• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Help and opinion on Pixel Art or High Resolution Art?

Pixel art or High Resolution Art?

  • Total voters
    31
midnightAI

midnightAI

Member
I need your help and opinion about how to go about a game I am working on (hopefully that isnt against any rules or anything, mods lock if it is)

Due to two games recently being shown at the PlayStation State of Play for Feb 2026, one being fully 2D pixel art (God of War: Sons of Sparta) and the other being more 2.5D high resolution art (Castlevania: Belmont Curse) it has made me rethink slightly how I go about a game I am going to be starting work on more heavily later this year (I have another game I am working on that will be properly revealed soon that I want to finish first)

There has been lots of comments in both threads about one or the other being trash with some saying both look good also, now regardless of the quality of both of these individual games, what is your opinion/preferred choice of style for 2D games? Beyond the poll, has the pixel art retro bubble burst? does high resolution art look 'tacky' and too Flash like? could high resolution art work well if somehow the flash like appearance is eliminated? (I have some idea on that)

For a little bit of context for the game I will be making without revealing too much at this point, the game will be inspired by oldschool Amiga and arcade games from the 90's, predominantly Turrican and Shinobi but I don't want those games to necessarily determine the style of graphics the game would have, this is more about what people would rather look at while they play.

Example of high resolution art and pixel art of the same sprite (possible look for the sprite in game, completely unfinished):

sss_comparison.png

(for high resolution the resolution would be 1920 x 1080, for pixel art is would be 640 x 360, the above image is an approximation of the size of main sprite based on a screen resolution of 1920 x 1080)
 
Last edited:
I loooovvveee good pixel art. Even more so when there is a limited palette.

But that's not to say I hate high res 2d when the gameplay is good.
 
For some unknown reason I have always preferred pixel art for 2d games, or even simpler looking games.

I love what they have done with the high colors and use of more advanced effects (zoom, rotations, particles effects, lighting/shading) in games like octopath travelers, owl boy, last night and the very detailed 32-bit consoles or retro arcade games like golden axe: revenge of death adder (add more, the list could be so long)

Some 2d games have a resolution slightly higher (as if they were made to mirror the kind of details we had on 640*480 (480p I guess) instead of the lower resolutions we had before (around 320*240, but still much lower on a lot of hardware. Given the size of TVs/monitors these days I think that would nake sense.

This is just me, since I never got further than "hey I should try to make a video game" I won't criticize too much.
 
MagiusNecros said:
What graphical style does game have for it's levels?

Just by these sprites I prefer the Pixel Art one on the right.
Click to expand...
well I'm not ready to show graphics for the individual levels currently, nothing is really fixed hence why I'm asking the question really as that will determine the graphical style, the first level however is set in a futuristic Japan but old style shops (a kinda juxtaposition between technologically advanced and also vintage Japan, think neon lights but bamboo scaffolding, hover cars but people fleeing on old style bikes as part of the incidental animations)
 
midnightAI said:
well I'm not ready to show graphics for the individual levels currently, nothing is really fixed hence why I'm asking the question really as that will determine the graphical style, the first level however is set in a futuristic Japan but old style shops (a kinda juxtaposition between technologically advanced and also vintage Japan, think neon lights but bamboo scaffolding, hover cars but people fleeing on old style bikes as part of the incidental animations)
Click to expand...
If it helps I love Neon Inferno and I am keeping a close eye on Acrolyte. So I'm more keen on Pixel Art.

Your sprite has more similarity with Acrolyte's style I think. You can look it up as I don't want to detract from current discussion.

I think it depends on the kind of art direction you want for your game.
 
High resolution good art. No reason for pixel art to exist aside from nostalgia, and nostalgia sales are quickly fading, as new generation gamers have no desire for pixelated art. It's why the "fortnite" style is present more often than not in modern games. You're also asking on a forum made out of millenials and boomers who lived with pixelated stuff, so I wouldn't make a game base off our answers here. We're minorities.

Snow White Haters GIF
 
Last edited:
MagiusNecros said:
If it helps I love Neon Inferno and I am keeping a close eye on Acrolyte. So I'm more keen on Pixel Art.

Your sprite has more similarity with Acrolyte's style I think. You can look it up as I don't want to detract from current discussion.

