New Streets of Rage 4 screenshots. Looks like signature Streets of Rage.

Spukc

Member
Jan 24, 2015
7,404
1,954
365
It does look like shit. Why are they not getting rid of that flash game look. Fuck this.
Yup it’s T R A S H



MAKE IT LIKE THIS FFS
 

zenspider

Member
May 9, 2016
1,778
458
245
Thanks to early flash games, when I see Sprite scaling or rotation without pixelization, I think it looks cheap. My first introduction to sprite scaling / rotation was the SNES so that's what I consider real video game graphics

It's crazy what a stigma it is. Like, playing Monster Boy, my mind flickers between "mind-blowing hand crafted 2D" and "up-jumped Newgrounds Flash game", basically on the super clean rotations and segmented animations.
 

nkarafo

Member
Nov 30, 2012
12,194
980
690
That's because it costs money to animate detailed cartoons. There's a reason that they're mostly just thick lines and solid colors.
Exactly. It's cheap and it also looks cheap. That's the issue here.

Maybe it looks good enough for most people. But after growing up during the golden age of Capcom and SNK, cheap 2D graphics like these don't do anything for me. The only modern 2D game than managed to impress me is Cup Head. So yeah, i guess my standards are unrealistically high. But that's me, i want new things to be just as good or better than the ones i already have. Don't like regressions, especially considering how modern hardware doesn't limit what a developer can do anymore. So, low production values and indie developers who cut corners by using "easy to make" art styles don't interest me, unless the gameplay and level design is extremely good.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fuz and dirthead

dirthead

Prefix: dog
Jul 24, 2018
1,612
1,293
330
Exactly. It's cheap and it also looks cheap. That's the issue here.

Maybe it looks good enough for most people. But after growing up during the golden age of Capcom and SNK, cheap 2D graphics like these don't do anything for me. The only modern 2D game than managed to impress me is Cup Head. So yeah, i guess my standards are unrealistically high. But that's me, i want new things to be just as good or better than the ones i already have. Don't like regressions, especially considering how modern hardware doesn't limit what a developer can do anymore. So, low production values and indie developers who cut corners by using "easy to make" art styles don't interest me, unless the gameplay and level design is extremely good.

Cuphead really didn't deliver the gameplay goods though IMO. The "platforming" levels were complete trash, the hitboxes were weird, and the control felt sloppy and loose. It feels like we're trapped in some gaming hellscape where we have to choose between being punched in the balls or slapped in the face. Everything's a compromise. You can't just get what you want. This game plays right but looks like shit. This game plays badly but looks great.
 

Thiagosc777

Member
Jul 9, 2018
1,256
1,796
295
You are judging entire genre on games that has been surpassed. It's like judging character action (that you said is an evolution of beat'em ups btw) as a genre on DMC1. I gave you the list, "old man", you should try it sometime. You can also try DnD games or late Capcom titles, such as Captain Commando and Knights of the Round.

All of those were pretty common back then.
 

zenspider

Member
May 9, 2016
1,778
458
245
Exactly. It's cheap and it also looks cheap. That's the issue here.

Maybe it looks good enough for most people. But after growing up during the golden age of Capcom and SNK, cheap 2D graphics like these don't do anything for me. The only modern 2D game than managed to impress me is Cup Head. So yeah, i guess my standards are unrealistically high. But that's me, i want new things to be just as good or better than the ones i already have. Don't like regressions, especially considering how modern hardware doesn't limit what a developer can do anymore. So, low production values and indie developers who cut corners by using "easy to make" art styles don't interest me, unless the gameplay and level design is extremely good.

But does it look cheap because it is cheap?

