I am really scracthing my head with this sentence , Forget about HZD for a min , why are you generalising that CGI and pre-rendered makes character looks lifeless, becasue its Sharp, i mean first i thought you just jumbled up your post, but its really confusing now.
If you have said "man this looks stiff and plastic, might be ingame" Than i could have agreed with you on that, "But lifeless because CGI" , i mean did you recently check the FOR HONOR beta launch trailer , Thats CGI and a damn good Trailer. and you can't say to me that look lifeless. Sorry. may be i am bit misunderstanding you there .
It's not a generalization and it's not something I think of every game. I don't know why you would think that? You see others pointing out how convincing Horizons in-game animations are. You see the way her character expresses itself during gameplay.
But I assumed that the explanation could be that maybe if it was pre-rendered or CGI or used some form of post processing that could explain why the game looks so wrong in the with the facial animations. How their mouth moves, how their eyes are dead; with too much or too little eyelight.
I have nothing against CGI or pre-rendered cut scenes (see earlier games posted in this thread)- It just so happens that in the past we've seen developers outsourcing cut scenes to another team and/or another company and sometimes the result is lifeless, sterile looking characters in cut scenes who are animated with jank, while the developers who know the game and lore and world the best are involved in it, day to day.
The thing is- it's not accurate the call the cut scenes stiff and plastic. It's more like a over exxageration in certain areas. You have incredible detail in few parts of the face, but then the rest of the face feels like it's not animated and it makes for a real-doll type of look. Does it look plastic? No, not to me- Another poster said it looked like the characters is covered in some form of foundation. We've seen this happen in other games when they've resorted to use CGI. That's not a generalization or me hating CGI, but it has happened in the past with other games.
"I dislike the art direction" And thats the main reason isn't , Art is subjective its not good nor bad, what don't works for you works for me and maybe not for others too. Completely agrees on that. But if you have cheked the story trailer which came out before E3 , all the current designs was there, so "change of vision" "they are reaching"is not exactly i can see here.
Regarding The mishmash design , again go check the PSX panel discussion, They explained why there homes and armor are mixed with robot parts. These are not clans or Something Like FOR HONOR where each group have there distinctive look. But you are not convinced by the Art Direction as you said , so i an see where are you coming for.
No. Don't get it twisted. There are two core components to the criticism:
1) Animation; Animation as in discussing what sort of movement best suits a character or object. There is a lot less subjective analysis because when we're talking about what feels weighted in terms of obeying the physics of the world. My main contention was; ingame Horizon looks expressive on point; In cut scenes it looks awkward and offputting (facial animations, mouth movement, character tones, acceleration of actions looking telegraphed ("fake movie fighting").
2) Art Direction; Sure art direction is subjective, but there are many things with regards to character design we can discuss that are based on some core principles we consider for good design.
For one; Does the character have a distinct shilouette; Is it memorable, does it visually and audio visually become a cohesive role? does its animations fit it? Does it look right with a sexy character pose or does it add to it that it is sexualized? These are some of the things where we can put down some markers on what consistutes good art direction.
What I meant when I say I think the Devs are reaching is that the melting pot of inspiration they seem to be taken from many tribal cultures (I see Pagan, Celtic, Aztec, Inka, Mystic- probably more) objects, symbols, tattoos, headgear and orinments on these characters. To me it feels less like a distinct style of culture they are appropriating (which I have no problems with), but rather that they just flung cultural memes and saw what stucks. Some of the characters are overloaded with idiotic levels of detail in the outfit. Look at 2 characters from the trailer:
Both of them are highly detailed but they also consist of a useless waste of added accessories to their character which doesn't add, but takes away from their characters. With the male character they went for a Mayan style headdress with tons of gadgets and gizmos. Optically it takes away from the character.
Same for the female character; She is loaded with straps, buckles, wires and things strapped onto her character needlessly. Less is often more when it comes to character design. It's in my opinion better to have a strong silhouette and focus less on adding many trinkets to a character on the assumption that making them filler will make them memorable.
There is a term often used in art (and design) about killing your darlings.
So if you have a character who wears Mayan/Aztec/Inka symbols and headgear, and then another character wearing endo european tribal tattoos and symbols, I am trying to find the red thread.
Optically in the sense of how something looks practically (functionally) and then what something means culturally. Everything you add to a character communicates something.
I am not against the idea of the characters wearing scraps of metal and technology- Other games have done it (we've talked about other post apocalyptic games earlier in this thread) - It's that the style frame looks all over the place, and that annoys me.
I don't like the outfit on the male character. It looks off putting and it makes me want to not pay attention to him. They could have toned it down and made something that would let us better feel the character instead of looking like he assembled a power ranger outfit in home depot.
Ahoy has 3 layers of necklesses- a massive metal toreso with matching arm guards. underneath she wears a dark blown fur coat on her shoulders. Then there is the headgear with the matching metal ornament on top. She doesn't need all of this crap. Her hairstyles alone is what makes her stand out. All of this just takes away from her.
I don't buy this (using your for honor example) that just because something is sharp it is good design or that people shouldn't think about their designs just because it is technical sound. Photorealism and " it looks so real" is incredible uninteresting versus having characters that are expressive and pleasant to look at.
So to recap; excess detail makes it look busy and tiring to look at, a mishmash of symbols makes it difficult to decode the style guide and cultures they are trying to channel. And finally, the aesthetics themselves ("does this character look cool") look problematic and goofy. The outfits are not balanced.
If we are using Enslaved (the previous example) you can see the style guide and thematic is quite simple. The color palette is bright, the characters are rather bare bones and the inspiration is a classic tale (Journey to the West). But it doesn't go to far as making the characters channel chinese headgears or floating on clouds or has Wuxia action. Nor is Monkey an actual Monkey. The style is controlled, the characters are toned down (even though they also wear scraps of metal). I can easily decode the games artistic premise and I know exactly what it is.
Again, I'm talking about character designs; and specifically the clothing they wear. The Robot-Dinosaurs look really cool in my opinion.