I'm the opposite. I love generally the newer art. This coming from someone who has collected Magic the Gathering cards since 1994. Old art is fantastic as well, but the second edition DnD stuff never really grabbed me. Their 'fluff' books I love, but I like the art of the newer books better. Especially love Lockwood's third edition dragons.
That said there are some artists that I dislike a lot in DnD books. But it's personal taste.
If I could afford to have my books just illustrated by Jaime Jones, Aleksi Briclot, D Alexander Gregory, Jason Chan and Michael Komarck, well I'd explode in my pants.
Mrmm.. I feel the picture Lemernis posted has a lot of drama in it, but it's not portrayed very well by modern standards. It could work by having the exact same style in looks, armors, and all that.. but the angle could be somewhat improved. It's not as intense as say, Chun Li just kicking into the air. Or whatever Cammy is about to do on the following pictures :P
'Realistic' art just doesn't tend to play around with angles, effects, and dynamic poses. 90% of the 'realistic' fantasy art always looks weird. An artists references a real life stiff person, but when it comes to the elf ears and elf armor, the artist needs to improvise and it just looks inconsistent. Often enough with realistic art, you shouldn't look too closely at the details either, unless it's drawn by Drew Struzan. (He drew the Indiana Jones and Star Wars movie posters +++ done without using any digital tools)
But yeah... OP and Lemernis just want their games looking closer to reality, and less cartoony. Nothing wrong with that. Each to their own. Personally, I see enough realism in real life. When I play games and read comics I want a good story, but I also want to see interesting professional styles and colors. This doesn't mean that the stories have to be Disney happy. I still think a world a can be dark and edgy even though the art is 'stylish, colorful, and exciting' and not 'realistic'. Take Fable. It has beautiful art. It's interesting to look at, and has dark themes. If only the game was as good as it looks lol
That said, certain professional styles can be unappealing sometimes, even to people who normally like that stuff. Chun Li sure has some rediculously thick thighs for example.... But still, if she was a romance option somehow, somewhere, I'd still hit it. It's Chun Li. :P I spent so many quarters to play on the arcade machine back in the 90's, kicking my friends' ass, often enough using her. Ah, memories.... Ahem, point is. I love her for who she is, not how she looks ... :P (What!?)
All of the fantasy artists I know by name are guys who work with WOTC's Magic: The Gathering side.
Greg Staples, for example:
He's also responsible for the modern day Serra Angel which I'm just going to leave as a hyperlink because it really pisses me off when people link like 700 images in one post on web forums. (Hint, hint, cough, cough. It slows down me loading the page!)
He does a lot of monstrous people (vampires, werewolves, etc.) to great effect. World reknowned for it, as far as I know.
This stuff I think is phenomenal, and it also seems to be the type of thing the OP at least laments. My biggest problem with a lot of older fantasy art is they try to be realistic, often utilizing actual human models in stationary pictures which they then use as inspiration and reference, but the way they would do the lighting just... It bothers me. Contrast always seemed extremely out of whack, even on the ones I like.
@LadyRhian: I haven't thought about Dragonlance in far too long. Great books when I was a kid. Lost interest in high school, though. Haven't really read a whole lot since even though I was a huge book nerd back in the day. Go figure. Elmore is a good example of what I meant when I said the contrast in older fantasy pictures seems way off, though. As beautiful as it is, there's something about it I find off-putting. I wish I could put my finger on it in a better way.
I'm going to come out on the other side of this and say, as someone who was born in the 80s and has been an avid fan of fantasy the entire time... I really dislike classic fantasy art. No slight on the artists, much of it is amazing stuff, but I just flat out dislike it.
The more comic book/manga style has always been more my flavor and, I feel, more fitting for the game. DnD has just never really felt like oil painting high fantasy. It has always felt pulpier.
I'm going to come out on the other side of this and say, as someone who was born in the 80s and has been an avid fan of fantasy the entire time... I really dislike classic fantasy art. No slight on the artists, much of it is amazing stuff, but I just flat out dislike it.
The more comic book/manga style has always been more my flavor and, I feel, more fitting for the game. DnD has just never really felt like oil painting high fantasy. It has always felt pulpier.