It reminds me of the cinematic 24.4 fps standard; higher frame rates look cheap, because they were used in broadcast television, commercials, and "home video" pornography.
 

nkarafo

Member
Nov 30, 2012
12,194
980
690
Cuphead really didn't deliver the gameplay goods though IMO. The "platforming" levels were complete trash, the hitboxes were weird, and the control felt sloppy and loose. It feels like we're trapped in some gaming hellscape where we have to choose between being punched in the balls or slapped in the face. Everything's a compromise. You can't just get what you want. This game plays right but looks like shit. This game plays badly but looks great.
The issue is that high budget 2D animation is a thing of the past. Animating 3D objects/skeletal animation was always more convenient (you don't have to redraw the same characters over and over again) so now that there are ways to move an already existing asset, very few developer are going to bother with anything else. So the chances to see a game with high quality hand drawn animation/assets and game design at the same time are at the lowest right now. Which is a shame because as Cup Head proved, modern hardware poses no limits in what can be done with 2D animation.


But does it look cheap because it is cheap?
Considering what can be done with modern hardware, most 2D games do look cheap. There are always just enough animation frames to "do the job" unless they use the ugly skeletal animation technique (Cup Head looks amazing because they are using tons of frames for all animations. Google "frame-by-frame" animation and tell me if you can find one example that doesn't look good). Also, the shading looks usually simple and flat and many times there are all kinds of post-processing and lighting effects to mask all that and make these games look "artsy" and impressive enough. You can always make even a shitty looking game look nice if the lighting is good.

I also notice "cheap" art direction decisions in some games, like this one. Like how the backgrounds are more detailed and better shaded because the artists know they only need to make them once. But then, they cut corners with the animated assets. That makes the sprites look like they don't belong in those backgrounds. (Also, what's the deal with the huge outlines in this game? Backgrounds don't look like that...)

And let's not talk about the "8-bit" looking games with blocky sprites that look nothing like the actual 8-bit games of the past. The huge, sharp pixels was not even a thing, on the Atari 2600 maybe, but after the NES the pixels were not as obvious, CRTs also masked the games enough to look smooth. So anyway, most indie developers will pretend they are "artsy" with their blocky, low resolution assets but i know the only reason (most of) these games look this way is because it's cheaper. And that bothers me a bit. Like i said, i was pretty much spoiled by the likes of SNK and Capcom in the 90's so i can't be bothered with lower tier productions anymore. Guess the indie scene is not for me.

There are a few exceptions. Axiom Verge looks like a NES game in steroids (and has a good level design). Shovel Knight also looks like that although i haven't played it. And the only "fat pixels" game that looks good to me is The Last Night but who knows if we are ever going to play that.

It reminds me of the cinematic 24.4 fps standard; higher frame rates look cheap, because they were used in broadcast television, commercials, and "home video" pornography.
I disagree with this. Personally, the low frame rate in movies always bothered me. Because i know the 24fps was a "just good enough" standard. This may sound like a heresy to some but i did like using motion filters when watching movies. So i loved the 48fps standard some movies tried to push. I don't think people thought it looked "cheap", it just looked unfamiliar (compared to what they watch in cinemas) or "weird".
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Fuz

zenspider

Member
May 9, 2016
1,778
458
245
The issue is that high budget 2D animation is a thing of the past. Animating 3D objects/skeletal animation was always more convenient (you don't have to redraw the same characters over and over again) so now that there are ways to move an already existing asset, very few developer are going to bother with anything else. So the chances to see a game with high quality hand drawn animation/assets and game design at the same time are at the lowest right now. Which is a shame because as Cup Head proved, modern hardware poses no limits in what can be done with 2D animation.



Considering what can be done with modern hardware, most 2D games do look cheap. There are always just enough animation frames to "do the job" unless they use the ugly skeletal animation technique (Cup Head looks amazing because they are using tons of frames for all animations. Google "frame-by-frame" animation and tell me if you can find one example that doesn't look good). Also, the shading looks usually simple and flat and many times there are all kinds of post-processing and lighting effects to mask all that and make these games look "artsy" and impressive enough. You can always make even a shitty looking game look nice if the lighting is good.

I also notice "cheap" art direction decisions in some games, like this one. Like how the backgrounds are more detailed and better shaded because the artists know they only need to make them once. But then, they cut corners with the animated assets. That makes the sprites look like they don't belong in those backgrounds. (Also, what's the deal with the huge outlines in this game? Backgrounds don't look like that...)

