Posted: Sun Aug 11, 2002 5:56 pm
3D can be isometric.NeamhShaolta wrote:Basically, I just prefer isometric.
X-Com: Enemy Unknown, X-Com: Apocalypse, Jagged Alliance 2, Syndicate, Fallout 1/2.
Duck and Cover
The second oldest Fallout gaming community, online since 1998, keeping warm in the nuclear glow.
https://duckandcover.cx./forums/
The big choice 2d or not 2d
Page 8 of 8
Posted: Sun Aug 11, 2002 9:22 pm
But if you force a completely 3d game into an isometric view, then you're just gonna piss a bunch of people off...
I think that what they're doing for Lionheart would be great to use for a Fallout 3 with the 3d models being turned into 2d sprites... plus it would stop people from posting about getting rid of the helmets on their power armor...
And to answer to the debate on 2d vs 3d... I think that it's a problem with hardware... the casual gamer doesn't have the hardware (And won't buy the hardware) for that 3d game to look pretty yet... if you want a 3d game to look nice, you're going to need a 3d graphics card that'll cost ya at least a couple hundred dollars... lotsa RAM like 512 megs at least... and a whole lotta other things... 2d games don't need all that... and so can look prettier...
Plus I don't think that anyone's been able to figure out how to use 3d graphics in a way to tell a story any better then one with 2d graphics... maybe other then the people at Square...
I think that what they're doing for Lionheart would be great to use for a Fallout 3 with the 3d models being turned into 2d sprites... plus it would stop people from posting about getting rid of the helmets on their power armor...
And what's wrong with that? I've been doing that for the last 4 years with Half life... and it's that sort of thing that seperates a true gamer from the vast seas of the ignorant... it's not like all people who play first person shooters are mindless assholes (though many are...)Crow of Ill Omen wrote:I know people that play the same FPS every night almost, and know everything there is to know about it.
There's just something about elves and swords and all that stuff that people just like... plus what's more fantastical? The Elven Mage casting Fireball at an incoming mob of goblins and orcs or the lone gunman traversing the wastelands? I guess you can argue that the former is cliched... but only because people can... supposedly... identify with that sort of thing better... or something...Crow wrote:I don't know what effect that'll have on RPG, though. Fantasy has always dominated the genre, irrespective of commerce.
It isn't replay value that's the problem with consoles... it's in Linearity... Console games are extremely linear when compared with computer games, which are usually extremely open-ended with how you can accomplish various tasks and goals... this, of course, does turn itself into replay value in going back and seeing if you can do certain quests in different ways... but you're basically still doing the same things over and over again... consoles, in their RPGs, are stuck with one or two ways to do anything and a single ending... but some of them do have multiple endings and do offer replay value comparable to a PC game... uh... Ogre Battle on the SNES is the only thing I can name off the top of my head... Tactics Ogre too... but to a lesser extent... and story-wise, both were well told...PaynetotheMax wrote:consoles cannot (or a at least seem to) produce anything with replay value
And to answer to the debate on 2d vs 3d... I think that it's a problem with hardware... the casual gamer doesn't have the hardware (And won't buy the hardware) for that 3d game to look pretty yet... if you want a 3d game to look nice, you're going to need a 3d graphics card that'll cost ya at least a couple hundred dollars... lotsa RAM like 512 megs at least... and a whole lotta other things... 2d games don't need all that... and so can look prettier...
Plus I don't think that anyone's been able to figure out how to use 3d graphics in a way to tell a story any better then one with 2d graphics... maybe other then the people at Square...
Posted: Fri Aug 16, 2002 9:37 am
Yeah.Saint_Proverbius wrote:Homeworld's ships where still pretty blocky. The asteroids looked more like potatoes than say, an asteriod. This is because they could only display a certain amount of polygons at any given time.bloodbathmaster2 wrote:3d games can have just the same effect of a beautiflly animated 2d game. Homeworld proved that to us.
Like Rosh said, that's about all that had to be displayed. There was no terrain geometry in Homeworld, no buildings, no day/night cycles, no environmental effects, and so on.
Back then I lived in Europe, I had a multi-lingual gf and two big towers where still there.
I belive the term to be "several generations ago"?
THATS RIGHT, THE IDIOT YOU ALL KNOW AND LOVE IS BACK!
Posted: Sat Aug 17, 2002 1:35 am
Only in the loose sense of the word. Isometric is really a scaled and/or shifted axis projection where the coordinates don't typically match up with real world values. With the standard 2D Isometric tile engines, it's usually width and half-height for the tiles and the coordinates are on a 45 degree offset.VasikkA wrote:3D can be isometric.
With true 3D, coordinates are not scaled or shifted in terms of design work and programming. The API handles the "projection" as a matrix transform.
Posted: Sat Aug 17, 2002 2:58 am
I apologise for any unintended offense.Lancer wrote:And what's wrong with that? I've been doing that for the last 4 years with Half life... and it's that sort of thing that seperates a true gamer from the vast seas of the ignorant... it's not like all people who play first person shooters are mindless assholes (though many are...)Crow of Ill Omen wrote:I know people that play the same FPS every night almost, and know everything there is to know about it.
My point was, in response to the previous one, basically: being a regular gamer does not equate with being someone looking for RPG depth.
Posted: Sat Aug 17, 2002 3:00 am
If it creates the same general appearance, why does it matter?Saint_Proverbius wrote:Only in the loose sense of the word. Isometric is really a scaled and/or shifted axis projection where the coordinates don't typically match up with real world values. With the standard 2D Isometric tile engines, it's usually width and half-height for the tiles and the coordinates are on a 45 degree offset.VasikkA wrote:3D can be isometric.
