What's with the hate on the visuals?

[Martyn van Buren]

Yeah I don't feel like it's outrageous, but I can't get my head around it.  I can def see looking at it and being underwhelmed, but I'm puzzled by how you can be seriously put out by them.  I dunno, maybe I'm over-used to really low-res games; I do tend to play Indies and old games.  And AI War, which wonderful as it is does not rely much on graphics for its mood.

[Wanderer]

Yeah I don't feel like it's outrageous, but I can't get my head around it.  I can def see looking at it and being underwhelmed, but I'm puzzled by how you can be seriously put out by them.  I dunno, maybe I'm over-used to really low-res games; I do tend to play Indies and old games.  And AI War, which wonderful as it is does not rely much on graphics for its mood.

Perhaps I can help a hair since this isn't a 'how do I fix it?!' type of thing.  I primarily play AAA titles, barring a few old favorites like Nectaris.  Eventually, you get used to seeing 'perfect' graphics, or as close to the uncanny valley as they can get so far. 

The graphics in this game remind me a lot of animated comic books.  To me, that's a bonus point, I think it's cool as hell.  It's like watching awesome art come to life, but it's still art.  However, a lot of recent Trip-A titles have been focused on maximizing realism.  Ragdolls, internal skeleton junctures... hell, even the speed that a rock is supposed to fall at by straight physics at 1G.  This tweaks the mainstream, they're not quite sure what's wrong because they don't know how what's 'right' is built.  Their brain just registers 'there's better!' and then they comment.

From that point, you've got a background and objects that are incredibly crisp and can interfere with gameplay because of the way people look at things.  People are used to 'focusing' on important objects, and background objects that are as directly in focus as the 'player's plane' tend to get their depth and focal perceptions just a little mashed up.  I love the backgrounds and art and crispness, but that's because I personally tend to hyperfocus.

Combine those items and people feel things are a little 'off'.  Combine that feeling with anonymous and you get the internet result of "That's not really what I prefer."

[The Wuggly Ump]

DISCLAIMER: I apologize in advance, I am being brutal here. It will seem rude, and it is a bit, but you asked and I want to answer honestly. I sincerely hope that what I say doesn't offend anyone, and I mean no disparagement to any of the many artists whose work this game includes. I love art, I even love ugly art, and I love this game, too.

Now then.

The textures are far too bright, the animations are hilariously bad, the GUI is spread out all over the place, nothing is scaled right, but most importantly colors and shapes are thrown together with absolutely no hint of coherence. There's no separation between foreground, background, and sprites. The important things are given exactly the same visual treatment as the unimportant things; background objects are exactly as crisp and vibrant as enemies if not more so. It looks, frankly, like a bunch of art assets stuck together completely at random.

Other games' art styles are largely irrelevant, but for an example of a similar aesthetic done competently, take a look at And Yet It Moves. For an example of an extremely colorful game that's still pleasant to view, try Botanicula. Those are both low-fi indie games with a gorgeous artistic style, and if you want I can give you a list of all the others I have installed to prove my street cred or whatever. Hell, most of the time I prefer indie games to big budget titles. The problem with the graphics isn't a retro style or a colorful presentation, those are fine things, in fact they're often good things. The problem is that the game does those things very badly. I love the game, but it's ugly, and not even the good kind of ugly, like Picasso, or Minecraft, or punk rock. The ugliness doesn't effect my enjoyment beyond occasional eye strain, but it's unfortunate, and I'm kind of amazed that anyone would dispute it.

Luckily it looks like we'll be getting official texture pack support soon, and I suspect people like me will be considerably less noisy once we can easily replace the art. I mean, I've never even mentioned the music since I replaced that. Wait, crap.

[Quaix]

The graphics are very inconsistent.

On one hand you have gorgeous looking sprites. Espers, amoebas, most of the spell effects. These are absolutely beautiful and this kind of art is what pre-rendered graphics are all about.

On on the other hand you have ugly sprites with *extremely* poorly done transparency. They stick out like cardboard cutouts. The objects are dark, but instead of fading into the background they have an ugly, white, sharply defined halo. Ridiculous. Next time you are in Evergreen Forest, take a look at those stumps. Or go check them out in RuntimeData\Images\Bushes\OvergrownStump. They stick out like a sore thumb. There are others, but these stumps are the worst offenders.

Those who really like the graphics only look at the good looking sprites and ignore the rest. Those who find graphics offputting dislike how those two styles of graphics clash together.

There is no easy  fix, short of redoing half the things in the game: Pretty much all buildings, objects, trees, character animations, all robots and some other monsters.

[Mánagarmr]

I think I'm colored by months of beta testing, so I'm not exactly qualified to comment on the graphics because I'm so used to them. But as such, I never felt jarred by the sidescrolling element. Back when it was top down it felt hilariously bad due to the animations not at all fitting with the movement. These days it feels very SNES-ish, which I like.

There are some criticism I agree with and that is the lack of distinction between background and foreground. Since everything is sharp and colorful, it tends to cause some eyestrain after a while. There is however a mod in the works that is supposed to fix that. Haven't tried it myself yet though.

[Dizzard]

The graphics don't really bother me. They can occasionally be nice too.

Although I will admit that initially the game didn't grab my attention during beta (months ago) and I almost didn't download the demo. So I suppose if anything I'd say the graphics aren't particularly noteworthy.

[Huaojozu]

In this day and age, graphics grow exceedingly important. Not because they inherently are (since they aren't) but because most people will glance at screenshots when deciding whether they will like the game or not. I know a lot of my friends first google the game to find out some gameplay pictures and only then read a review (if they aren't put off immediately). While this is quite sad, it's also the reality of modern gaming. We can argue at length about how graphics shouldn't matter, but they do, and none of us will ever change that. The simple fact remains, that better looking game will always sell better than an uglier one despite worse gameplay.

