Can we define SOVL?

Can we define SOVL?

Attached: 1637542674388.jpg (1441x1026, 340K)

old = soul
new = soulless

bright colors are for children so we can't have that in our childrens platformer (even though they're a lot more appealing to the eye)

Pretty much any game where the devs had to do weird shit and pushed the hardware as hard as possible while maintaining smooth game-play.
These days everything is copy/paste UE4/Unity no effort garbage.


Soul is the beginning of any franchise, before it gained notoriety. It doesn't have to be a retro game either. For example Minecraft java is soul, or Fortnite Season 0
>inb4 rage

Attached: maxresdefault.jpg (1280x720, 130.61K)

>Friend was hyped for STW so he got me to play Battle Royale as soon as it started.
>Season 0, no skins, no wacky shit
>No one builds
>When they do, its strategic basses and not in the middle of combat
I can't believe I'm nostalgic for Fortnite

Genuine passion and effort


Retarded zoomer opinion.

it's not but it's impossible to explain to someone who sees it this way.
It's like trying to define love with words to someone who has never loved, or a landscape to a blind person.

>ITT zoomer aks what soul is for the 90000th time when it has been explained plenty of times in a stealth attempt of disproving it

Attention to detail within hardware limitations.

It's this but also whatever you grew up with. Unless you grew up with some straight garbage like Sonic 06 or something, you will find a way to call it soulful someday (and even for something like Sonic 06 it's very easy to do that)

Old good, new bad, most of the time.
One exception I can think of is Shin Megami Tensei. Those old games were absolutely terrible. They started out way too grindy (the original DDS: Megami Tensei), then became too easy thanks to the gun command.

Attached: 35F1A9ED-17D9-410C-B75F-9F7A2CC099CE.jpg (809x542, 238.75K)

Yeah, it's called nostagia filter and it's been explained hundred of times before for decades.

It's like asking what "art" means. You can define it in many ways, but they always lack something - but still, anyone is capable of noticing whether something is or isn't art.

soul = a game I like
souless = I want to start a shitstorm on v/

Souls is a term that has been used in creative fields for decades at least. And outside videogames it's more commonly used to describe contemporary works, because there it's mroe related to the artist "getting" something and covneying it that some quick excuse to justify how the game from your childhood are better than the games from someone else's childhood.

>It's like trying to define love with words to someone who has never loved
haha yeah

>hire a talented team with a coordinated vision to make a game that will stand out among the competitors
>use your existing reputation and marketing budget to ensure that your massive untalented team who have mainly been hired so that your game has larger numbers can push out a fairly mediocre game that's easy to market

You're all wrong. Soul is measurable, objective, and fact based. Think of all the details in MGS 3. If you don't eat your stomach growls and gaurds hear it. Snake can actually build up a tolerance to poisonous bites. Or Conker's Bad Fur Day, the game pushed the hardware to the limit using clever graphical tricks in order to get it to run. In Half Life 2, the enemy AI is so fucking good they really feel like they're working together to coordinate attacks on you and even try to get away from you if they're injured. Even some aspects of Halo 1-3 have soul. Like enemy chatter being so numerous and dynamic that you can sneak up and listen to voice lines you've never heard even after 10 play throughs. Soul is when extra care is put into a game, little details you may not even notice. Devs who treat games like art (whether it IS art or not). Soul is when you think "wow, they didn't have to do that, but it's awesome they did."

Attached: 1652309568710.jpg (422x600, 80.15K)

>people unironically believe it's about old vs new
I hate you asswipes so much. I'm glad there are some people in this thread that actually know what it is

Attached: 1643134871982.gif (192x192, 3.54K)

>In Half-Life 2, the enemy AI is so fucking good ...
Half-Life 1*

As some anons have said, you can't really define what soul is. Every definition is in part correct (or simply false like hardware limitations), but never explanatory, and often times something that for me has soul might not for you (could be nostalgia, could be preferences). But what's easier for everyone to understand is what soulless is, just look at fortnite and tell me the people who are working on it are doing everything out of passion and not because their market analytics have shown them what is popular + what their hr department told them is acceptable. Soul, in essence, is the opposite of soulless

Attached: soul_0.png (675x552, 579.02K)

Soul is literally zoomer faggotry word. Old/v/ just called it TECHNOLOGY.

Let us therefore ask the obvious next question: what is the relation between SOUL and KINO?

KINO is for movies.
A SOULFUL game is technically called LUDO.

If something has SOUL then it's KINO. Simple as that bro.

Soul and Kino have nothing to do one with another. Besides one being for movies and the other in general, Soul is more feeling the passion of the artist behind the craft while kino is more a proper execution of the idea, something solid and well done all around.

Yusuke in P5 explains it the best: It's another word for something having 'heart'.

Attached: 1652346992836.jpg (1125x1171, 748.39K)

ludo/kino is a different concept from soul
it's the difference between brilliance and charm

>In Half-Life 2, the enemy AI is so fucking good

It's quite simple, soul is "high effort" and soulless is "low effort". This goes beyond just the graphics.

