Hey!

I recently started thinking about SciFi and that anything modern (be it games or movies) tends to not please me at all and I started wondering about this. I get to thinking that it's about the general style of today's SciFi - what do you think about this?

I came to the conclusion that I really liked the general SciFi designs used in the 80s and 90s. In terms of games there especially were those quite old titles with this certain "pixelized" charme somehow making it plain great. To give some examples:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tppjzT-su0Q&feature=grec_index
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qw2W_Ap7m2k

It didn't stop with those titles though as newer games still could deliver that certain style like for example:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pqrb--1GfzY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6HKjYgd3Z4k

When talking about games of that age I have to talk about Crusader: No Regret - this game is full of this awesome SciFi design I love so much which in my opinion added a lot to make this not just a good but a great game. It's sort of the same style you also can find in movies like "Total Recall" and when talking about movies the Aliens movie also had a very nice design...

For me it feels a bit like the style in those old games and movies has so much atmosphere to it. Modern designs have a rather boring and bland effect on me and don't excite me at all. The environment of all this old stuff seems to be able to pull me right into the setting which pretty much all of the new stuff is unable to do...

Does anyone here feel similar about this?

you did not play mass effect?

Mass Effect also has this modern touch to it that differs it from those old games. It might be about the lighting (it sort of lacks any real shadows - everything looks softened like hell) and colors used but it also shows in the general geometry which is quite flat with rounded edges...

Oh, we are talking about visual design, not the way Sci-fi setting is applied. It's a lot about personal preference imo. F.i. I like the designs of ships more in mass effect. They are more believable, carries certain aspects of today's flight tech. And all races have different certain characteristics for their ships.

I also like the "old" sci-fi style more than most of the new ones. Why?

Because old sci-fi athmosphere and art style was mostly dark and dirty. In most games, the future wasn't nice or shiny (Mass Effect, Freelancer (to some extend), Perry Rhodan), but harsh and cruel (Syndicate, Blade Runner, Privateer, Neocron, etc). And because the dark and cruel games had a way more dirty look, they felt more real/immersive (i'm talking about the art they used, not the story). Used things always look more real in games than brand new ones if you ask me.

Deus Ex: Human Revolution mixes both shiny and dirty, that's why i REALLY like it's overall art style. It feels very real without actually looking real.
On the other hand, i don't really like the Crysis graphics and setting, because they "just" try to archive a realistic look without beeing very artistic. If i want to see the real world, i can go outside and look at it. No need to sit in front of a monitor for this.


A used, rusty object tells way more stories than a new, sterile one.
I guess thats why many like the Fallout graphics a lot: Apart from having that retro look, most objects and locations in Fallout are REALLY worn out and look extremely used and dirty.



As a test, try to imagine what kind of people live in the locations shown on the next screenshots. I have no idea for the mass effect or perry rhodan shots, but have clear pictures in my head for the neocron and privateer ones.

Shiny/Sterile:

Perry Rhodan


Mass Effect




Used and dirty

Neocron


Privateer





Additionally to the shiny<->dirty contrast, there are other differences (of course):

shiny: round objects and levels (= optimistic vision of the future, no edges to hurt yourself)
dirty: hard edged objects and levels (= harsh future where you have to watch where you're going to)

shiny: soft, bright lighting (= there is no evil or dark places, most people are nice and you can easily see that)
dirty: hard, dark lighting (= be careful to whom you talk to, people might smile at you, but that's only because they wan't to kill you in a dark alley and rob your money.)

And then there is the (in my oppinion) biggest difference: Screen resolution and number of colors.
If you have less colors and resolution to look at, your brain starts doing his own work to create a nice picture in your head. That's called imagination. You'll create a picture in your head which better suits your own taste.
If, on the other hand, you get a full HD picture with ultra high res textures and effects, there is not much room for imagination.


well, just my 2 cents

what about Aliens vs Predator (2010), Dead Space or Doom 3? They are new games with that old "dark" style

Prey 2 looked very cool at the GamesCom...

OT: I disagree, it is extremely artistic. IMO, those artists (and those who made Half Life 2, as well) have an extremely good sense for building coherent styles. The artists of Crysis especially know how to melt vegetation with terrain while others are extremely bad with this. I love it!

BTW, what about Portal - too clean?

Well on the one hand these in fact are examples for sort of new games (although Doom 3 isn't quite new) having a SciFi design that follows that concept pretty well. On the other hand those all are horror-shooters. It's crucial to have dark lighting here for shock effects and a scary environment...

It's not just about this dark & dirty aspect only - e.g. have a look at that Privateer screenshot posted by BoH_Havoc or the Crusader video I linked in the opening post. There's no dark lighting at all and yet still you can see this certain style. I don't know how to express this - things sort of look "interesting" there. I guess it's partially about faces not being very flat which is what you see in modern SciFi all the time. Maybe some pictures for expressing this with television examples:




The surfaces are just flat and boring often making them look fake because they look too new and shiny (especially for that Star Trek scene). It seems to be a general rule for today's SciFi as games tend to end up the same way...

painkiller: from the ones you listed i only played doom3 and deadspace. And yes, i like their art. Deadspace feels like the alien movies sometimes and doom has a sterile but dark atmosphere, with hard edges.

Slin: It does indeed look good. I'll have to keep an eye on that.

Pappenheimer: I didn't say they did a bad job on the graphics (they obviously didn't!), i just think it's nothing special in terms of "art". But as always when it comes to taste, there are different oppinions of course . Portal 1 looks ok for what it is (really, who plays Portal for the graphics?). The Singleplayer Part of Portal 2 however looks great and has a nice athmosphere. It mixed nature and manmade structures like Crysis 2 did, but it feels different than the locations in Crysis 2. The Portal 2 locations have more "character" if you ask me.