I think it depends on the kind of art direction you want for your game.
Click to expand...
I guess I'll have to come up with a full screen mockup of high resolution and pixel art rather than just a single sprite. The main sprite is a robot Ninja, game will play very similar to Turrican with a bit of melee combat thrown in for good measure along with wall sliding and platform hanging. I have had a look at Acrolyte and it will be quite a bit brighter than that more like Neon inferno but not quite as bright and a lot less cartoon like, again, more in line with Turrican 90's arcade games. (I miss Turrican a lot, was my favourite game growing up as a kid, they aren't making a new game based on that IP so thought I'd make my own along similar lines but it will be quite different also)
 
midnightAI said:
I guess I'll have to come up with a full screen mockup of high resolution and pixel art rather than just a single sprite. The main sprite is a robot Ninja, game will play very similar to Turrican with a bit of melee combat thrown in for good measure along with wall sliding and platform hanging. I have had a look at Acrolyte and it will be quite a bit brighter than that more like Neon inferno but not quite as bright and a lot less cartoon like, again, more in line with Turrican 90's arcade games. (I miss Turrican a lot, was my favourite game growing up as a kid, they aren't making a new game based on that IP so thought I'd make my own along similar lines but it will be quite different also)
Click to expand...
I think for Turrican specifically that Pixel Art might be best.

Keep us posted. A Turrican run and gun doesn't happen often.
 
How are you creating the art? if you're converting 3d models into 2d sprites for the high rest art, that's probably the way to go since it will be much less work in the long run, especially if you want to add/change things.
If you are drawing high res art, and then using some kind of skeletal motion graphic system for the animation, that will probably look less good than pixel art that's animated by hand, but save a little on time.
If you are drawing high rest art and drawing individual frames for animation, you're a psychopath 🙃
 
Big budget AAA game from veteran western dev studio- we want proper highend next gen graphics, not snes alike pixelated mess.
Anything else aka indie or AA games= w/e devs want
 
The Cockatrice said:
High resolution good art. No reason for pixel art to exist aside from nostalgia, and nostalgia sales are quickly fading, as new generation gamers have no desire for pixelated art. It's why the "fortnite" style is present more often than not in modern games. You're also asking on a forum made out of millenials and boomers who lived with pixelated stuff, so I wouldn't make a game base off our answers here. We're minorities.

Snow White Haters GIF
Click to expand...
Well, maybe, but its mixed at the moment which is how I feel about it. The way I am going about my current game and how I was going about this was thinking about it more like high resolution pixel art, so much of it is hand animated and practically drawn pixel by pixel, at least to touch up what I have brushed by hand that high resolution pixel art is a more apt description, at least for the sprite work. I'm also in my 50's, but I have done pixel art for a long time as well as high resolution art, so I don't really have a preference as such but one thing I do agree on for many is the flash like look of some high resolution art games but a lot of that is down to how its animated which I feel can be avoided by using hand drawn animation rather than using skeletal animation using tools like Spine (dont get me wrong, that can create good results if used well).
 
Reizo Ryuu said:
How are you creating the art? if you're converting 3d models into 2d sprites for the high rest art, that's probably the way to go since it will be much less work in the long run, especially if you want to add/change things.
If you are drawing high res art, and then using some kind of skeletal motion graphic system for the animation, that will probably look less good than pixel art that's animated by hand, but save a little on time.
If you are drawing high rest art and drawing individual frames for animation, you're a psychopath 🙃
Click to expand...
jack cuckoo GIF

(well, kinda, my plan is to use a combination of something like Spine but then generate that as a sprite sheet and then correct and improve the animations so they are less 'flash' like)
 
Both styles can be good, and both can look cheap.
Overall I personally prefer high resolution art, most of the metroidvanias I've enjoyed in recent years have used that style (Silksong, Nine Sols, Metroid Dread, Ori, etc).

That said, while I know nothing about game development, I could imagine that if you are making your game alone or dealing with limited resources pixel art might be a bit easier to make look good. I've noticed a lot of games like these made by solo devs like Animal Well or Axiom Verge tend to go with a Pixel Art aesthetic.
 
Hi-res. Too many developers have jumped on the pixel art bandwagon and for me at least, they all look too similar so I quickly swipe past them on Steam, etc.
 
midnightAI said:
Well, maybe, but its mixed at the moment which is how I feel about it. The way I am going about my current game and how I was going about this was thinking about it more like high resolution pixel art, so much of it is hand animated and practically drawn pixel by pixel, at least to touch up what I have brushed by hand that high resolution pixel art is a more apt description, at least for the sprite work. I'm also in my 50's, but I have done pixel art for a long time as well as high resolution art, so I don't really have a preference as such but one thing I do agree on for many is the flash like look of some high resolution art games but a lot of that is down to how its animated which I feel can be avoided by using hand drawn animation rather than using skeletal animation using tools like Spine (dont get me wrong, that can create good results if used well).
Click to expand...
If you're good at what you do and if its not much of an issue, why not combine both? Like make your game have a unique level or two where everything becomes pixelated, or even better, graphics option to swap between them? Not many games have these things. Probably a lot of work.
 
