hub.
About the crewmembers and their costumes: i can see what's the concept there. They didn't want to have just more soldiers at your side, but each one with a very distinct personality. Again, it's the dirty dozens theme where each part of the crew is a story in itself. Pretty much like the x-men, too. Therefore they decided to have each of them wear his or her own costume (i'm using the word because it fits better than armor or uniform) that supports and underlines the personality.
But, as i mentioned the x-men: this is the problem! i's more like a cartoon (in a neutral sense, not judging. Its different ways of telling a story thats all) than a grown-up sci-fi. And that's a decision i personally don't like. I can understand it but i don't like it.
Especially in cases of Samara it just doesn't make sense in so many ways that it really hurts. She is described as very old and living by a strict warrior code. So, i would think of signs of old age on her and clothing that underlines her dedication to combat and non-personal way of living. More like a robe, i guess or worn out combat suit. I mean, she's in combat her whole life, that should be reflected by the stuff she wears. But what we got is a 80's rollerskate-show suit with a cleavage of 20years old on high heels. And the breather of course. Something went wrong there, cleary
In ME1 the colours are subtle and smooth, pastel even. In ME2 you have a wider graduation range and more vivid colours, darker corners and brighter highlights. Not sure if that's "gritty".
I mean Omega is gritty from its leveldesign, i.e. it has garbage in corners and lots of dark areas, pipes and neon-signs and Tuchanka has it's bombed construction site appeal
But i'm not sure if the general game is grittier from a graphical perspective. I think the gritty refers more to the missions and the subjects Shepard talks about. Btw, i felt, that Novera was dark too. Not graphically but it felt cold and hopeless after doing the sidequests there in a general aftertaste. Its one of my most favourite areas of the two games sofar because of its awesome twisted quest design. Also, not a graphics thing but a levedesign thing: the details of each level increased heavily. One room on zakera contains more "stuff" than the whole Noveria port hub.
About the crewmembers and their costumes: i can see what's the concept there. They didn't want to have just more soldiers at your side, but each one with a very distinct personality. Again, it's the dirty dozens theme where each part of the crew is a story in itself. Pretty much like the x-men, too. Therefore they decided to have each of them wear his or her own costume (i'm using the word because it fits better than armor or uniform) that supports and underlines the personality.
But, as i mentioned the x-men: this is the problem! i's more like a cartoon (in a neutral sense, not judging. Its different ways of telling a story thats all) than a grown-up sci-fi. And that's a decision i personally don't like. I can understand it but i don't like it.
Especially in cases of Samara it just doesn't make sense in so many ways that it really hurts. She is described as very old and living by a strict warrior code. So, i would think of signs of old age on her and clothing that underlines her dedication to combat and non-personal way of living. More like a robe, i guess or worn out combat suit. I mean, she's in combat her whole life, that should be reflected by the stuff she wears. But what we got is a 80's rollerskate-show suit with a cleavage of 20years old on high heels. And the breather of course. Something went wrong there, cleary
Modifié par SimonTheFrog, 21 octobre 2010 - 05:23 .
#15
Posté 21 octobre 2010 - 05:45
Oblarg
-
- Members
- 243 messages
SimonTheFrog wrote...
The way i see it is that they yanked up the contrast in ME2.
In ME1 the colours are subtle and smooth, pastel even. In ME2 you have a wider graduation range and more vivid colours, darker corners and brighter highlights.
That's certainly a part of it, yes.
#16
Posté 21 octobre 2010 - 05:54
DarthCaine
-
- Members
- 7 175 messages
What? IMO everything in ME1 looked bland. In ME2 there were lots of pretty colors that gave that sci-fi feeling
#17
Posté 21 octobre 2010 - 06:34
Trix-Rabbit
-
- Members
- 395 messages
The big difference between me1 and me2 was content vs quality, Me1 had considerably more content at the expense of artwork.(which is much the style of classic rpgs) with tons of prefabs for quick building of scenes and the like.
me2 had more art quality at the expense of content(at least until dlc started coming out)
although on a side note, i feel like the content could have come together in a more seemless manner(and from some of the unreleased voicing. it would seem as though they had that in mind(such as recruiting in any order)) Im sure time frame was a huge issue in this(and likely why some people felt the game was rushed)
me2 had more art quality at the expense of content(at least until dlc started coming out)
although on a side note, i feel like the content could have come together in a more seemless manner(and from some of the unreleased voicing. it would seem as though they had that in mind(such as recruiting in any order)) Im sure time frame was a huge issue in this(and likely why some people felt the game was rushed)
#18
Posté 21 octobre 2010 - 06:42
Inquisitor Recon
-
- Members
- 11 831 messages
I actually liked some of the grittier areas you visit in ME2. Places like omega make the galaxy seem more realistic.
