As a student in game art, I find this comparison really...misplaced. For numerous reasons. Art style is always the first thing to consider when taking a look at game art. If you're going photoreal then make sure to go in 100% and that's what Naughty Dog did. If you want a more stylized and animated game world then make sure you go in 50% and keep a rear view mirror of photorealism for the other 50%. I actually think it's more difficult to correctly pull off a stylized direction because to succeed at it, you need to incorporate aspects of both realism and stylization into your art style. Which is why games like Breath of the Wild can look so damn good on such inferior devices.
Another huge part of the "look" of a game like Uncharted 2 and 3 is the lighting. Lighting is just as important if not more important than texturing. And I will agree that Nintendo needs to get more experienced in the lighting department. And they will. It's just that western developers have been using these amazing engines with next gen features for some time and Nintendo just got on the bandwagon in 2012 with Wii U. They are gonna need more than 5 years to get really good at all aspects of the art pipeline. Despite what Miyamoto says, Nintendo still needs to fully understand dynamic lighting, but if they do indeed know what they're doing and hardware is preventing them from really showing off, then Nintendo...make more powerful hardware. That's where I stand.
Existing User Log In
New User Registration
Register for a free account to gain full access to the VGChartz Network and join our thriving community.