I like both styles personally. In general I am really fond of 2D games as a rule. As far as whether or not I will like an individual product, that's going to depend on a lot of factors such as the animation quality, style, etc. But I would never say in a sweeping such statement that I don't like one or the other personally.
 
The Cockatrice said:
If you're good at what you do and if its not much of an issue, why not combine both? Like make your game have a unique level or two where everything becomes pixelated, or even better, graphics option to swap between them? Not many games have these things. Probably a lot of work.
Click to expand...
I was considering a switch (like R-Type Dimensions) but it could be too much work really, still, not ruling anything out at the moment.
 
I prefer good 2D pixel art, but most modern 2D pixel art games look mediocre at best. GoW Sons of Sparta falls into that category. I can go play my SNES or Genesis and enjoy the pixel art on those consoles so much more. I will say that the few that do it right on modern consoles make games that look stunning.
 
Pixel art when it's done well leaves more room to imagination. To make a bold comparison, I feel it's a bit like impressionism in painting, more interesting than realism. But it requires expertise.
 
I would say both, depends on the type of approach a game has.
If your purpose is remembering the old times, making the person feel like is playing a Mega Drive or Master System or just feel like your art doesn't translate well to 3D, then go to pixel.
Any other reason is valid for high resolution art. I would not suggest going for high resolution for realistic human look though. If its animated or close to anime, then its good.
 
Von Hugh said:
I don't think Sons of Sparta is pixel art.
Click to expand...
It is, they did export some model animations from the other GOW games but they drew over those, still, they aren't 3D models directly and they don't use high resolution art (at least not as the final output). They may have 'cheated' in a few areas but it is closer to traditional pixel art than any other style.
 
In my opinion we leave pixel-art territory when we go above 240p. Because above, you are pretty much constrained to resort to other methods and can't make everything by hand anymore.

Also, I see pixel-art as an artistic approach (that was forced) to do deal with limitations. Usually these limitations were about the number of colors for the sprite or background layer (usually 16 by sprite or layer). And then around the global palette, could be 32k on SNES, 4k on Game Gear, 512 on MD/PCE or 64 on SMS.

So in the end, if this is simply to take high-res 3D assets and pixelize them in still higher res than 240p, with pretty much no constraints around palette size and global palette size, then it will end up looking like pixel salad to me, rather than carefully crafted visuals. In that case, you might as well go with the high-res visuals, and why not offer a pixelating filter but that's it.

Only my personal opinion of course (I make games too).
 
Last edited:
I like both. Imo the decision should be done taking into account the overall style of the game, how the scenarios are going to look and most important: which one will take less effort and time to make and the scope of the project. If it's a small game you could go with high-effort assets no problem, but if the scope is big I think it would be smart to cut some corners here and there so you don't end up spending a myriad of hours just making assets.
 
I think both styles can work if done well.

One of the criticisms I've had against some pixel style graphics is when they're obviously 3D renders converted to 2D, and I say this as someone who has worked on a game that did it and I was unhappy that the art team decided to take that approach. It can work, but it risks looking more like an efficiency process than a creative decision. The beauty of going for pixel style is in how each frame is crafted to maximize the expression for that moment and not just an interpolation between the last and next key frame, which is what you get from 3D or 2D motion graphics.

Another consideration for pixel style is how the pixels exist in the world. Going back to something like the Amiga as you mentioned, the pixels were plotted in fixed space, meaning that sprites and background scrolling moved on a pixel grid. Another thing that I think can break the illusion of modern pixel style games is that pixels are treated as the motion elements, not the grid-like projection, so you get pixels drawn on screen that are off grid as it were. Something like this, and anything really, is down to a stylistic choice, but perhaps at least worth consideration should you want to go that route.
 
Last edited:
PeteBull said:
Big budget AAA game from veteran western dev studio- we want proper highend next gen graphics, not snes alike pixelated mess.
Anything else aka indie or AA games= w/e devs want
Click to expand...

Yeah. It's like rich people giving out crappy candy on Halloween. When you know they can afford to do more, but do the bare minimum, it looks bad.
 
I'd go with the higher res art, just because there is a quite a bit of saturation on pixel art.

You can still sell pixel art if you have interesting lighting/shading effects layered on top of it, but you'd probably stick out more with the higher res stuff.

