User Avatar Image

Are you kidding me with these graphics?

posted by caeska on - last edited - Viewed by 5.3K users

Because this is absolutely ridicilous.
When is TTG going to learn and actually implement some proper graphics and animations into their games?
While this style of graphics is too cartoony and doesn't fit the L&O genre at all but I wouldn't mind that so much if Telltale would just take the graphics aspect somewhat seriously.

Look at Jurassic Park: Good characters, good story. But the graphics look like they were, and they probably were, done by amateurs who never attended a graphic design class in their lives.
My 5-year old niece could have done a better job in that department. The character animations as a whole, body language, movement, lip synch and
facial expressions of emotions is completely unrealistic and it is actually done so poorly that it makes it impossible to get immersed into the game world. BTTF was the same, no effort whatsoever put into animations and thus, no entertainment value.

And so far L&O seems poised to do exactly the same mistakes that BTTF and JP did because there is no indication that L&O will be any better. It's too rough around the edges and with the graphics style they've chosen to use they've effectively destroyed the game before it's even released. I'm still hoping to be proven wrong, but somehow I have my doubts.

If they are not going to bother to work with the graphics and animations, then I'm not going to bother with paying money for the game. It really is that simple. The graphics aspect is so important in a computer game that in many cases, it determines whether it becomes a success
or failure. And it is one of the most contributing factors to replay value and how drawn you as a player get into the game.

175 Comments - Linear Discussion: Classic Style
  • But I said that you dont believe as much, yes sometimes cartoons can be sad and there are a few serious cartoon films but they are not based on a book or another film but telltale make game's for big franchises which are real life, so if telltale can make better graphics why not use better graphics it would be easier and they would get more ratings in the graphic aspect of thing's but if they dont bother with graphics there is nothing good.

  • @yoman45135 said: But I said that you dont believe as much, yes sometimes cartoons can be sad and there are a few serious cartoon films but they are not based on a book or another film.

    Batman DC Animated Universe films are way more emotionally gripping then any of the live films including Dark Knight.

  • @coolsome said: Batman DC Animated Universe films are way more emotionally gripping then any of the live films including Dark Knight.

    I disagree, the dark knight was very emotional and batman forever was very tense sometimes

  • @yoman45135 said: I disagree, the dark knight was very emotional

    I really only liked the joker parts the rest wasn't that good for me.


    and batman forever was very tense sometimes

    Batman Mask of the Phantasm was theatricality released about 1 or 2 years before Batman Forever and there's no way in hell that anyone could think batman forever is more dramatic then mask of the phantasm.

  • User Avatar Image
    Jennifer Moderator

    @coolsome said: Batman Mask of the Phantasm was theatricality released about 1 or 2 years before Batman Forever and there's no way in hell that anyone could think batman forever is more dramatic then mask of the phantasm.


    I agree. In that example the live action film is definitely sillier and more cartoony than the animated film.

  • It's an artstyle, besides the graphics are like Sam and Max IMO. If Sam and Max was done now this argument would have happened.

    Look at TF2, it's graphics are downed due to an ARTSTYLE.

  • @Jennifer said: I agree. In that example the live action film is definitely sillier and more cartoony than the animated film.

    I disagree completley batman forever was only a bit silly most parts were really serious

  • @caeska said: Because this is absolutely ridicilous.
    When is TTG going to learn and actually implement some proper graphics and animations into their games?
    While this style of graphics is too cartoony and doesn't fit the L&O genre at all but I wouldn't mind that so much if Telltale would just take the graphics aspect somewhat seriously.

    Now, this is a valid argument and I agree wholeheartedly.

    @caeska said: The graphics aspect is so important in a computer game that in many cases, it determines whether it becomes a success or failure. And it is one of the most contributing factors to replay value and how drawn you as a player get into the game.

    And it's where you drop the ball in my opinion. I know this is said to death, especially in these forums by dozens of people already -everyone's used to hear it I think people started to call people agree with me here "the hippies of videogaming"- but graphics are only an aspect and depending on the variety of the game itself and the promises of the developers depending on its production value, budget, etc.; the kind of graphics Telltale uses for their games can still be used to the way to success, given that "success" itself is relative. A game that makes more money than what has been paid for, is a success. The chimes of fan appreciation through your communication channels, are a sign of success. For example, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 is sadly a success. At the same time, indie game Terraria is also a MAJOR success even though the community of the latter example is much smaller. As I said before, the tone of the game you aim for is also a big defining factor on which visual style you need to go for.

  • @yoman45135 said: I disagree completley batman forever was only a bit silly most parts were really serious

    Is this... is this a joke? Have you seen Batman Forever? It's one of the most over-the-top, ridiculous and silly films ever produced! (Bested in this regard perhaps only by its sequel.) Tommy Lee Jones EATS the scenery, Jim Carrey is... well Jim Carrey, and Joel Schumacher seems to be under the impression that the only real Batman worth imitating is Adam West and the gang.

    But forget all this for a moment, the argument that you are attacking isn't 'Is Batman Forever a silly or serious film?' it's 'Is Batman Forever sillier than Batman Mask of the Phantasm?' Have you seen Batman Mask of the Phantasm, because you make no mention of it? If not then you can't really have anything constructive to add to the conversation.

    Your quote defending Batman Forever as a serious film shows that you have a blinding prejudice against animation over live action, one so strong and fervent your argument could be considered irrational.

  • @Woodsyblue said: Is this... is this a joke? Have you seen Batman Forever? It's one of the most over-the-top, ridiculous and silly films ever produced! (Bested in this regard perhaps only by its sequel.) Tommy Lee Jones EATS the scenery, Jim Carrey is... well Jim Carrey, and Joel Schumacher seems to be under the impression that the only real Batman worth imitating is Adam West and the gang.

    But forget all this for a moment, the argument that you are attacking isn't 'Is Batman Forever a silly or serious film?' it's 'Is Batman Forever sillier than Batman Mask of the Phantasm?' Have you seen Batman Mask of the Phantasm, because you make no mention of it? If not then you can't really have anything constructive to add to the conversation.

    Your quote defending Batman Forever as a serious film shows that you have a blinding prejudice against animation over live action, one so strong and fervent your argument could be considered irrational.

    Um yes Jim Carrey was silly in Batman Forever but I am sure you dont know what Batman
    is, it is a comic so it having a animated film makes sense and it having a real life action film doesnt, also I recall the comics being a very silly but brutal theme just like the films and tha

Add Comment