And let's not talk about the "8-bit" looking games with blocky sprites that look nothing like the actual 8-bit games of the past. The huge, sharp pixels was not even a thing, on the Atari 2600 maybe, but after the NES the pixels were not as obvious, CRTs also masked the games enough to look smooth. So anyway, most indie developers will pretend they are "artsy" with their blocky, low resolution assets but i know the only reason (most of) these games look this way is because it's cheaper. And that bothers me a bit. Like i said, i was pretty much spoiled by the likes of SNK and Capcom in the 90's so i can't be bothered with lower tier productions anymore. Guess the indie scene is not for me.

There are a few exceptions. Axiom Verge looks like a NES game in steroids (and has a good level design). Shovel Knight also looks like that although i haven't played it. And the only "fat pixels" game that looks good to me is The Last Night but who knows if we are ever going to play that.


I disagree with this. Personally, the low frame rate in movies always bothered me. Because i know the 24fps was a "just good enough" standard. This may sound like a heresy to some but i did like using motion filters when watching movies. So i loved the 48fps standard some movies tried to push. I don't think people thought it looked "cheap", it just looked unfamiliar (compared to what they watch in cinemas) or "weird".

I think you're making great points (though I disagree with the cinema fps one), but I think your letting 'perfect be the enemy of good' here regarding indies.

6 of the 12 games on my top/recent Switch menu are 2D games: Into The Breach, Monster Boy, Celeste, The Messenger, Black Bird, and Dead Cells - none of these game feel cheap. In fact, they all 'feel' incredible to play (Into The Breach withstanding), which is as much a product of quality animation as anything. Hollow Knight is the perfect example of not being able to appreciate how well done the animation is without 'feeling' the impact of combat and flow of movement. Personally, I think it makes SotN and Super Metroid blish in that regard - but you wouldn't know it to see it.

The distinction I really want to make is between the stigma of cheapness and the reality of the intended effect.

Monster Boy is really the game that gives me the most dissonance, because it looks like cheap mobile art at first blush, and, as the visual cortex gives way to the gameplay sensations - that stigmatized lens flickers on and off. Really looking though - it's remarkably well-drawn, the animation is top-notch and quite charming, and there are these really subtle lighting effects (like appropriate 'kicker' lighting') that, as better-than-novice graphic artist and programmer, I find incredibly impressive for a throwaway effect every time I see it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ballthyrm

wzy

Member
Dec 29, 2018
152
171
160
I'm trying to appreciate that what they're doing is impossible but goddamn this looks terrible. Pixels = texture. It's the "paper" of the composition. The same techniques aren't going to apply and you can't just paint over the sprites without thinking about what's being covered up. I realize they're professionals and almost certainly realize this and that the look is probably more about the needs of production (i.e., that it be cheap) than any artistic consideration but yeesh. This sucks.
 

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
Jun 7, 2004
12,810
933
1,700
The issue is that high budget 2D animation is a thing of the past. Animating 3D objects/skeletal animation was always more convenient (you don't have to redraw the same characters over and over again) so now that there are ways to move an already existing asset, very few developer are going to bother with anything else. So the chances to see a game with high quality hand drawn animation/assets and game design at the same time are at the lowest right now. Which is a shame because as Cup Head proved, modern hardware poses no limits in what can be done with 2D animation.



Considering what can be done with modern hardware, most 2D games do look cheap. There are always just enough animation frames to "do the job" unless they use the ugly skeletal animation technique (Cup Head looks amazing because they are using tons of frames for all animations. Google "frame-by-frame" animation and tell me if you can find one example that doesn't look good). Also, the shading looks usually simple and flat and many times there are all kinds of post-processing and lighting effects to mask all that and make these games look "artsy" and impressive enough. You can always make even a shitty looking game look nice if the lighting is good.