I have no preference when it comes to classic or newer art, but I dislike Manga art in my games very much! It's so childish, and I've always wondered why adult people would prefer it in Japan and other Asian countries..
I have no preference when it comes to classic or newer art, but I dislike Manga art in my games very much! It's so childish, and I've always wondered why adult people would prefer it in Japan and other Asian countries..
Because thats how they developed over there. I did a report on this years ago, but it all boils down to the general, "cultural and historical perspectives influenced the art."I love it because it looks crisp and fresh to me.
Manga has always appealed to me because most of their styles are more anatomically correct while at the same time being very fanciful. It looks like the artists have greater attention to detail than the cartoons I grew up with.
Agreeing with Lemernis, I also favour more photorealistic art over stylized or cartoonish works. One artist I like a lot is Games Workshop's Mark Gibbons. His works are sort of larger-than-life akin to the Warhammer setting, but he's got a very good eye for detail and sharpness.
I have no preference when it comes to classic or newer art, but I dislike Manga art in my games very much! It's so childish, and I've always wondered why adult people would prefer it in Japan and other Asian countries..
Because thats how they developed over there. I did a report on this years ago, but it all boils down to the general, "cultural and historical perspectives influenced the art."I love it because it looks crisp and fresh to me.
Manga has always appealed to me because most of their styles are more anatomically correct while at the same time being very fanciful. It looks like the artists have greater attention to detail than the cartoons I grew up with.
I understand what you mean, but I hope we will not see that style in western RPG's, as I hate that manga art seems to only feature what seems like children. I like my women in games pretty, even sometimes, "ahem", with less clothing than strictly appropriate, but I want them to look like adults... :-)
I guess that's what bother me most with manga, it's almost always what looks like underage girls trying to look sexy.. It just rubs me the wrong way.
Also, the facial art seems too similar, give 5 characters a different wig and clothing, keep the same face, and that's it...
Hmm... What manga have you primarily seen? I know exactly what you're talking about, and there was a blitz of underaged-heroes manga and anime in the USA for about 20 years: Sailor Moon is a popular culprit, and the magical boy/girl genre is huge there, so naturally we'd also get a good helping of that.
Imho, I just don't like that one genre. It's great that kids are taught lessons like teamwork, justice, friendship, etc., but it's not me.
You may already have your preference set in stone, but just keep in mind that there's quite a bit more to manga than the "popular" stuff shown over here on mainstream TV.
Hmm... What manga have you primarily seen? I know exactly what you're talking about, and there was a blitz of underaged-heroes manga and anime in the USA for about 20 years: Sailor Moon is a popular culprit, and the magical boy/girl genre is huge there, so naturally we'd also get a good helping of that.
Imho, I just don't like that one genre. It's great that kids are taught lessons like teamwork, justice, friendship, etc., but it's not me.
You may already have your preference set in stone, but just keep in mind that there's quite a bit more to manga than the "popular" stuff shown over here on mainstream TV.
You're probably right, I haven't got any expertise in anime/manga, and I'm sure there's good examples out there.
The last 3 years I've been playing a lot of games on my ipad, and a lot of my animosity towards the genre comes from the Japanese and Korean games converted to that platform. Out of curiosity and decent price points on these games, I've tried quite a few, and watched gameplay videos on others.
The art seems very childlike and simple in many of these games.
When I was younger, though, I watched a few animated movies by whatshisface - Kuwazaki?? Shit, can't recall his name and can't wiki anything, I'm at work and writing this on my phone.. Anyhow, I liked those movies, as I did the segment in Kill Bill by Tarantino..
I have to learn to be less judgemental... My reference frame is very narrow in anime/mango....
@Bytebrain You probably mean Miyazaki. But what people really think of as "Anime/Manga Style" isn't the *only* style. It's just the commonly perceived to be "Manga/Anime" style. You have stuff like this:
@LadyRhian That last pic is exactly what I mean with bad/lazy facial artwork. Take the two boys flanking the, again, very young, girl. Exchange the hairstyle/colour and clothing and it's the exact same faces...
I like the other ones very much though. Also, they look grown up, and not as it's made for pre-teens and teenagers.
I suddenly remembered the name of the films I watched when I was younger! It was the Akira films by af Katsuhiro Otomo. As I remember, very good stuff indeed.
