←back to thread

MacPaint Art from the Mid-80s Still Looks Great Today

(blog.decryption.net.au)
1034 points decryption | 3 comments | 12 Jul 25 08:45 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
seabombs ◴[12 Jul 25 10:57 UTC] No.44541090[source]▶
There's a term I read about a long time ago, I think it was "aesthetic completeness" or something like that. It was used in the context of video games whose art direction was fully realized in the game, i.e. increases in graphics hardware or capabilities wouldn't add anything to the game in an artistic sense. The original Homeworld games were held up as examples.

Anyway, this reminded me of that. Making these pictures in anything but the tools of the time wouldn't just change them, they'd be totally different artworks. The medium is part of the artwork itself.

replies(13): >>44541180 #>>44541815 #>>44541851 #>>44542274 #>>44542699 #>>44542899 #>>44542992 #>>44543278 #>>44543418 #>>44545440 #>>44547629 #>>44553341 #>>44557614 #
al_borland ◴[12 Jul 25 13:08 UTC] No.44541815[source]▶
I have to imagine that fully realizing a vision can only truly take place when the artists are not working at the limits of the present day tools. I’m thinking of something like games today that choose an art style and run with it, rather than trying to push the hardware as hard as possible.

Was this the artist’s vision, or were they simply making the best of the tools they had?

replies(2): >>44541862 #>>44542835 #
zozbot234 ◴[12 Jul 25 13:14 UTC] No.44541862[source]▶
Pixel art is very much still around today, even though it's far from "pushing" the limits of current hardware. It's pursuing a rather consistent "vision" of maximizing quality while staying within the bounds of a predefined level of detail (i.e. resolution) and color depth.
replies(2): >>44541892 #>>44542752 #
1. armchairhacker ◴[12 Jul 25 15:30 UTC] No.44542752[source]▶
I think most indie developers choose pixel art (and low-poly 3D) today because they still can’t produce high-quality high-detail art, and high-quality pixel art is prettier than low-quality high-detail art.

It’s still a case where the developer can’t truly express their vision, but they can express it behind a filter, in this case pixelation, that makes our brains charitably fill in the missing details.

Although I’m sure for some games it is part of their vision, because there’s something intrinsically pretty about pixel art and low-poly 3D. Likewise there are 2D games like Cuphead that emulate “cartoon” style, and 3D games like Guilty Gear that emulate 2D anime; those are much harder than making a 2D or 3D game with traditional modern graphics.

replies(2): >>44542842 #>>44542937 #
2. anthk ◴[12 Jul 25 15:42 UTC] No.44542842[source]▶
Games from Neo Geo were pixel art of very high quality. Just check Garou.
3. qgin ◴[12 Jul 25 15:56 UTC] No.44542937[source]▶
I think a slightly different way to think about it is that it’s not always contest for maximum detail. Apple’s new liquid glass look is impressive, but is it necessarily better UI than System 9? I think you could have a reasonable debate about that.