By definition, beauty is a characteristic of a person, place, object, or idea that provides a perceptual experience of pleasure, meaning, or satisfaction. (Thanks Wiki) Of course I won't be absolutely consistent with the word beauty, because beauty itself has no one definate form it takes. I enjoy both aethsthetic beauty found in technical works of art as well as beauty found in colorful, abstract and more emotionally appealing settings. If you expected anything other then a list based on personal bias of what I consider beauty, then you need to understand one of the oldest and most cliche sayings, "beauty is in the eye of the beholder." Coming into this thread expecting anything other then what I personally consider beautiful is mislead, and I suppose you could blame that on the title. That is in essence correct though; arguing with me the point of beaty has no point. Still, Kuutra's argument was well thought out, and it was interesting; he explained how beatuy can be seen in desolate, destroyed areas even without the neccesity for a distinct art style. And for that, Kuutra, I thank you for the argument. Much better then most I get on forums.

 If I could well retitle the thread I would. I've always considered beauty to be a personal thing; I usually don't see the world neccesarily like others do. And I would have it no other way.

Aya.

Look, in the first place, have a bubblegum manga/anime style is neither unique or interesting because even if the visual style is unique amongst video games (and it isn't: there's a reason the promotional art for so many Tales games look alike, and why so many anime-based games look like that minus the cel-shading in a few cases) it is still indistinguishable from so many faceless, indistinct anime or manga that it barely merits paying attention to. The primary difference between cel-shaded Tales games and, say, Viewtiful Joe, is that Viewtiful Joe's particular visual flair is not found anywhere else, and it is visually distinct from every other product on the market. So is Wind Waker. So is Jet Set Radio. So is Prince of Persia.

Looking like anime is not unique. It is not distinctive. One of the major weaknesses of the Tales series is that it lacks its own voice in terms of visuals.

No, g-value, those screenshots are not convincing.

And blaydcor bring up a good point in that you've completely abandoned any pretext of an objective set of standards - not an attempt to hold to objectivity, we're not going to ask that of you, but even a single set of standards to which you yourself here. You just picked your five favorite-looking 360 games. That's fine. What isn't as fine is when you do this and then attempt to present yourself as having used a process of elimination that allows you to include Bioshock but not Gears, because the former's devastation serves to highlight decay and violence in a formerly beautiful place and the latter's devastation serves to highlight decay and violence in a formerly beautiful place. Was that sentence confusing? It sure was to me!

Now your just hating. Just because you don't see Tales of Vesperia as beautiful does not mean somebody won't. I believe ones taste in beauty is a personal thing. With that being said i believe ToV deserved to be on that list.

How is saying that the game looks like a generic anime hating? If that's your thing, cool, but trying to claim it looks unique is absurd.

hey, like I said, I'm bias to Tales games. Always have them, probably always will be. I have yet to find another game that can recaptures its feeling of an anime through its graphical style alone so well. Vesperia both looks and feels like a playable anime. With good lip-sync this time around though.

Of course, no standards neccesarily exist in my views of  beauty. I couldn't see Gears beauty passed its destruction, simply because it was so very average; I see what was most likely just like our planet before a great disaster when I try and look past Gears' rot and decay and whatnot. When I look past it in Rapture, I see the statues, the artwork, the find crafting and molding of the archways and pillars, the golden sun-shaped emblems and a general technical but extremely unique art style that is in the game. Maybe I'm simply not able to see the true beauty the world in Gears once had, but quite frankly, it doesn't shape up near enough to the standards that Bioshock has in terms of hidden art.

If you admit that you're not holding to any particular standard, fine, but if that's the case I would appreciate something reflecting that in the OP.

No its not absurd. I believe ToV has a very unique art style among video games and that all that matters to me.

I will pull out the promotional art. Don't make me do it.

I don't have to see things through your point of view. Why are you making such a big deal about someone else's taste? Just leave it alone.

Oh I certainly am holding what I have written as beautiful games to a standard; but my standards for art seem to differ greatly from one thing to the next, apparently anyway. And as they continually change based on what I consider to be beautiful, and I would expect that most people's do(or perhaps most simply just have one standard of beauty? I could not imagine being limited like that personally) so standards of beauty in just about any form exist, if at all, in a very limited sense. But as you wish;

Shadowblind said:

And beauty is, of course, in the eye of the beholder. Feel free to disagree with what I have listed, I more then likely have different standards then you on the topic of "beauty".