@Bytebrain That last one *was* for a younger audience. From the top down, they are: "Fist of the North Star", "Ninja Scroll" and "Fruits Basket"
Yeah. I have to learn not to comment on stuff I don't know much about.. :-) That's twice in no time at all, on two different threads you've put me in my place.. (Insert huge smiley here).
Hyung-Tae Kim is incredible. His art definitely stands out. My only beef with him is the incredible disproportion to lady bits. This picture is pretty good but he's got some other things that are clear fan service.
@Bytebrain ...Sorry? I've been into anime and manga for a while. Most of what comes to America is teenager and kid stuff. You know, stuff like Dragonball (Akira Toriyama). Fruits Basket is a Shoujo series, meant for young teenage girls. Dragonball is a Shonen series, meant for young teenage boys. Older, more adult stuff is Seinen (for young men 18-30) and Josei is for late teen and older women. Here's an example of a Josei manga: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradise_Kiss
Inexplicably, Paradise Kiss wasn't very popular here, despite being about fashion and college age teens. It's the teenage stuff that sells best, and I don't know if that is because people in America feel that cartoons are for kids generally and steer away from stuff that's more adult, or the art style turns them off.
@Bytebrain ...Sorry? I've been into anime and manga for a while. Most of what comes to America is teenager and kid stuff. You know, stuff like Dragonball (Akira Toriyama). Fruits Basket is a Shoujo series, meant for young teenage girls. Dragonball is a Shonen series, meant for young teenage boys. Older, more adult stuff is Seinen (for young men 18-30) and Josei is for late teen and older women. Here's an example of a Josei manga: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradise_Kiss
Inexplicably, Paradise Kiss wasn't very popular here, despite being about fashion and college age teens. It's the teenage stuff that sells best, and I don't know if that is because people in America feel that cartoons are for kids generally and steer away from stuff that's more adult, or the art style turns them off.
Not that styles don't overlap. This is from Gensomaden Saiyuki, inspired by the same source as Dragonball Z and Dragonball: It's considered Shoujo.
No need to be sorry. I was just beginning to feel a bit foolish, as I realized I was talking out my behind. :-) You did put me in my place, but with good examples and you were very polite. :-) In the end, I did remember the Akira films, and how good I thought they were when I saw them 20 years ago or so.
I will still say that there's a lot of JRPG and KRBG games out there with very simple and childish art out there that have been very popular. That was what I was hoping wouldn't seep over in hour western style RPG's.
I like many of your examples, some very good art.
Thanks for your patience with grumpy conservative old guy.
@Bytebrain Old is only in the mind. IRL, I'm 45. I got into anime back in the 80's with stuff like "Battle of the Planets". They did a new 3-episode version in the 90s under the original name, Gatchaman. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OvO-YwhnuCk
@LadyRhian I just turned 45 this Sunday, and I'm still just a kid in a mans body, So I know what you mean. :-)
I do see that I'm sometimes a bit conservative and my real age seeps through when I hear myself say sentences that start with "now, back when I was young".
I just searched YouTube for the Akira films, and the trailers look as awesome as I remember, so I think I'll have to find a place to buy them so I can watch them again. They were awesome.
Oh man... prepare for an angry-old-guy rant. DISCLAIMER: this isn't meant to piss anyone off. I'm just an old codger letting out steam.
As someone who grew up in the 80's playing p&p Dungeons and Dragons the artwork of today just makes my eyes bleed. The "classic" (I'm going to call the artwork of 80's/early 90's classic from now on to save time) D&D art was beautiful, imaginitive and had an uniform vision.
I love it's way of being fantastic but grounded in reality at the same time. And the word 'grounded' is a key word here. For example: the armour and equipment aren't what you would call totally realistic but they look functional and make sense. Landscapes look otherworldly but at the same time they look like they _might_ exist somewhere sometime. The paintings aren't overcrowded: they have a clear sense of space, leaving room to illustrate interesting characters, often presenting an interesting scene or a small story.
Please don't tell me realism has no place in the discussion because "it's fantasy with wizards and stuff". The greatest part of the classic style is that you can RELATE to it. And fantasy (even high fantasy) must be relatable in order to work. That's why the best fantastic art (visual or otherwise) is grounded at least partly in real world and history.
