Anyway, are we talking about 2D/3D graphics or gameplay? 2D-play games are certainly viewtiful in 3D, but it really just comes down to a waste of processing. By the same token, 3D-gameplay games with 2D sprites are awful, take Chameleon Twist for example.
As far as gameplay goes, I've peen playing through the entire Megaman series lately. And Ghouls 'n' Ghosts, Deamon's Crest, Actraiser, SNES Shadowrun, GradiusIII/R-TypeIII, and Genesis Taz-Mania. You can't tell me those are for "newely born kids." If the only thing that can draw your attention is graphics, then anything by Konami or Capcom in the latter SNES years blows the first five 3D years and beyond out of the water.
Anyone played The Divide? PSX and PC I think. It's on my shelf right next to Heart of Darkness. TD has crappy graphics, horrible gameplay, and is in full 3D. Yet, when MMF3D comes out, I think it will be a long time before we see a player-developed game that tops it. HoD, on the other hand, was released after TD, and is full 2D. It has beautiful graphics, and fantastic gameplay. The team who worked on HoD worked previously on Another World (called Out of This World in USA, I think), and later on Abe's Oddesey. Another World had flat, vector-based 2D graphics, but it's still one of my favourite titles of all time.
Hmmm, the only MMORPG that were 2D I knew were Dransik and Ultima Online, oh and Lineage. Ragnorok was in 3D and the asheron call games too, same with World of Warcraft etc.
I've never played a good MMORPG besides Phantasy Star Online in either 2D or 3D. It's a genre that just doesn't appeal to me for some reason. I guess I value story too much in my RPGs...
I agree with Mr.Coffee. Some games have to be in 3d to work. I can't imagine playing HalfLife in 2d somehow. However, platform games do still (in my opinion) play better in 2d, and RPGs can easily get away with 2d.
2d will always have a place in the gaming industry... it's just not the *only* place anymore. It's like the horse and the car. When the car arrived on the scene, people didn't go arround massacring horses because they no longer needed to ride them to get to work or to pull carts, they just rode in their leisure time instead. 2d is going this way.
Ok now lets see ... think that u r playing halflife or counter strike in 2d .. how does it feels?? .. it looks like we will kill our self after playing that thing .. now thing .. the famous 2d game .. Sonic 1 .. think or playing that game in 3d... What do u think about this 2d 3d problem? ...
(\__/)
(='.'=This is Bunny. Copy and paste Bunny into ur
(")_(")signature to help him gain world domination.
I'm not entirely sure what your point is (I can barely read it to be honest)... are you saying that games designed for 3D definitely won't work in 2D, whereas games originally in 2D have a chance of working in 3D as well?
The second dimension is clearly the best in my mind. For most things that is. There are some occasions when 3D is necessary (football games, shoot 'em ups), but most of the time 2D will do just fine.
I think 2D is making a comeback with games like Viewtiful Joe (I know it's not entirely 2D, but the gameplay is on one line).
I'd say 3D & 2D kind of match only because 2D lets the designer to express them selfs easyly with pixel by pixel art.
Though were 2D platformer games can have a really nice look, I mean look at Enternal Daughter!
But games like Super Smash Bro. Melee, is shows that a 3D platformer can have a really nicely done 2D/3D feel. I love those. If only they would use that idea for a new Sonic game like Sonic The Hedgehoge 1,2,2,S&K, & so on. Cause I thing the new 3D Sonic games are good, but they can't compair with the classic platformer games in my view.
In my personal oppinion it is impossible to say wether 2d or 3d is best. It really comes down to what game you want to make (genre) as it has been mentioned before in this topic.
Some games gain from 3d and some dont.
2d is a allround good format that can be used in any game. Its strenght is its simplicity and its weakness is its limitation. Its quite easy to draw sprites and show them on screen layered for more depth. However the 2d perspective makes limitations as only 2 dimensions can be shown at a time.
3d has an advantage over 2d. Its strength is its simulation and its weakness is its complexness. 3d simulates the real world well as both are 3 dimensional. The downside is it is more complex to create a 3d world than a 2d world (obviously as you only have to create 2 dimensions for 2d and 3 for 3d).
3d will always win when it comes to simulating. First/third person racing, flying, shoot'em'up games etc. These games can do a much more realistic simulation of a world due to 3d.
Games that do not simulate a world have no use of 3d. Side scrollers are not supposed to simulate a real world. A card game can do just as good in 2d as 3d if its just about the cards.
Both 2d and 3d games can be good, challenging, innovative etc. etc.
It is truly a pitty that 2d is abandoned by major game creators.
I think dave c is right about klikkers making 3d games. Making 3d games will never be as easy as making 2d games. There will be many games with ugly 3d models containing too much polygons cuz of meshsmooting, with huge textures. making 3d gfx is a lot harder to learn compared to 2d gfx, and it takes a lot more time.
on the other hand, imagine a 3d game by Jannis Stoppe or Jonathan Smeby...
Advertisement
Post Reply
This is Bunny. Copy and paste Bunny into ur
Klik with the kid!