However, if one is a pain to animate or do particle/hit effects well for gameplay mechanics, pick the other.
 
I'm partial to pixel art, but I don't want it everywhere.
As for your example, I think the pixel art is great (needs some polish) and going for 360p is a good idea as a more traditional 240 looks too chunky on a modern display. Consider Crosscode's 568x320, the pixel art there is just right and a lower resolution means less work.
 
midnightAI said:
I need your help and opinion about how to go about a game I am working on (hopefully that isnt against any rules or anything, mods lock if it is)

Due to two games recently being shown at the PlayStation State of Play for Feb 2026, one being fully 2D pixel art (God of War: Sons of Sparta) and the other being more 2.5D high resolution art (Castlevania: Belmont Curse) it has made me rethink slightly how I go about a game I am going to be starting work on more heavily later this year (I have another game I am working on that will be properly revealed soon that I want to finish first)
Click to expand...


It's difficult to say one or the other without knowing the color palette, the theme of the game and some other things. IMO the problem with GOW it's not pixel art but its bland style. Blasphemous is pixel art and looks fantastic. For example, Celeste's pixel art is very basic but it matches the mood of the game very well.

The problem with high resolution like Castlevania (which looks great) is that you also need great animations to match that syle. I guess it's more work.
 
falconhoof said:
I think both styles can work if done well.

One of the criticisms I've had against some pixel style graphics is when they're obviously 3D renders converted to 2D, and I say this as someone who has worked on a game that did it and I was unhappy that the art team decided to take that approach. It can work, but it risks looking more like an efficiency process than a creative decision. The beauty of going for pixel style is in how each frame is crafted to maximize the expression for that moment and not just an interpolation between the last and next key frame, which is what you get from 3D or 2D motion graphics.

Another consideration for pixel style is how the pixels exist in the world. Going back to something like the Amiga as you mentioned, the pixels were plotted in fixed space, meaning that sprites and background scrolling moved on a pixel grid. Another thing that I think can break the illusion of modern pixel style games is that pixels are treated as the motion elements, not the grid-like projection, so you get pixels drawn on screen that are off grid as it were. Something like this, and anything really, is down to a stylistic choice, but perhaps at least worth consideration should you want to go that route.
Click to expand...
Agreed on your second point, very obvious on rotational elements
 
Holammer said:
I'm partial to pixel art, but I don't want it everywhere.
As for your example, I think the pixel art is great (needs some polish) and going for 360p is a good idea as a more traditional 240 looks too chunky on a modern display. Consider Crosscode's 568x320, the pixel art there is just right and a lower resolution means less work.
Click to expand...
640 x 360 is a nice resolution, it scales well into 1920 x 1080 (3x) and even though it's low resolution it does allow for much more detailed sprites than 240 as you mentioned. The art above is very early and the pixel art in particular has had less time spent on it, it's too grainy at the moment which is easy enough to solve but was made quite quickly just to make this thread to show the differences.
 
TKOFromTokyo said:
I prefer good 2D pixel art, but most modern 2D pixel art games look mediocre at best. GoW Sons of Sparta falls into that category. I can go play my SNES or Genesis and enjoy the pixel art on those consoles so much more. I will say that the few that do it right on modern consoles make games that look stunning.
Click to expand...
A few games that did it right are CrossCode, Sea of Stars and Chained Echoes. I like how all three did pixel art.
 
Blasphemous, Valfaris, Street Fighter 3, Metal Slug, Symphony of the Night, Super Metroid and so on.

Also use as many frames of animation as possible.
 
Last edited:
midnightAI midnightAI if you ever want to engage in gamedev chatting feel free to drop over here!

mopspear

|OT| Games  Thread 'Game Development Thread - What project are you working on? Why aren't you working on it right now?'

We need a community thread dedicated to game development.

Post the projects you're working on.

Include some screenshots or a video.
  • Love
  • Like
 
Fluid pixel art is a thing of beauty few things can match. Hi-res isn't always bad, but sometimes it is borderline "mobile gamey".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

DOOM 4 Assets and concept art
17
333
Walliwallipaloo replied
The Official Art In Video Games Thread
|OT| Social Opinion 
36
1K
ResetEraVetVIP replied
Fable Reboot New Pieces of Concept Art Showcase Locations
News 
46
475
Gabe ♥ replied
Tech art frames for nerds
2
220
Rentahamster replied
Iraqi Customs Detained A Clair Obscur Fan's Art Book Because It Might Be A "Possibly Ancient" Artifact
0
56
Thick Thighs Save Lives replied
Top Bottom