By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
sc94597 on 18 June 2015
Edit Thread

spemanig said:


Low quality textures isn't cel-shading. The fact that you used the fur texture on the picture I posted as an example of cel-shading proves you don't understand what it is at all. That isn't cel shading. If it was cel-shading, it wouldn't look like fur, it would look like a flat gray-white color. What you're talking about are bad textures.

The snow does have gradience. It's not cel-shaded at all. None of what you bring up in that post is an example of cel-shading. I don't get how you still don't understand when I literally posted three pictures with clear examples of cel-shading. You say that the light and dark patterns are the textures. That doesn't happen in cel-shading because textures in cel-shading are single, flat colors. That's the whole point of cel-shading. If this game was cel-shaded, it would look nothing like that.

I realize that I missed a portion of your post. Shading, has to do with the lighting, not the detail or content of the texture. Here are games with detailed textures that are also cel-shaded. 

^ Notice there are some gradients in the lighting here and there, but for the most part the lighting is constant. However, the textures still vary in color. Notice toward the edges of the rathian there is a darker red than in the center. That has nothing to do with the lighting, but rather the content of the texture. 

^ Same thing here. The lighting values are mostly constant or discrete, while the textures vary in color. 

Besides that, it is obvious that there is a spectrum between no lighting gradient and realistic lighting. MPH has far more "realistic" lighting than MPF.