I felt that in my last shot, the house actually was sort of... uncanny compared to the GBA version. A new sort of uncanny introduced by a dynamic perspective. It would seem, if a design is too simplified it can feel uncanny when viewed too close. Every sort of detail has its ideal distance. Apparently the brain has basic expectations on detail to distance. When viewed from afar, it accepts less detail and even unrealistic detail, in the assumption there is more detail and more correct detail when going closer. You might even say, it's about managing a suspense of disbelieve in the detail/distance.
Conversely, too much cramped detail far away may be uncanny as well, but first looks just too busy/noisy to be of any other concern.
Normally, this is less of a problem in pixelart, since the artist has absolute and final control on the perspective, and plans the design fit accordingly from inception.
As well as there have been developed accepted norms of designs for certain scenes.
That too is the reason why a well made dynamic level of detail system is important the more dynamic the view on the scene is, aesthetically as much as for performance concerns.
The following scene overview is more akin to the GBA sample that the house was designed for, with a bigger shop sign above door accordingly:
Hrrrrm, but I'm not quite so sure yet. Maybe it's the different iso angle on the scene compared to the classic oblique perspective. Or the different colours. Or resolution. Or maybe the contrasting detail of the unfinished surroundings messes with my senses. or is it an imbalance of detail between rooftop and lower stage of house? Is something amiss?
Your senses are more refined, does it look strange to you? or fine? for what it is? Does it look just like a soulless render, or does the simple design maintain its charm in translation?
So basically, I wonder if these designs/forms/abstractions and graphical "tropes" that worked for GBA kinda games are mostly tied to their exact conditions of implementation, like resolution and perspective, and the moment you go beyond these conditions it looks sorta stupid? Does it? How big is a need for entirely new standards of design in this new medium to start with, or do the old standards suffice? slightly revised? These are the questions weighing heavily on my mind.
Well, it's prolly fine for what it is, looks fun enough. I'm making up weird esoteric problems just so I don't have to face the real problems of my work. way to procrastinate. ;p
