Winner of best graphics of e3 2010 (GT)

haters gonna hate: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wXzg0D-cKds

I, for one, am thrilled Kirby won

Rofl the Wii has a graphix king now!

Move over Crysis!

The award should be renamed best art style, because Epic Yarn is no best graphics nominee.FIipMode

[QUOTE="FIipMode"]The award should be renamed best art style, because Epic Yarn is no best graphics nominee.jg4xchamp

Champ beat me to it. Of course it still needs to be asked;

Does Kirby's Epic Yarn have... (wait for it) da foliage??? :o

Why is the name of the category being debated here, the category clearly is meant to indicate what's the best looking game (" best graphics" seems like an appropriate label for that). Obviously they don't think Kirby has the best technical graphics. What's the point of saying which one is technically more impressive when in the end that apparently has no bearing on which one actually looks better?

You'll also notice Gamespot also had Kirby listed as a nominee for it's E3 best graphics category, along with other very technically impressive games. Once again, the category isn't best technical graphics, it's simply which ones looked the best; "eye candy", as Gamespot put it.

[QUOTE="FIipMode"]The award should be renamed best art style, because Epic Yarn is no best graphics nominee.jg4xchamp

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"][QUOTE="FIipMode"]The award should be renamed best art style, because Epic Yarn is no best graphics nominee.FIipMode

Gamespot's E3 awards only had "Best Graphics", the nominees are Castlevania: Lords of Shadow, Gran Turismo 5, Crysis 2, Killzone 3 and Kirby: Epic Yarn. Gran Turismo won.

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"][QUOTE="FIipMode"]The award should be renamed best art style, because Epic Yarn is no best graphics nominee.FIipMode

Since when does a good looking game have to be pushing a lot of Polygons?

Kirby looks amazing, I feel saddened that the shortsighted fanboys can't see past polygon count. Great choice by GameTrailers and further proof Wii is a great console.

To all those complaining that there should be a separation between technical graphics and art style -- What's the point of technical graphics if a 2D platformer that creatively puts yarn, a visual style, as a gameplay element ultimately looks and feels better? Graphics are art and technical proficiency combined, and that is Kirby's Epic Yarn. Hands down.

Thought... it would have been nice to see better nominations. >_>

lol, epic yarn wins? has to be a joke.

markinthedark

So it won because it was artsy? No wonder jaffe is fed up of people putting these on a pedestal.

So it won because it was artsy? No wonder jaffe is fed up of people putting these on a pedestal.

Espada12

This was pretty much an attention grab, since like others said, they placed 3 other kind of boring looking shooters with this game. Should of put up Rayman Origins and Child of Eden. But still, this deserved it. And I don't see why they would have to place tech graphics and art style graphics into 2 different categories. Sorry, that just wouldn't make sense. DaViD_99

I just can't accept this crap! :(Kleeyook

Sad to see people with such a narrow viewpoint of graphics.

I've said this before so many times. Graphics is defined by art direction. Graphics has always been more an art than a science. The technology is merely the tool for the artists to bring their vision to life, and that isn't always limited to "photorealism".

[QUOTE="Kleeyook"]I just can't accept this crap! :(AdobeArtist

Sad to see people with such a narrow viewpoint of graphics.

I've said this before so many times. Graphics is defined by art direction. Graphics has always been more an art than a science. The technology is merely the tool for the artists to bring their vision to life, and that isn't always limited to "photorealism".

[QUOTE="FIipMode"][QUOTE="jg4xchamp"] art direction/styIe is part of graphics. Not that I agree with the pick, but it's an inspired pick no doubt._BlueDuck_

Gamespot's E3 awards only had "Best Graphics", the nominees are Castlevania: Lords of Shadow, Gran Turismo 5, Crysis 2, Killzone 3 and Kirby: Epic Yarn. Gran Turismo won.

[QUOTE="PAL360"]

They dont know the diference between art style and graphics!

Nintendo_Ownes7

Usually graphics mean the technical aspects. Thats why we all accept Crysis is the graphics king and not Mario Galaxy 2 for example.

Im not trying to hate since i love Nintendo and 2D games but imo giving Kirby the best graphics award doesnt make sense! Its just a beautifull and original 2D game

Um since when are Graphics and art style the same thing?? This best GRAPHICS of e3 = fail.

bigblunt537

[QUOTE="AdobeArtist"]

[QUOTE="Kleeyook"]I just can't accept this crap! :(xsubtownerx

Sad to see people with such a narrow viewpoint of graphics.