Now let's look at some examples:
First, Larry Elmore. He's the guy you probably think first when someone is talking about classic D&D art. I've heard many call his paintings "stiff" and "static". Well, that sometimes happen when you use real models. Not as often I hear someone mention how good a storyteller he is. When I look at some of his paintings my imagination just starts to go wild ("Who are these people? What are their stories?"). Not to mention his gorgeous landscapes and pure technical prowess.
I could go forever with these examples. Sure many of them are cheesy. Sure there's a lot that 80's hair and chainmail bikinis. But that's a big part of why I love it. My intrests are in serious art and D&D means nostalgic child-like wonder for me.
Now about the modern artwork... Man, I can't relate to any of it. First, I don't like digital art. I've got nothing against digital media per se, but digital visuals just don't do it for me. It just doesn't have the texture of an oil painting. For sci-fi it's passable at times but in fantasy? No way, jose. But my main beef with it is just the style. It's just... ehhhh. Here's a few atrocious examples of stuff I just can't stand:
It's cartoony, "edgy" (as in SPIKES, SPIKES EVERYWHERE! SPIKES!!!) and downright unrelatable. It's style before purpose. I might be totally wrong about this, but I suspect the main reason is the current "culture of awesome". What's that? It's instad of John Mclane fighting bad guys barefooted and with limited resources, it's him fighting a jet plane atop a highway exit ramp. It's insted of Luke and Vader dueling in a simple atmospheric location, it's two guys dueling in a platform sinking in a river of frigging lava. I'm propably wrong here, but anycrap.
Once again: I'm not trying to put anyone down because they have a different taste than me. And I know the examples I showed weren't totally fair. I just tried to illustrate a point.
Comments
That said there are some artists that I dislike a lot in DnD books. But it's personal taste.
If I could afford to have my books just illustrated by Jaime Jones, Aleksi Briclot, D Alexander Gregory, Jason Chan and Michael Komarck, well I'd explode in my pants.
http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20110608003841/streetfighter/images/6/68/07_sfxtart05.jpg
http://guestcontroller.files.wordpress.com/2011/09/guest-controller-capcom-street-fighter-x-tekken-character-art-kazuya.jpg?w=640
'Realistic' art just doesn't tend to play around with angles, effects, and dynamic poses. 90% of the 'realistic' fantasy art always looks weird. An artists references a real life stiff person, but when it comes to the elf ears and elf armor, the artist needs to improvise and it just looks inconsistent. Often enough with realistic art, you shouldn't look too closely at the details either, unless it's drawn by Drew Struzan. (He drew the Indiana Jones and Star Wars movie posters +++ done without using any digital tools)
But yeah... OP and Lemernis just want their games looking closer to reality, and less cartoony. Nothing wrong with that. Each to their own. Personally, I see enough realism in real life. When I play games and read comics I want a good story, but I also want to see interesting professional styles and colors. This doesn't mean that the stories have to be Disney happy. I still think a world a can be dark and edgy even though the art is 'stylish, colorful, and exciting' and not 'realistic'. Take Fable. It has beautiful art. It's interesting to look at, and has dark themes. If only the game was as good as it looks lol
http://download.gamespotcdn.net/d4/user_images/103/fable2.jpg
http://cache.kotaku.com/assets/resources/2008/03/fableprostitutes.jpg
http://fc01.deviantart.net/fs39/f/2008/343/6/7/Fable2_Town_by_skybolt.jpg
http://images1.fanpop.com/images/photos/1300000/Fable-2-concept-art-Crowd-of-Poor-People-fable-1301821-1024-411.jpg
http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lyikvuYM7R1r20dvto1_1280.jpg
http://gamesareevil.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/fable1.jpg
That said, certain professional styles can be unappealing sometimes, even to people who normally like that stuff. Chun Li sure has some rediculously thick thighs for example.... But still, if she was a romance option somehow, somewhere, I'd still hit it. It's Chun Li. :P I spent so many quarters to play on the arcade machine back in the 90's, kicking my friends' ass, often enough using her. Ah, memories.... Ahem, point is. I love her for who she is, not how she looks ... :P (What!?)
And Jeff Easley...
