So, uh, why does Street Fighter look worse in 3D? Would like one animation info-dump please :Dc
@lycheebirb
This is the post that I originally saw that explains it the best! I don’t remember how I came across it (twitter I think? I might’ve come across it from a RT employee, or maybe in Dillon Gu’s discord server but again, IDR)
http://www.dinofarmgames.com/a-pixel-artist-renounces-pixel-art/
The beginning of the post talks about the general origins of pixel art, and what defined good pixel art, so you can scroll WAYYY down until you see them using the pics from Street Fighter 4 for the explanation, and that’s where they start to explain, but I’ll condense it for you:
Basically, the pixel art versions of the Street Fighter games actually follow and use traditional animation techniques that make their animations look good! The 3D versions don’t.
Here’s a few examples in the blog post, and what animation and drawing principles they specifically reference:
-Lines of action, anticipation
-Squash and stretch
-Follow through (with her clothes and hair- they keep moving even when she’s set in this pose!)
See the differences they make? And it’s not like it’s impossible to do with 3D animation. You can also tell that they’re trying to compensate with motion blur, but motion blur doesn’t exactly work. It just makes the characters look smudgy, and still doesn’t help with the problem with their lacking movement dynamics.
Now for a different side of the same coin: there’s a game called “Guilty Gear XRD”: you wouldn’t believe it at first glance, but these are 3D models (in a non-photorealistic 2D-inspired style, like “RWBY”) Here’s just a video of the idle animations of the characters.
This is what animation means! Making these pictures and models seem full of life! (no, seriously!)
The video is about phases where the characters in this fighting game are doing NOTHING, and it’s still really nice and fluid to watch! The animation isn’t just good because it’s a good mimicry of 2D, the animation is good because it’s actually hand-keyed animation done by the animators, who know how human bodies squish and stretch dynamically to do stuff. Also we have to know how to exaggerate it so viewers know what’s happening! It’s not auto-tweened or flat-looking, like what’s being done with Street Fighter’s animation.
Here’s a video of someone playing SF4:
not sure if the footage is lagging, but even if it was, the animation should still look good and dynamic- but it doesn’t. It’s flat and lackluster. These characters are fighting. Front flips and kicks and punches are supposed to look cool (even in slow motion, or lag) but I’m yawning over here.
It’s one of those opinions that I don’t just have bc I’m an animator, but even non-animators/laymen can sort of recognize that something is off about the animation of this game, and it’s not just because of nostalgia goggles.
Now to be completely fair, if my research is correct, SF4 came out in like 2008, and XRD came out in like 2014- and technology DOES advance pretty quick in such a span of time. Maybe Capcom had limitations too, and they did what they could with what they had or what they knew. But still, if you were ever wondering why the animation felt weird, that blog post probably explains why!
The last paragraph of that post is a really good summary too!
What I’m saying is, The things that made pixel art great are the same things that make “HD” art great. Artists must make the decisions, not computers. Instead of hand-placing squares, hand-place curves. Good art is good art, and nothing beats the real deal. Embracing the medium simply ensures that everybody else knows it.
