Art vs Art

Apologies for not posting this Yesterday… I was going to, but then forgot Black Ops 6's multiplayer beta started up last night.

That I'm writing about this game instead of Black Ops 6, should itself indicate my impressions. Not negative, but not blown away either. Speaking of games that didn't blow people away…

Atomic Heart.

I didn't need to enter into the debate surrounding this game at launch as I heard it wasn't good in the first place. However, it was the last day of it being on Game Pass, the business model has run its course, as has the gaming discourse, so, I didn't feel too bad about satisfying my curiosity and venturing into its campaign.

This isn't a review of the game, I dropped it after less than two hours, very much sharing almost everything pointed out to me by friends who did play it at launch.

-Bad Intro
-Bad Writing
-Bad Characters
-Bad Design
-Bad Melee Combat
-Bad Enemies
-Bad Pacing

Lots of bad, but nothing that shocked me. I've played far worse games than Atomic Heart, so the feeling while going through the game wasn't so much anger, just boredom. There's one thing that really stood out to me in my brief time playing this game however.

What got Atomic Heart so much attention in the first place, years before its Rule 34 bait robots, was its visual prowess for such a small-studio, specifically the environment designs, which manage to equal the spectacle, scale, and on rare-occasion, even storytelling of this genre's heavy hitters that the game is obviously inspired by.

I mean, they make an 0451 Code joke not-even 10 minutes in, they are not subtle.

And that's fine, because the game's most obvious quality, is its world. It's not merely as simple as seeing an idealistic retro-future through an Eastern lens, but ones with designs for boats, gloves, buildings, elevators, and gadgets that are immediately distinct to this game in particular. Things that with just a silhouette, someone would instantly point to being from Atomic Heart.

I feel like that's the goal with original art-design.

You strive for something that under no circumstance, can be confused for something else that's already been seen before.

What's left me so baffled then if it's not the environments then?

It's the people and things in said Environment.

You've got a game that was given recognition and finances because of its art-design and fidelity… a game with scenery so striking, it confidently devotes its entire opening to showcasing it… only to shove in your face the most generic robot-enemies the moment actual gameplay starts, with you playing as the most generic FPS protagonist, running into even the most generic looking companions and villains, while you swing an axe.

What does it say about a game that the most memorable and visually distinct character in someone's opening hour is a Fridge?

I happened to retweet a piece of Cyberpunk fan-art the day I played Atomic Heart, and that's when I immediately realized what Atomic Heart is so painfully missing. The character design to match its world design.

The opposite of Atomic Heart would be if Cyberpunk's entire cast were all placed in the environments from Alpha Protocol.

Fidelity can be important. Environments can be important. Characters can be important. But more important than any individual piece of art-design, is cohesion through all of them.

I think one of the reasons a game like Half Life 2 is still so easy to appreciate in its art despite being two decades old is unlike many games from that generation, ones with amazing faces plopped onto blurry plaid-shirts, every part of Half Life 2 from the textures to its animations and character designs… never clash.