Whats the real answer to this

[SplitMindGaming]

I have been trying to research the correct answer to this question. If using pixel art. Is it better to have the images really small and just scaling it up within the code? Or is it better to have the image the actual size of what your game is. The reason I ask is because alot of the pixel art assets are extremely small. I notice within hyperpad if you disable anti aliasing scaling the image doesnt have no effect on it visually. Also alot of youtubers i know who create pixel art games say their overall world is like only 250 x 250. So is this true? Can i have my image like 16x16 and simply scale it upwards? Would this improve gameplay as far as lag goes and frame dropping.

[RobinsonX]

Yes! Believe it or not, you can have extremely small graphics yet maintain high quality.

hyperPad now has the ability to disable anti-aliasing, so small graphics of pixel art can be used. Disabling Anti-aliasing just makes it so assets don't look blurry, instead they look pixelly. There are many pros of having very small assets.

• virtually no difference in quality
• save memory
• less lag

You really start to see the difference when you have an extremely small image and then using anti-aliasing.

[RobinsonX]

I use a graphic that is 5px by 5px as a tileset, and it works flawlessly. It can definitely improve performance when used correctly.

[SplitMindGaming]

@RobinsonX thanks for confirming. I had a strong feeling about this that it would make it better. So far my filesize has decreased by more then 50% and it definitely feels more faster. I did run into a few problems however. Now that my objects are really small if i have a play animation on one of them the second animation will,be extremely huge. But i think i just have to now make any special effects animation even smaller as well. It needs a way to control the size of the animation that you choose to play.

[Murtaza]

You can also create large pixel art by increasing your brush size.

For example every 4 pixels is 1 pixel.