As for the actual graphics in this game, many thready have already discussed it. For me, it's a combination of several things:
- Saturation and other parameters (now fixed thanks to the unofficial (mod)pack. The original causes way too much eye strain for reasons better explained in other threads (subjective though).
- Lack of coherence. I am kind of used to it that when a game takes you to a volcano, everything will look like the insides/outsides of a volcano, enemies will be tailored to that area as will the vegetation. When I show you an enemy, you should be able to put it into a game-zone based on it's appearence.
- Too much stuff. Again subjective but it detracts from what is really important. I always thought that 2D sidescrollers required a minimalist touch since you only have two dimensions to play with.

Look at Outland. That is a 2d sidescrollers action platformer as well and yet it's visual style is much more coherent and alltogether prettier to look at.

[KingIsaacLinksr]

In this day and age, graphics grow exceedingly important. Not because they inherently are (since they aren't) but because most people will glance at screenshots when deciding whether they will like the game or not. I know a lot of my friends first google the game to find out some gameplay pictures and only then read a review (if they aren't put off immediately). While this is quite sad, it's also the reality of modern gaming. We can argue at length about how graphics shouldn't matter, but they do, and none of us will ever change that. The simple fact remains, that better looking game will always sell better than an uglier one despite worse gameplay.

As for the actual graphics in this game, many thready have already discussed it. For me, it's a combination of several things:
- Saturation and other parameters (now fixed thanks to the unofficial (mod)pack. The original causes way too much eye strain for reasons better explained in other threads (subjective though).
- Lack of coherence. I am kind of used to it that when a game takes you to a volcano, everything will look like the insides/outsides of a volcano, enemies will be tailored to that area as will the vegetation. When I show you an enemy, you should be able to put it into a game-zone based on it's appearence.
- Too much stuff. Again subjective but it detracts from what is really important. I always thought that 2D sidescrollers required a minimalist touch since you only have two dimensions to play with.

Look at Outland. That is a 2d sidescrollers action platformer as well and yet it's visual style is much more coherent and alltogether prettier to look at.

Tbh, just looking at screenshots has gotten me more bad games than I care to consider. Its just not a wise thing to do anymore, many pretty games are shallow/broken experiences.  But I see your point though.

King

[blastpop]

I would rather play a great game with bad graphics than a bad game with great graphics. Having said that by all accounts it seems more than a few people are too caught up in the look of the game. I'm not sure what to think of the graphics at this point or the game play for that matter. I will soon find out as I'm currently downloading the demo. AVWW seems so different from whats out there both in terms of the mixing of genres and different visuals, it will take time to evaluate it properly (well, for me at least...  ). When folks are accustomed to their comfort zone it can be a bit scary when something diverges from it. Yet, that might be just part of the fun.

[timtim]

Agree with most comments. It feels like a fairly retro game, but the graphics are like a high-res gorgeous retro game. I love the repeated objects because that's equally what similar games did in the past.

I love the graphics, and all I ask is that it's easily moddable (like Minecraft) so there's a change for others to make graphic sets.

[mrhanman]

I love the graphics, and all I ask is that it's easily moddable (like Minecraft) so there's a change for others to make graphic sets.

This was just added:

Texture Packs
Some players have expressed a desire to be able to create custom texture packs for the game, and given the nature of how this game loads files that's something that we were able to reasonably accommodate.  So this version of the game now supports swapping out specific images, whole new image sets, new particle effect logic, and so on -- anything you like.

[nanostrike]

IMO:

The outdoor areas are decent-looking and some are VERY atmospheric (The Deeps, Lava Flats, ect), but the caves and buildings tend to all blend together.

Also, the oceans seem strangely empty.  I know that it's "Acid Water", but there ARE fish and such living in it, so why not some plants or neutral fish?

[blastpop]

neutral fish?

Lol- sounds like a name for a rock band...

[blastpop]

I would rather play a great game with bad graphics than a bad game with great graphics. Having said that by all accounts it seems more than a few people are too caught up in the look of the game. I'm not sure what to think of the graphics at this point or the game play for that matter. I will soon find out as I'm currently downloading the demo. AVWW seems so different from whats out there both in terms of the mixing of genres and different visuals, it will take time to evaluate it properly (well, for me at least...  ). When folks are accustomed to their comfort zone it can be a bit scary when something diverges from it. Yet, that might be just part of the fun.

I downloaded and played for 2-3 hours last night. I really like it and not entirely sure what combination of mechanics in the game make it enjoyable for me. I like AVWW so much in fact, I woke up during the night thinking about the game. That is not good...    I'm happy to report the graphics don't bother me too much and actually growing accustomed to them and dare say liking them?

Question- if I purchase the game will I be able to continue my current game? The other part of the question will it matter if I buy from Steam, GG or Arcen to be able to continue? I downloaded the demo directly from Arcen.

Thanks!

[Misery]

Those who really like the graphics only look at the good looking sprites and ignore the rest.

Oooooorrrr, they just like all of it.

In complete honesty, I've never once noticed this "white halo" around things that you speak of.   I've never noticed the stumps in the forest stick out.   Ever.

Even if I were to go in there specifically looking for stumps to see what you mean, I can already tell you what my reaction would be, it would be something like me staring at it for 5 minutes, and then saying "Yup.   That sure is a stump, all right."

Something like that seems like the sorta thing that's going to bug the hell outta some players, but other players either literally wont notice or see it, or WILL see it and think "Yeah?  So what?  Slight halo.  Still a nice tree stump."

And thus is the fun with graphics in games!  They can never please EVERYONE, much as they all try to.

I think it says something good about the devs though that they dropped the texture-pack support into the game so very quickly after the art arguements started up.