And Fred Fields
Greg Staples, for example:
He's also responsible for the modern day Serra Angel which I'm just going to leave as a hyperlink because it really pisses me off when people link like 700 images in one post on web forums. (Hint, hint, cough, cough. It slows down me loading the page!)
He does a lot of monstrous people (vampires, werewolves, etc.) to great effect. World reknowned for it, as far as I know.
This stuff I think is phenomenal, and it also seems to be the type of thing the OP at least laments. My biggest problem with a lot of older fantasy art is they try to be realistic, often utilizing actual human models in stationary pictures which they then use as inspiration and reference, but the way they would do the lighting just... It bothers me. Contrast always seemed extremely out of whack, even on the ones I like.
@LadyRhian: I haven't thought about Dragonlance in far too long. Great books when I was a kid. Lost interest in high school, though. Haven't really read a whole lot since even though I was a huge book nerd back in the day. Go figure. Elmore is a good example of what I meant when I said the contrast in older fantasy pictures seems way off, though. As beautiful as it is, there's something about it I find off-putting. I wish I could put my finger on it in a better way.
The more comic book/manga style has always been more my flavor and, I feel, more fitting for the game. DnD has just never really felt like oil painting high fantasy. It has always felt pulpier.
If anyone wants a kickstarter project, that's a freebie.
It's so childish, and I've always wondered why adult people would prefer it in Japan and other Asian countries..
Because thats how they developed over there. I did a report on this years ago, but it all boils down to the general, "cultural and historical perspectives influenced the art."I love it because it looks crisp and fresh to me.
Manga has always appealed to me because most of their styles are more anatomically correct while at the same time being very fanciful. It looks like the artists have greater attention to detail than the cartoons I grew up with.
I guess that's what bother me most with manga, it's almost always what looks like underage girls trying to look sexy..
It just rubs me the wrong way.
Also, the facial art seems too similar, give 5 characters a different wig and clothing, keep the same face, and that's it...
Imho, I just don't like that one genre. It's great that kids are taught lessons like teamwork, justice, friendship, etc., but it's not me.
You may already have your preference set in stone, but just keep in mind that there's quite a bit more to manga than the "popular" stuff shown over here on mainstream TV.
The last 3 years I've been playing a lot of games on my ipad, and a lot of my animosity towards the genre comes from the Japanese and Korean games converted to that platform. Out of curiosity and decent price points on these games, I've tried quite a few, and watched gameplay videos on others.
The art seems very childlike and simple in many of these games.
When I was younger, though, I watched a few animated movies by whatshisface - Kuwazaki?? Shit, can't recall his name and can't wiki anything, I'm at work and writing this on my phone..
Anyhow, I liked those movies, as I did the segment in Kill Bill by Tarantino..
I have to learn to be less judgemental... My reference frame is very narrow in anime/mango....
as well as stuff like this:
And this:
That last pic is exactly what I mean with bad/lazy facial artwork.
Take the two boys flanking the, again, very young, girl. Exchange the hairstyle/colour and clothing and it's the exact same faces...
I like the other ones very much though. Also, they look grown up, and not as it's made for pre-teens and teenagers.
I suddenly remembered the name of the films I watched when I was younger!
It was the Akira films by af Katsuhiro Otomo.
As I remember, very good stuff indeed.
That's twice in no time at all, on two different threads you've put me in my place.. (Insert huge smiley here).
then you have stuff like this
Hyung-Tae Kim is incredible. His art definitely stands out. My only beef with him is the incredible disproportion to lady bits. This picture is pretty good but he's got some other things that are clear fan service.
Inexplicably, Paradise Kiss wasn't very popular here, despite being about fashion and college age teens. It's the teenage stuff that sells best, and I don't know if that is because people in America feel that cartoons are for kids generally and steer away from stuff that's more adult, or the art style turns them off.
http://fs01.manga-access.com/manga/2766/85255/Junai_no_Seinen_ch00_pg01.jpg
Not that styles don't overlap. This is from Gensomaden Saiyuki, inspired by the same source as Dragonball Z and Dragonball:
You did put me in my place, but with good examples and you were very polite. :-)
In the end, I did remember the Akira films, and how good I thought they were when I saw them 20 years ago or so.
I will still say that there's a lot of JRPG and KRBG games out there with very simple and childish art out there that have been very popular. That was what I was hoping wouldn't seep over in hour western style RPG's.