I also notice "cheap" art direction decisions in some games, like this one. Like how the backgrounds are more detailed and better shaded because the artists know they only need to make them once. But then, they cut corners with the animated assets. That makes the sprites look like they don't belong in those backgrounds. (Also, what's the deal with the huge outlines in this game? Backgrounds don't look like that...)

And let's not talk about the "8-bit" looking games with blocky sprites that look nothing like the actual 8-bit games of the past. The huge, sharp pixels was not even a thing, on the Atari 2600 maybe, but after the NES the pixels were not as obvious, CRTs also masked the games enough to look smooth. So anyway, most indie developers will pretend they are "artsy" with their blocky, low resolution assets but i know the only reason (most of) these games look this way is because it's cheaper. And that bothers me a bit. Like i said, i was pretty much spoiled by the likes of SNK and Capcom in the 90's so i can't be bothered with lower tier productions anymore. Guess the indie scene is not for me.

There are a few exceptions. Axiom Verge looks like a NES game in steroids (and has a good level design). Shovel Knight also looks like that although i haven't played it. And the only "fat pixels" game that looks good to me is The Last Night but who knows if we are ever going to play that.


I disagree with this. Personally, the low frame rate in movies always bothered me. Because i know the 24fps was a "just good enough" standard. This may sound like a heresy to some but i did like using motion filters when watching movies. So i loved the 48fps standard some movies tried to push. I don't think people thought it looked "cheap", it just looked unfamiliar (compared to what they watch in cinemas) or "weird".

The issue I have with lots of 3D games is actually animation of character and their facial expressions: while it is cheaper to model, skin, and texture a character and then animate it and the camera quite cheaply (relatively to 2D) and then change textures, add customisations to clothing, character traits, etc... is also much cheaper than redrawing everything... I have found a lack of animation weight, a lack of exaggerated funky poses or facial expressions that you can do very effectively and cheaply going one frame of 2D animation to the next... compare the animation of Monkey Island 2’s characters and look for 3D polygonal characters with the same animation quality and detail... many are not even close to be fair.
 

Ballthyrm

Member
Jun 21, 2013
286
130
330
Montpellier
The old Street of Rage were the top of the heap. Some of the biggest games SEGA had to offer.
I wouldn't be surprised if they had a way bigger budget than this game will.

For all the improvement we had in the tools and engine, there is still work that can be compressed or optimised.
All of the art you guys are talking about, this stuff, i doubt that much of that has changed.

All the characters still need to be animated from scratch, all need to be Art directed.
There is no magic sauce that make that stuff work, it is just animators putting on the hours.

Now, with all that said, i doubt that a smaller team with less experience that the one who did Street of rage III is going to do much better.
I'm pretty sure, they are doing the best with what they have.
Expecting the kind of big budget 2d sprite animation that take slave labor to make is unrealistic, not because it can't be done, but because the market won't bear it anymore (this game won't cost 60$)


PS: saying something looks cheap, doesn't mean it is cheap, cheapness is just pipeline + experience, the street or rage III may have done their animation more cheaply because they knew what they were doing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Klart

Blood Borne

Member
Oct 30, 2017
968
856
225
Looking good so far, however I don't really like the art. Also, won't be complete without Yuzo Koshiro.
 
Last edited:

Blood Borne

Member
Oct 30, 2017
968
856
225
Exactly. It's cheap and it also looks cheap. That's the issue here.

Maybe it looks good enough for most people. But after growing up during the golden age of Capcom and SNK, cheap 2D graphics like these don't do anything for me. The only modern 2D game than managed to impress me is Cup Head. So yeah, i guess my standards are unrealistically high. But that's me, i want new things to be just as good or better than the ones i already have. Don't like regressions, especially considering how modern hardware doesn't limit what a developer can do anymore. So, low production values and indie developers who cut corners by using "easy to make" art styles don't interest me, unless the gameplay and level design is extremely good.
I wholeheartedly agree with you, but something is better than nothing. I wouldn't even mind if they remade one of my favourite games with this art, The Revenge of Shinobi. In fact all the Shinobi games, including the Game Gear games.
 

