When I first looked at using Unity, I noticed that most of the games using Unity looked “cartoony” or somewhat silly I guess. But then, I was also told by someone who I consider to have more technical knowledge than I, that this was only because that was the “style” of the games that a lot of developers make with Unity. And that if you wanted to, you could make a game with a gritty, dark, hard-nosed style of textures and graphics, and that it wasn’t something inherent in Unity itself (and perhaps the way it renders things).
So, to some extent, I’m trying to make my game not “cartoony” on purpose. I’m trying to make it more realistic in nature (at least that’s the goal). But having been working on my game for quite some-time, it’s hard for me to tell if my game has a “cartoony” look – even if I try to avoid it.
Overall, I’m not quite sure. I’m just wondering if other people have noticed this. And if so, how can you avoid it? I know textures and shaders have a lot to do with how your game “looks”, but lets assume you use the most realistic textures and shaders possible, will there still be an “ethereal, can’t quite put my finger on it” cartoony vibe that still emanates from your game?
Is there something about how Unity was designed and built that makes this so? Is there some weird vibe, or are people just seeing things?
Show some screenshots, otherwise we’d have to buy crystal ball to tell if your game really look cartoony.
And even best graphics won’t help here, I think.
What you are probably experiencing is called “uncanny valley”. It’s terms from robotics, but it extends quite well into games, both character and environment-wise. I’m leaving explanation of it to more knowledgeable people, since I’m not good at explaining this term. Just google it if you can’t wait.
Ya I guess it’s something along the lines of the “uncanny valley” darkhog. But is it a phenomena that is concretely real (actually happening)? Or is it something that is being perceived incorrectly – perhaps even an optical illusion so-to-speak.
Do engines have “personalities” of sorts, where games made in the UT engine look and feel a certain way, no matter how they’re developed, and games made in the frostbite engine behave and look a certain way (purely by the nature of the engine).
What do you think? As for screenshots of my game, I would post some if I was really concerned about my game in particular (which I am but not that much lol), I’m more thinking overall – in all Unity games, not just mine.
It probably depends a lot on how you define “cartoony” in your own mind. I tend to find most handpainted textures more “cartoony” than those done from photographs of real surfaces, yet I prefer the look of games with those handpainted textures more.
Looking through some of my Steam games, I really don’t see any I would consider “dark and gritty” and definitely not any particularly photorealistic. Even a “dark” game like Fallout 3 seems more “cartoony” than realistic to me.
However, I have noticed that there is a big difference in the final polish on many games. Tweaking the shaders/textures just right, perfecting the lighting, getting those other little details just so. This can make a huge difference in the final look of a game. Since Unity is used by a lot of hobbiests and independents who don’t necessarily have the talent or resources to dedicate to that extra polish, it seems logical to me that Unity games would look different than AAA games where there might be a whole team dedicated to just adding the final bits of polish.
The reason lots of Unity games look similar is that they are using the default shaders, light intensity etc. Games like slender have used the Unity assets and thats why people think that all Unity games look like that when really they probably don’t even realise the games that don’t have that style because they turn off the controls menu and make there own (and shaders).
No, if you use custom shaders and textures then I don’t think your game will have a cartoony look providing your shaders are not making it look cartoony. If you want a realistic look then perhaps have a look at some of the packages on the asset store, perhaps something like Marmoset sky shop would give the visual style you want.
All good points, thanks. I just wanted to get other people’s thoughts on this for the most part. So, what I gather, especially from TylerPerry is that shaders have a LOT to do with it, as well as the amount of time/manpower spent on details.
So, just a thought, does this mean that if the guys over at Blizzard were forced to create StarCraft II all over again, with all of their AAA tools available to them, but with the caveat that they HAD to use the Unity engines core physics/rendering engines (for example), that the game would not look any different.
“Yes” (essentially), because the look of game is entirely up the developers/artists making the game. There is nothing inherent to the Unity that defines the look of games. As others have said, a bulk of the games you may be looking at that were produced using Unity come from amateurs/hobbyists who don’t have the skills/resources/knowledge or Pro version of Unity to produce that type of look. Another thing to consider is that is Unity is used heavily for mobile games, which because of current limits, affect the general look of mobile games. (to a degree).
And “no” because Unity is not the same type of engine that AAA games use. Hypothetically speaking (since it wouldn’t be used to create a AAA game) it most likely wouldn’t look “exactly” the same. Not worse or better, just not the same. (differences in the rending pipeline/process). But essentially, the visual style/quality/appearance could be achieved in Unity if you have the same quality of Artists/Tech Artists that you have on a game like Starcraft.
Unity is powerful tool. But just like a pencil, brush or musical instrument, results are based on the skill of the person using the tool, not the tool itself.
Its not really unique to unity, I think what you’re recognizing is how independent developers in general tend to opt for stylized art styles. Its usually because they’re easier to produce. Photorealistic AAA-quality scenes are absolutely possible to produce in Unity, but only if you have the time, skill and manpower to make them.
I haven’t seen anything photorealistic on a console or anywhere else in games. A hi-res texture is a long ways from looking realistic even with high contrasted dark looks like the OP wants to see. It was made high contrast and dark because the scene is so unrealistic looking.
Try back in 3 years but by then the genres you like will be even more faded then they are already.
semantics; I was using it in the fashion that most people in the games industry use it (although I would argue some racing games come awful close in certain cases).