I've said this before so many times. Graphics is defined by art direction. Graphics has always been more an art than a science. The technology is merely the tool for the artists to bring their vision to life, and that isn't always limited to "photorealism".

If it did alot of xbla/psn games would win best graphics awards left and right,but the fact is that they dont. So how the hell does this work out. It doesint make any sense what so ever.

Why is the name of the category being debated here, the category clearly is meant to indicate what's the best looking game (" best graphics" seems like an appropriate label for that). Obviously they don't think Kirby has the best technical graphics. What's the point of saying which one is technically more impressive when in the end that apparently has no bearing on which one actually looks better?

You'll also notice Gamespot also had Kirby listed as a nominee for it's E3 best graphics category, along with other very technically impressive games. Once again, the category isn't best technical graphics, it's simply which ones looked the best; "eye candy", as Gamespot put it.

_BlueDuck_

Word.

Both Gamespot and GT are obviously using the word "graphics" to mean both the art style and the technical graphics. IGN does the same too, as does virtually every single gaming site on the Internet or gaming magazine etc.

That is the correct way to use it imo and it's how magazines and video game sites have been using the word since the dawn of video games and when reviewing how good a games graphics are.

I think that's how we should all be using it too and if anyone only means art style or technical graphics then that is what they should say/specify, and not the other way around.

Troll xD

Don't worry all, GT5 won it from GS! :)Ringx55

Great choice, and the best part is that it wasn't shown in 3D.

[QUOTE="tomarlyn"][QUOTE="brandontwb"]Tell me, how do you define graphics and how do you define art style?

brandontwb

[QUOTE="Espada12"]

So it won because it was artsy? No wonder jaffe is fed up of people putting these on a pedestal.

IronBass

Isn't that the definition of artsy?

Umm artstylegraphics and tec graphics are 2 different things GT. Dam GT just sucks when it comes to making any sense.

finalfantasy94

I think kirby looked really good as well but KZ3 looked the most impressive IMO.

I think kirby looked really good as well but KZ3 looked the most impressive IMO.

blaznwiipspman1

[QUOTE="x8VXU6"]

[QUOTE="Fried_Shrimp"]Graphics also means art style. Kirby is legit.Fried_Shrimp

[QUOTE="IronBass"][QUOTE="Espada12"]

So it won because it was artsy? No wonder jaffe is fed up of people putting these on a pedestal.

Espada12

Isn't that the definition of artsy?

um....no. Not at all. If it is, that's a very shallow definition.

Yeah nice atention whoring GT...

Whats next? Best gameplay goes to the PS3 move bundled game? And best multiplayer for Fallout New Vegas?

I'm okay with that selection. No game has ever looked anything like Epic Yarn.

Isn't that the definition of artsy?Espada12

No. The word "artsy" is used to describe something that tries (offten in a showy, pretentious, way) to be "art".

Having a unique artstyIe =/= artsy.

You could (if your defintion of art fits that) consider Kirby EY an "artsy" game, but that is not Nintendo's intention nor the reason why GT chose it.

[QUOTE="Espada12"]Isn't that the definition of artsy?IronBass

No. The word "artsy" is used to describe something that tries (offten in a showy, pretentious, way) to be "art".

Having a unique artstyIe =/= artsy.

You could (if your defintion of art fits that) consider Kirby EY an "artsy" game, but that is not Nintendo's intention nor the reason why GT chose it.

in video game terms: Graphics is just the technical looks so I think that was a bad pick. For art style Kirby looked great but seriosuly it should've been Rage or Crysis 2

in video game terms: Graphics is just the technical looks so I think that was a bad pick. For art style Kirby looked great but seriosuly it should've been Rage or Crysis 2

OB-47

I'm not surprised, since Gametrailers chose COD 4 over Crysis and S.T.A.L.K.E.R. as game with best graphics in 2007 and Gears Of War 2 over Warhead and Call Of Prypiat as best graphics in 2008...

Is insane, due the only merit in Kirby's Epic Yarn technical department is artistic, There's nothing awesome -resolution of the textures, postproccess, global lightning illumination, parallax mapping, object motion blur, facial motion capture, fx particles or physics... - in the technical department from the Nintendo games, specifically in this generation.

The thing is even worse -and more insulting- due Nintendo's is unable to push the boundaries of the software in any way, constantly making the same remakes of the same games time after time after time after time... So... ok, keep dreaming GT and sheeps, no one cares about Kirby's graphical wise. But I'll rolf any time I will see this:

...In a Shattered Horizon, Metro 2033, Crysis 2, Rage, Killzone 3, Gears 3, GT 5 thread.