Mega Man

Member
Apr 5, 2011
177
14
500
I remember the days of running through the original and SoR2 with my older brother. Finally making it to the final boss, just to get absolutely STOMPED. This would spill over into backyard brawls with friends, with me taking the role of Axel or Skates.

There is something to be said for the nostalgic sound and look of this game. I'm glad they are embracing the 90's generation as a mainstay rather than opting for something modern. I agree with many in this thread, that the art-style is not my favorite. I do like that they are going for something different than many of these pixel art remakes/sequels. My only hope is it keeps the tight feel as I upper-cut, high-kick, and sweep my way to defeating Mr. X and his corporate cronies ONCE AND FOR ALL!
 

Klart

Member
Jan 16, 2014
1,836
46
370
Me either, but I'll wait to give it a shot.

I wish the M2 SoR collection was on current gen consoles. I have to play it on my 360 still.

You can get the Megadrive Collection on current gen that holds those three games.
 

Redneckerz

Those long posts don't cover that red neck boy
Jun 25, 2018
3,341
2,783
405
Unknown Body, Proxima Centauri, 4th O.B.
Cuphead really didn't deliver the gameplay goods though IMO. The "platforming" levels were complete trash, the hitboxes were weird, and the control felt sloppy and loose.
What constitutes a good game for you then when practically every good gamer has a shitton of issues in your book?

You are the guy who would trash on Mario Oddysey and Zelda BOTW, or RDR2, and now Cuphead.

I am not going to deny all these titles have flaws, but the way you speak of them, in such expletives, you would think they were programmed by a box full of monkeys.

This frequent usage of hyperbole is readily apparent in most posts you make and its far from actual reality. We get it, you don't really like games. And if you do, feel free to showcase that for once. The gaming hellscape you refer to is created and maintained by people like you who never let a day pass by being incredibly negative about any aspect of the video game industry.
 

Fuz

Member
Jun 8, 2009
3,641
1,976
785
Cagliari, Italy
all i wanna know is will it have trannies?
That was Final Fight. And she wasn't a tranny.
What constitutes a good game for you then when practically every good gamer has a shitton of issues in your book?

You are the guy who would trash on Mario Oddysey and Zelda BOTW, or RDR2, and now Cuphead.

I am not going to deny all these titles have flaws, but the way you speak of them, in such expletives, you would think they were programmed by a box full of monkeys.

This frequent usage of hyperbole is readily apparent in most posts you make and its far from actual reality. We get it, you don't really like games. And if you do, feel free to showcase that for once. The gaming hellscape you refer to is created and maintained by people like you who never let a day pass by being incredibly negative about any aspect of the video game industry.
I LOVE CUPHEAD SO MUCH, but if you imagine it without the incredible art, how would it hold up?
The issue is that high budget 2D animation is a thing of the past. Animating 3D objects/skeletal animation was always more convenient (you don't have to redraw the same characters over and over again) so now that there are ways to move an already existing asset, very few developer are going to bother with anything else. So the chances to see a game with high quality hand drawn animation/assets and game design at the same time are at the lowest right now. Which is a shame because as Cup Head proved, modern hardware poses no limits in what can be done with 2D animation.



Considering what can be done with modern hardware, most 2D games do look cheap. There are always just enough animation frames to "do the job" unless they use the ugly skeletal animation technique (Cup Head looks amazing because they are using tons of frames for all animations. Google "frame-by-frame" animation and tell me if you can find one example that doesn't look good). Also, the shading looks usually simple and flat and many times there are all kinds of post-processing and lighting effects to mask all that and make these games look "artsy" and impressive enough. You can always make even a shitty looking game look nice if the lighting is good.

I also notice "cheap" art direction decisions in some games, like this one. Like how the backgrounds are more detailed and better shaded because the artists know they only need to make them once. But then, they cut corners with the animated assets. That makes the sprites look like they don't belong in those backgrounds. (Also, what's the deal with the huge outlines in this game? Backgrounds don't look like that...)