I like many of your examples, some very good art.
Thanks for your patience with grumpy conservative old guy.
I just turned 45 this Sunday, and I'm still just a kid in a mans body, So I know what you mean. :-)
I do see that I'm sometimes a bit conservative and my real age seeps through when I hear myself say sentences that start with "now, back when I was young".
I just searched YouTube for the Akira films, and the trailers look as awesome as I remember, so I think I'll have to find a place to buy them so I can watch them again. They were awesome.
As someone who grew up in the 80's playing p&p Dungeons and Dragons the artwork of today just makes my eyes bleed. The "classic" (I'm going to call the artwork of 80's/early 90's classic from now on to save time) D&D art was beautiful, imaginitive and had an uniform vision.
I love it's way of being fantastic but grounded in reality at the same time. And the word 'grounded' is a key word here. For example: the armour and equipment aren't what you would call totally realistic but they look functional and make sense. Landscapes look otherworldly but at the same time they look like they _might_ exist somewhere sometime. The paintings aren't overcrowded: they have a clear sense of space, leaving room to illustrate interesting characters, often presenting an interesting scene or a small story.
Please don't tell me realism has no place in the discussion because "it's fantasy with wizards and stuff". The greatest part of the classic style is that you can RELATE to it. And fantasy (even high fantasy) must be relatable in order to work. That's why the best fantastic art (visual or otherwise) is grounded at least partly in real world and history.
Now let's look at some examples:
First, Larry Elmore. He's the guy you probably think first when someone is talking about classic D&D art. I've heard many call his paintings "stiff" and "static". Well, that sometimes happen when you use real models. Not as often I hear someone mention how good a storyteller he is. When I look at some of his paintings my imagination just starts to go wild ("Who are these people? What are their stories?"). Not to mention his gorgeous landscapes and pure technical prowess.
http://www.fond-ecran.com/ORIGINAUX/divers/larry_elmore/larry_elmore_004.jpg
http://www.tucoo.com/fantasy/f_larry_elmore/images/larry_elmore001.jpg
http://artgalleryenc.com/Content/Images/Upload/original/Image_20120920032439218_482b0203-a918-4583-852a-4fd7f4bdce87.JPEG
Also, ever heard of Keith Parkinson? He was a master:
http://www.boomove.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/KeithParkinson-Art-33-2Knights-Riding-Spotted_N_BrwonHorses.jpg
http://fantasy.mrugala.net/Keith Parkinson/Keith Parkinson - Ville de conte de fees.jpg
http://www.scenicreflections.com/files/Keith_Parkinson_Art_Wallpaper_lpl0u.jpg
I could go forever with these examples. Sure many of them are cheesy. Sure there's a lot that 80's hair and chainmail bikinis. But that's a big part of why I love it. My intrests are in serious art and D&D means nostalgic child-like wonder for me.
Now about the modern artwork... Man, I can't relate to any of it. First, I don't like digital art. I've got nothing against digital media per se, but digital visuals just don't do it for me. It just doesn't have the texture of an oil painting. For sci-fi it's passable at times but in fantasy? No way, jose. But my main beef with it is just the style. It's just... ehhhh. Here's a few atrocious examples of stuff I just can't stand:
http://paizo.com/image/content/CrimsonThrone/PZO9010-Barbarian_180.jpeg
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_vY8I5HvOvk8/SmC8UAPo86I/AAAAAAAAH6c/C8JUKbNHlWA/s400/333.jpg
And pretty much everything Wayne Reynolds.
It's cartoony, "edgy" (as in SPIKES, SPIKES EVERYWHERE! SPIKES!!!) and downright unrelatable. It's style before purpose. I might be totally wrong about this, but I suspect the main reason is the current "culture of awesome". What's that? It's instad of John Mclane fighting bad guys barefooted and with limited resources, it's him fighting a jet plane atop a highway exit ramp. It's insted of Luke and Vader dueling in a simple atmospheric location, it's two guys dueling in a platform sinking in a river of frigging lava. I'm propably wrong here, but anycrap.
Once again: I'm not trying to put anyone down because they have a different taste than me. And I know the examples I showed weren't totally fair. I just tried to illustrate a point.