#19
Posté 21 octobre 2010 - 06:49
Oblarg
-
- Members
- 243 messages
Trix-Rabbit wrote...
The big difference between me1 and me2 was content vs quality, Me1 had considerably more content at the expense of artwork.(which is much the style of classic rpgs) with tons of prefabs for quick building of scenes and the like.
me2 had more art quality at the expense of content(at least until dlc started coming out)
although on a side note, i feel like the content could have come together in a more seemless manner(and from some of the unreleased voicing. it would seem as though they had that in mind(such as recruiting in any order)) Im sure time frame was a huge issue in this(and likely why some people felt the game was rushed)
Recruiting people in any order wouldn't have fixed the fact that the plot took a complete backseat, but that's beside the point.
The environments and characters in ME1 looked much nicer, at least to me. The universe was beautiful and awe-inspiring.
#20
Posté 21 octobre 2010 - 07:44
DarthCaine
-
- Members
- 7 175 messages
You're kidding right? You sound biased to me just because you prefered ME1Oblarg wrote...
The environments and characters in ME1 looked much nicer, at least to me. The universe was beautiful and awe-inspiring.
Omega, Afterlife, Ilium,Pragia, Tuchanka and the Reaper IFF is why ME2's areas are far better and much more atmospheric.
Noveria and Feros were boring and bland. Even the ME1 Citadel, though big, was bland. The ME2 one had lots of colors that gave a sci fi feeling
Modifié par DarthCaine, 21 octobre 2010 - 07:55 .
#21
Posté 21 octobre 2010 - 07:52
Tyrannosaurus Rex
-
- Members
- 10 800 messages
DarthCaine wrote...
You're kidding right? You sound biased to me just because you prefered ME1
Omega, Afterlife, Ilium,Pragia, Tuchanka and the Collector's ship is why ME2's areas are far better and much more atmospheric.
The areas in ME2 felt more alive, I only wish they had made them bigger instead of making it feel like you were walking through a few corridors. But I heard that due to technical lemitations.
Strange you mentioned the Collector ship, both the ship and the base were dissapointments IMO (the ship far less though).
#22
Posté 21 octobre 2010 - 07:56
DarthCaine
-
- Members
- 7 175 messages
Oops, I meant the Reaper IFF which gave a sort of a horror feel.Lizardviking wrote...
The areas in ME2 felt more alive, I only wish they had made them bigger instead of making it feel like you were walking through a few corridors. But I heard that due to technical lemitations.
Strange you mentioned the Collector ship, both the ship and the base were dissapointments IMO (the ship far less though).
In ME1 there was only one big bland hub world. In ME2 instead of that, you get several smaller more alive hub worlds
#23
Posté 21 octobre 2010 - 08:03
Tyrannosaurus Rex
-
- Members
- 10 800 messages
DarthCaine wrote...
Oops, I meant the Reaper IFF which gave a sort of a horror feel.Lizardviking wrote...
The areas in ME2 felt more alive, I only wish they had made them bigger instead of making it feel like you were walking through a few corridors. But I heard that due to technical lemitations.
Strange you mentioned the Collector ship, both the ship and the base were dissapointments IMO (the ship far less though).
In ME1 there was only one big bland hub world. In ME2 instead of that, you get several smaller more alive hub worlds
The derelict Reaper was decent I guess, still hated it (but thats due to story reasons).
I think they should have one (or two) hub worlds in ME3. Where they combine ME1's grand scale and ME2's life-like and detail, taking the best of both worlds.
#24
Posté 21 octobre 2010 - 08:06
DarthCaine
-
- Members
- 7 175 messages
I miss the days of KOTOR where there were around 6 big hub worlds (each with a unique setting). Now, that is how ME3 should be done. They should remove all the crappy UNC and N7 mission and make a KOTOR like galaxyLizardviking wrote...
I think they should have one (or two) hub worlds in ME3. Where they combine ME1's grand scale and ME2's life-like and detail, taking the best of both worlds.
Modifié par DarthCaine, 21 octobre 2010 - 08:09 .
#25
Posté 21 octobre 2010 - 08:30
Oblarg
-
- Members
- 243 messages
DarthCaine wrote...
You're kidding right? You sound biased to me just because you prefered ME1Oblarg wrote...
The environments and characters in ME1 looked much nicer, at least to me. The universe was beautiful and awe-inspiring.
Omega, Afterlife, Ilium,Pragia, Tuchanka and the Reaper IFF is why ME2's areas are far better and much more atmospheric.
Noveria and Feros were boring and bland. Even the ME1 Citadel, though big, was bland. The ME2 one had lots of colors that gave a sci fi feeling
That's a bit ironic - "your opinion is wrong, you're obviously biased."
How about some legitimate description? "Bland" is a meaningless word.