And let's not talk about the "8-bit" looking games with blocky sprites that look nothing like the actual 8-bit games of the past. The huge, sharp pixels was not even a thing, on the Atari 2600 maybe, but after the NES the pixels were not as obvious, CRTs also masked the games enough to look smooth. So anyway, most indie developers will pretend they are "artsy" with their blocky, low resolution assets but i know the only reason (most of) these games look this way is because it's cheaper. And that bothers me a bit. Like i said, i was pretty much spoiled by the likes of SNK and Capcom in the 90's so i can't be bothered with lower tier productions anymore. Guess the indie scene is not for me.

There are a few exceptions. Axiom Verge looks like a NES game in steroids (and has a good level design). Shovel Knight also looks like that although i haven't played it. And the only "fat pixels" game that looks good to me is The Last Night but who knows if we are ever going to play that.


I disagree with this. Personally, the low frame rate in movies always bothered me. Because i know the 24fps was a "just good enough" standard. This may sound like a heresy to some but i did like using motion filters when watching movies. So i loved the 48fps standard some movies tried to push. I don't think people thought it looked "cheap", it just looked unfamiliar (compared to what they watch in cinemas) or "weird".
You are my new best friend on this forum. <3

Cheap flash games are made to be played for free on Newgrounds.com, not on my PC for a cost.
 
Last edited:

Krappadizzle

Member
Oct 4, 2011
12,069
386
595
Don't really like the way it looks tbh. If they wanted to hold on close to the original I think they would have been better emulating a style closer to Mother Russia Bleeds :



Still retains the retro look while not looking too outdated. The way it currently is, it's a bit like a flash animation and just doesn't seem right.
 

dirthead

Prefix: dog
Jul 24, 2018
1,612
1,293
330
Don't really like the way it looks tbh. If they wanted to hold on close to the original I think they would have been better emulating a style closer to Mother Russia Bleeds :



Still retains the retro look while not looking too outdated. The way it currently is, it's a bit like a flash animation and just doesn't seem right.

As much as I dislike the insipid SOR4 look, this is even worse.

The bottom line is that no one gives a shit about this genre anymore and it's not going to get the budget it needs to actually approach the classics in the genre.

As has been mentioned in this thread already, beat 'em ups WERE the AAA games of their era. They actually put amazingly talented artists on them. Today, we're getting B to C table scraps.
 

molasar

Member
Jun 20, 2018
134
108
185
Not sure if someone posted about it on GAF before but there is an OpenBor project in development based on Super Double Dragon/Return of Double Dragon called Legend of the Double Dragon worth checking out. It has new sprites, move sets, sound effects and music (borrowed from films). I remember that someone wrote this genre should be left dead but IMO the project proofs that there is still so much fun in it. More details about it and playable demos can be found here: http://gx-openbor.blogspot.com/

 
Last edited:
Apr 10, 2007
826
46
860
Brighton, UK
Others can, it just takes time, money and passion.Good high quality 2D animation isn't cheap or easy.
True.

However in the era of deep learning neural networks, there are ways to achieve getting at least half-way there quicker and cheaper than throwing armies of off-shored filipino artists at the problem.

With this approach you leverage tools like AI Gigapixel to create interim upscales for every frame and then your artists just need to do touch-ups for contours and restorations of finer details.

I can imagine this approach could go quite a long way in being commercially viable by a relatively small team even today.
 

iconmasterX

Member
Jan 27, 2018
2,339
2,707
290
However in the era of deep learning neural networks, there are ways to achieve getting at least half-way there quicker and cheaper than throwing armies of off-shored filipino artists at the problem.

No, that's an upscaling tool. If you want smooth animation, someone still has to draw every in-between frame, regardless of its resolution.

It's not a fast process, and therefore not cheap.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hariseldon

LMJ

Member
Feb 7, 2019
357
462
205
From what I've seen so far it definitely looks like a return to form.

However, what I really want to see is interactivity with the world around me, I wanna be able to throw people into stores, I want to to smash people on the cars or smash people with the rubble of what I smashed already lol

This is the next logical evolution of the Genre and one I think very few games have actually even tried, I want to be able to use the environment in all its glory.
 

