[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/v/ - Video Games


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


File: ffpr.jpg (37 KB, 739x415)
37 KB JPG
FF1-4 look really good.
FF5 looks awful
FF6 looks... less awful, but still worse than the SNES version.

What happened? How did they make 1-4 look great but then 5 almost hurts to look at?
>>
Meh. I didn't particularly care for the visual presentation in any of them. It felt like a lazy attempt to be "pixel" without any acknowledgment for the beauty and skill that went into it over the years. Chrono Trigger probably being one of Square's best-looking pixel art games.

I blame indie games for significantly lowering the bar in the minds of consumers.
>>
>>743403916
seiken densetsu 3 looks way better



[Advertise on 4chan]

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.