Why do people prefer stylized/simplistic animation to realistic/detailed animation?

Why do people prefer stylized/simplistic animation to realistic/detailed animation?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=7QbVmZw7iVk
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

G-Force was fucking horrible.

I doubt it's a real preference for all but a few people. It's just Stockholm Syndrome.

Mostly uncanny valley stuff

...

...

...

...

That's just narcissism.

Because in animation, so much is possible.

Why stay grounded in realism when you can go above and beyond?

>empathy is narcissism

I think it's just cheaper and easier to animate, So studies will gravitate to simple stuff regardless of what the consumer wants.

The consumer has no option but to consume what actually exists in the market.

Realistic designs and animation don't mean the story and presentation have to be realistic.

And from what I've seen on Sup Forums, what people usually mean by "going above and beyond" is basic squash/stretch cartoon animation.

I am referring to the right panel, not the left one.

I like detailed animation but it takes you out of the details when the animation is silky and hyper as fuck. Or the opposite like in The Good Dinosaur.
You have realistic backgrounds that contrast with how cartoony the characters were.

How does realism = bad? Why wouldn't you want to animate birds like this instead of Angry Birds style birds?

Too much meming about 'gray and brown realism' in game graphics

>basic squash/stretch cartoon animation.
>Implying that's a bad thing.

>How does realism = bad?

It doesn't.
I never said it does.

I mean I've seen people act like it's some incredible thing pushing animation to its limits or some shit. As if there was nothing more to animation, and as if there was anything novel about it anymore.

I smell what you're stepping in.

I still love squash/stretch, but there definitely is more to animation.

Stylized is better eye candy

Your able to do more that would otherwise look awkward on realistic

Stylized character designs are just stylized character designs, they don't tell us anything about their level of detail, and the quality and inventiveness of the animation, backgrounds and camera work.

...

Why do you think that more detailed=objectively more appealing no matter what?

Something stylized will stay stylized forever, while imitating reality will become outdated as soon as technology gets better.

Because you want a lot of replies.

The only thing that aged badly on TP is the fucking ridiculous amounts of bloom in the graphical engine. Everything else may be a different style from Wind Waker, but it's still stylized enough to be distinct and set itself apart from uncanny valley pitfalls.

Simpler artstyle. Not simplistic animation. Simplistic means oversimplified to the point of negative effect.
Well actually you could mean simplistic, if so because most people don't give a shit about animation, which is why Family Guy and the Simpsons use Simplistic animation because the creators think more complex and fluid animation would distract from the comedy.

But I'd say people don't like shit like G-Force, ontop of it being unfunny, is because it kind of looks fucking creepy because the tech isn't there to make it truly convincing so it's kind of unsettling.

Cos it's gonna be fucking weird

...

youtube.com/watch?v=7QbVmZw7iVk

I can't hear that one Black Eyed Peas song without thinking of this movie.

I really hope his next project isnt outsorced garbage.