With true 3D, coordinates are not scaled or shifted in terms of design work and programming. The API handles the "projection" as a matrix transform.
Posted: Mon Aug 19, 2002 2:14 am
3d environments are easier(and faster) to create, because they consist of pre-made tiles. Also, 3d allows bigger maps and areas, 2d maps are usually more detailed and smaller.Doyle wrote:If it creates the same general appearance, why does it matter?
Posted: Mon Aug 19, 2002 2:39 am
but oh so much prettier.
you know, its interesting... recently finished resident evil 1, for the gamecube... the game realy, realy, looks realistic
for once, i liked 3d
ive come to terms with it: i like 3d graphics, and 2d graphics at the same time, for diffrent reasons... today's 3d is simply exellent, real-looking, and along with some deep ambient music, can realy make a good game
on the other hand, 2d games can also exel at their beauty, take castlevania: symphony of the night... dont think ive encountered a more beautiful 2d game,they realy poured their hearts into the graphics
to sum things up, i suppose this is an endless question, since both sides have their perks
you know, its interesting... recently finished resident evil 1, for the gamecube... the game realy, realy, looks realistic
for once, i liked 3d
ive come to terms with it: i like 3d graphics, and 2d graphics at the same time, for diffrent reasons... today's 3d is simply exellent, real-looking, and along with some deep ambient music, can realy make a good game
on the other hand, 2d games can also exel at their beauty, take castlevania: symphony of the night... dont think ive encountered a more beautiful 2d game,they realy poured their hearts into the graphics
to sum things up, i suppose this is an endless question, since both sides have their perks
Posted: Mon Aug 19, 2002 7:08 am
Resident Evil's graphics 3d?
Bullshit, it's 2.5d.
UT2, however, looks GOOD.
Bullshit, it's 2.5d.
UT2, however, looks GOOD.
Posted: Mon Aug 19, 2002 10:08 am
Ahhh, another SOTN fanatic. It is a wonderful game and a really good platform game of sorts. The style of it's artwork is much like that of Fallout. You just can't recreate that charm in 3d. The 3d of the N64 Ass-sylvania games look like ass, appropriately. Even with the RAM pack. The style is just not the same or possible to match. The comic style of Fallout would be a bit hard for 3d to recapture.the guardian wrote:
on the other hand, 2d games can also exel at their beauty, take castlevania: symphony of the night... dont think ive encountered a more beautiful 2d game,they realy poured their hearts into the graphics
to sum things up, i suppose this is an endless question, since both sides have their perks
Posted: Mon Aug 19, 2002 10:22 am
But you cannot re create wonder in 2D.
Say, for instance Morrorwind- you could not really create the "oohhs" in 2D.
So it is wonder- a deep, profund emotion or cute graphics.
The choice is obvious.
Moreover, 3D is the way (undoubtably) the wind is blowing these days.
Some time you have to sever a limb to save the body.
Say, for instance Morrorwind- you could not really create the "oohhs" in 2D.
So it is wonder- a deep, profund emotion or cute graphics.
The choice is obvious.
Moreover, 3D is the way (undoubtably) the wind is blowing these days.
Some time you have to sever a limb to save the body.
Posted: Mon Aug 19, 2002 11:52 am
I'm not quite sure why you responded, as that was directed at Saint. The point was, even if it's not really isometric, it could still make a game in similar style.VasikkA wrote:3d environments are easier(and faster) to create, because they consist of pre-made tiles. Also, 3d allows bigger maps and areas, 2d maps are usually more detailed and smaller.Doyle wrote:If it creates the same general appearance, why does it matter?
Posted: Mon Aug 19, 2002 11:03 pm
Because it doesn't. There are several isometric projections which really wouldn't work well in 3D. 3D is fairly literal in terms of what it does, so you can't "neatly" do something like - say - a hex grid overlapping the tiles in 3D.Doyle wrote:If it creates the same general appearance, why does it matter?
You have that backwards. Most 2D games are tile based.VasikkA wrote:3d environments are easier(and faster) to create, because they consist of pre-made tiles. Also, 3d allows bigger maps and areas, 2d maps are usually more detailed and smaller.
Posted: Mon Aug 19, 2002 11:27 pm
S_P, maybe you can explain what they mean by "3D tiling". Ever since I heard that term, I've always thought it sounded like a bit of an oxymoron, but (for instance) people refer to a "tileset" for NWN, which I thought was 3D.
Posted: Mon Aug 19, 2002 11:47 pm
Rosh wrote:nothing can beat sotn... used to be a zealot, knew everything on the game, even the saturn versionthe guardian wrote:
Ahhh, another SOTN fanatic. It is a wonderful game and a really good platform game of sorts. The style of it's artwork is much like that of Fallout. You just can't recreate that charm in 3d. The 3d of the N64 Ass-sylvania games look like ass, appropriately. Even with the RAM pack. The style is just not the same or possible to match. The comic style of Fallout would be a bit hard for 3d to recapture.
then i grew up
its still a wonderful game though
i bought cbr a pony?
Posted: Wed Aug 21, 2002 12:26 am
What I meant was simple and quick tools as in NWN, instead of hand-drawn backgrounds. Environment creating is easier with a toolset like in NWN as compared to, for example, Inifinity engine games. Of course, this depends much on the engine.Saint_Proverbius wrote:You have that backwards. Most 2D games are tile based.
Posted: Wed Aug 21, 2002 1:18 am
Those two engines are exceptions. Also, infinity engine landscapes aren't "hand drawn", they're modelled, and then rendered.VasikkA wrote:What I meant was simple and quick tools as in NWN, instead of hand-drawn backgrounds. Environment creating is easier with a toolset like in NWN as compared to, for example, Inifinity engine games. Of course, this depends much on the engine.