Business

Neo Member
Mar 22, 2018
11
6
100
Dunno what it is that makes these games look unnatural to me. Like 99% of mobile games. They look too clean or something? I always disliked that look ever since adobe flash games on Newgrounds were a thing.

The graphics are high resolution and lack detail. That's all there is to it.
 
Apr 10, 2007
826
46
860
Brighton, UK
No, that's an upscaling tool. If you want smooth animation, someone still has to draw every in-between frame, regardless of its resolution..
Maybe not.

Deep learning A.I.s are sophisticated enough that there may be milage in training them to generate interpolation frames also by learning the factors of variation that encode aspects of the very character movements themselves such as shape of limbs, articulated joints, motion of clothing etc directly from the image key frame processing.

Again similar to the upscaling, if you can only get 80% of the way there in terms of quality, you still save tons on manual effort to bring the quality up to a level that's acceptable to ship.

Two very different strands of proc gen work but both equally driven by similar state of the art AI techniques in-order to do what humans could do, albeit much much slower and requiring too many of them to do it at scale to make it economically viable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DT MEDIA

chriskun

Member
Dec 7, 2006
1,293
11
985
Im just curious about the gameplay. Have they added anything to make the game deeper? Looks like there is a juggle system in place.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DT MEDIA

grainflavour

Neo Member
Mar 2, 2019
14
7
75
Graphics are terrible. I am sure the developers put plenty of thought and time into this but the clean art style really is rubbish. Nintendo stated that the leap to hi def was a struggle so can only imagine how small/tiny developers manage.
 

Kazza

Member
Oct 6, 2018
574
647
255
While a couple of websites have gotten to play it behind closed doors, it'll be great to get some fan impressions. Since the developers are willing to let this be played by the public, we can't be too far off release, can we? (maybe early autumn)
 

Crew 511A

Member
Jun 29, 2017
233
110
170
Graphics are terrible. I am sure the developers put plenty of thought and time into this but the clean art style really is rubbish. Nintendo stated that the leap to hi def was a struggle so can only imagine how small/tiny developers manage.

I think the design choices are the problem. Just take SoR 2 or 3 assets and upscale them. Create some new characters, pay homage to the old games...how hard is that? Sonic Mania did it right. No sense in reinventing the wheel. Especially when you make the wheel ugly.
 

Wonko_C

Member
Jul 5, 2010
4,192
212
670
Cancun, Mexico.
Looking cool. I hope the classic voice sample was just a placeholder, but at the same time I want an option to have them in case the new voices suck.
 

Kazza

Member
Oct 6, 2018
574
647
255
Looking cool. I hope the classic voice sample was just a placeholder, but at the same time I want an option to have them in case the new voices suck.

What I hope is a placeholder is the weak "tap tap tap" sound when you punch someone. Hitting sounds are vitally important in beat em ups, and that sound just isn't cutting it. It needs to sound much more impactful.

I do quite like a some of the environments (especially the abandoned pier and Chinatown area). I liked the damage done to the door by Blaze's attack in the office. Hopefully they'll be more scope for environmental damage.

Still a hmmmm..... from me so far.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wonko_C

JunkerWoland

Member
Jun 29, 2016
362
336
205
I appreciate the technical craftsmanship on display, but the more I see of the game, the more certain I am about not being able to get past its chosen aesthetic. The studio's style worked for me on Wonder Boy III; it just ain't doing it at all for me on Streets of Rage.
 

Kazza

Member
Oct 6, 2018
574
647
255
Were these silhouettes in the previous trailer?




I would guess that the one on the right is a beefed up Adam. The one on the left looks like a girl with a guitar? There looks like there may be another one above Blaze and Axel too, but I can't make it out.
 

Kazza

Member
Oct 6, 2018
574
647
255
The arm on the left looks robotic? But it doesn't look like Dr Zan. I wonder what all the burning dollar bills mean a well.
 
Similar Threads Here