In terms of graphics game that conveys the environment well through creative uses of the available technology and a good and consistent art style has soul. A game that simply has more polygons and a more reealistic look despite it clashing with the overall theme and feel of the game is lazy and soulless.

Here's an easy example: Mario 64 is soul, mario running on unreal engine 4 with lightning effects and realistic scenario is soulless.

Qualities that convey the feeling that the person making something truely cared about what they were making.
Working with limitations for example, makes this wildly apparent.

Attached: 12312.jpg (1280x720, 91.37K)

Nah, it isn't.

What people see as "soul" is simply good design theory in terms of gesture, structure, positive/negative shapes, color.

Exact same shit applies to traditional art and why some images look better to golems without them understanding why it's triggering all the pleasing parts of their brain.

The older stuff generally tends to have more "soul" because of smaller dev studios where each artist gets to focus on their specific image, inspiration, and expression. While today not only are studios overstaffed and work is overlayed with other work, but everyone has been taught a hugbox of "expressing your art" where nothing is wrong and everything is valid. So the nuances have been removed.

The Japs still have a semblance of talent because they are worked like mules and haven't changed their work ethics in hundreds of years.

tl;dr People who don't understand "soul" aren't artist, and therefore are just niggers.

Attached: idea.png (624x469, 266.64K)

>In Half Life 2, the enemy AI is so fucking good
You misspelled Half Life 1.

>What people see as "soul" is simply good design theory in terms of gesture, structure, positive/negative shapes, color.
Bro something can look like butt and still be really full of soul.
You tried to dunk but forgot you were at your team's hoop.

*Basically* correct and that's all that's really matters. It's hard to deny that, in nearly all cases, newer thing has less soul than older thing. All the fags ITT will harp about how soul isn't caused by age, which is true in the most useless sense, because soulfulness happens to be almost perfectly correlated with age.

Well HL2 AI is the same level as games of today so it blew minds, only time game has had better AI is F.E.A.R. And before someone says the tired "HL1", just because enemy spams bullshit, you are easy to trick. The AI is dumb as fuck.

SOUL, KINO, BASED, WIN = I like it.
SOULESS, UNBASED, FAIL = I don't like it.

Attached: 1618432929268.png (600x578, 658.4K)

That's literally not any more descriptive than "soul".

Yes, soul comes from mastery of your tool and the energy you put into it. You can be extremely simplistic and still produce quality images.

I am not sure what your point even is here, user.

TECHNOLOGY and SOUL have nothing in common, faggot.

My cousin recently bought a new TV and he had some kind of frame-rate boosting shit on that made everything look like trash. The colours looked like neon, there was extreme ghosting and when I asked him what the fuck he was doing he said 'It looks great.'

The point is some people are literally incapable of seeing garbage before their eyes. This helped me understand, for instance, people who think the new Demon's Souls game looked okay.

>Masters doing master stuff literally flawless lords of their craft that can effortlessly create perfection
Stop being dumb, no dumb here

Attached: 3-0120-31-0230.gif (318x180, 1.21M)

The spirit, in CVSTODIA

Another sign of the fall of a civilization, user. The pleasure is placed before the act, then dialed up to 11. Nothing is valued or appreciated. A sense of perspective lacks in one's character, all virtues and aspects outsourced to what they consume, etc

This, but ironically

The crash remakes look ugly either way.

Attached: 1618580746705.jpg (2400x9756, 3.53M)

Attached: chair.png (632x482, 169.12K)

How am I wrong? There's intuition to create something, and when doing it with a tool you have to master it.

People often put the cart before the horse when they elaborate on such things where they believe the rigid structure of "rules" in terms of artistic expression is what gives the piece its "soul". When it's actually the inverse and one can sense/feel what flows and what doesn't, and then they become better at it, then we compartmentalize it and teach it in universities.

What parts do you even disagree on, user?

If you can't feel it you're an npc and probably can't see images in your head. Just consume products.

Pretty much this. The synapse creature doesn't care what it consumes, just as long as it consumes. They'll come into these threads to try and be right, and not to discuss the depths of the human spirit in acts of creation.

Attached: manga1.jpg (1365x2048, 1.05M)

Typical of the golem to be a reductionist of the material world. Head and soul empty of what he cannot conceive.

Hl1 has very advanced ai, it is dumb in combat but it does consider a lot of stuff in it's tactics. Ironically the really stupid ai is actually the one in fear, it seems smarter than it is because it tells you what it's doing

My issue is that soul isn't intrinsically linked to mastery but passion. The pursuit of mastery can be a result of said passion. But mastery isn't of itself passion.
It's the difference between something like a babbies first super mario rom hack that's badly rough around the edges and a soulless kaizo "inspired" hack by a long time "master" of romhacking.


oh come on, janny, I know you're doing your job but that was funny.

>something can look like butt and still be really full of soul.
you can just say 'morrowind'

Attached: 310ee550-41de-424d-a23c-93103a18494a.jpg (461x461, 37.6K)

Attached: whatarecats.jpg (223x197, 44.49K)

Fear didn't have good ai. It's an illusion.