2D: Dead or not Dead
- Thread starter Zera
- Start date
Recommended Videos
2D has one major advantage: by and large, it is much cheaper to make a 2D game than a 3D one. There are things that you just can't do in 2D, even if the gameplay is the same no matter how many dimensions you use. With even handheld systems possessing respectable GPUs, if you want to make an extremely attractive game, then you're making the graphics three-dimensional. It takes uncommon circumstances for a game with 2D graphics to be more attractive than the same game with 3D graphics.
I suppose there's one other advantage, and that's that certain games are better when you have very precisely geometric measurements that need to be made quickly. Tetris, for example, would only be made worse by making the graphics 3D.
You're asking quite a few of these questions; are you thinking of making a game yourself, or...?
I suppose there's one other advantage, and that's that certain games are better when you have very precisely geometric measurements that need to be made quickly. Tetris, for example, would only be made worse by making the graphics 3D.
You're asking quite a few of these questions; are you thinking of making a game yourself, or...?
The problem is that most of the new consoles and PC are power machines not made to be 2D game play extravaganzas. They are built for performance and HD 3D graphics. Only the wii, actually all of the Nintendo products, are made to still use 2D game play.
But...I regress.
But...I regress.
There are many succesful 2D games on the DS, and there's also room for them on XBLA.
2D shouldn't die. I remember one person who never played roms, who was all concerned about the 3D. Then we put him in front of a NeoGeo. He was on his knees, wondering how he could have missed that.
2D shouldn't die. I remember one person who never played roms, who was all concerned about the 3D. Then we put him in front of a NeoGeo. He was on his knees, wondering how he could have missed that.
I don't think 2d will ever truly die. At least not for a great long while. There are 2 major advantages to 2d: 1) it's comparitively easy to do, and 2) it's free. Sure, you can say if you want to make the graphics a bit crisper you should go out and get Photoshop or Paint Shop Pro, but you don't necessarily need them at all. 3d games on the other hand are far more difficult to create, more expensive for the software to create it, and when they're done poorly you tend to notice how much they suck.
The only way 3d will completely destroy 2d is if someone overcomes those two problems with a freeware (or nearly free) 3d creator that can be edited rapidly and efficiently, without a great deal of knowledge necessary to run the program.
In other words: "no chance, you unreasonable dicks" -Oscar Wilde.
2d will never truly die, just fade away.
The only way 3d will completely destroy 2d is if someone overcomes those two problems with a freeware (or nearly free) 3d creator that can be edited rapidly and efficiently, without a great deal of knowledge necessary to run the program.
In other words: "no chance, you unreasonable dicks" -Oscar Wilde.
2d will never truly die, just fade away.
I don't think 2D is dead. It's just mostly dead. You mostly only see them on the internet or on the live networks the consoles offer. But it'll never truly die until gaming itself does.
If there's one place that still illustrates where 2D games can shine it's the shmup genre. Not that this genre gets much attention, but I don't think anyone will kill it off for awhile. I'm glad to see Shikigami no Shiro III (Castle Shikigami III) is going to be released on the Wii and 360 (I believe the 360 version is a Live Arcade title), and I really hope ESP Galuda II gets a port, as well. The nice thing about having this sort of thing on newer systems is that the big problems with ports to older systems (flicker and slowdown) are less of a problem on a more powerful console.
The thing I've always loved about 2D games is that the camera isn't usually an issue. Frankly, this is why I generally don't like 3D platformers: manipulating the camera is usually a chore, and the price of fudging it up in the slightest is usually a fairly long fall. This is why I like 2D Mario games and erect holy wards to keep the 3D ones away from me. I like focusing on actually playing the game, and I find camera work to be a major detractor. I'd love to see some high-profile 2D platformers on newer consoles. The big advantage is that the relative simplicity of such a game would give the developer plenty of time and system resources to introduce a compelling set of gameplay mechanics. Sales could be disappointing, I suppose, but I have faith that if it were a good game, and the lot of us lied our faces off about it being the best game ever before it came out, enough people would buy it to make it financially worthwhile.
The thing I've always loved about 2D games is that the camera isn't usually an issue. Frankly, this is why I generally don't like 3D platformers: manipulating the camera is usually a chore, and the price of fudging it up in the slightest is usually a fairly long fall. This is why I like 2D Mario games and erect holy wards to keep the 3D ones away from me. I like focusing on actually playing the game, and I find camera work to be a major detractor. I'd love to see some high-profile 2D platformers on newer consoles. The big advantage is that the relative simplicity of such a game would give the developer plenty of time and system resources to introduce a compelling set of gameplay mechanics. Sales could be disappointing, I suppose, but I have faith that if it were a good game, and the lot of us lied our faces off about it being the best game ever before it came out, enough people would buy it to make it financially worthwhile.
While 2D gaming does sort of seem to be dying, that's not to say it's bad, or completely hardware related. I only relatively recently became interested in the twitch-shooter arcade game Metal Slug, and am all the better for it. Moreso, I cannot IMAGINE how someone could be perverse enough to make a 3D version of it. Well, unless SNK were to get really hungry for money back in 2004...which they DID.
But it's just the artstyle, the gameplay; you can't have so much bullet-dodging and lack of aiming in a 3D version of that. And while Half-Life 2 Done Quick was fun, the majority of excellent speedruns are in Megaman and Sonic.
But it's just the artstyle, the gameplay; you can't have so much bullet-dodging and lack of aiming in a 3D version of that. And while Half-Life 2 Done Quick was fun, the majority of excellent speedruns are in Megaman and Sonic.
Odin Sphere. Disgaea. Cave Story. Metal Slug. All games that would lose the attractiveness and charm afforded by their 2D roots (And in the case of Disgaea, 2D with 3D environments)Bongo Bill said:
Gish. Alien Hominid. 2D games are not made more attractive if pushed into 3D. It should be recognized that both 2D and 3D are valid ways of expressing the art style of a game. I can think of a wide variety of games which could not possibly be improved by a shift to 3D.
And in reverse, there are things you just can't do in 3D, both gameplay-wise (See Metal Slug above) and graphics wise (Alien Hominid, or Cave Story)
Not that I'm overly biased towards 2D games (Although it seems lately that games with a prominent 2D element have been phenomenal). I just think that there are art styles that fit the different dimensions. Try imagining Odin Sphere in 3D. Now imagine Gears of War in 2D.
Both are good, in my opinion. And given that most of the time 2D is done by indie or amateur developers, a lot of times 2D games are pretty innovative in gameplay elements and help bring new talent to the forefront.
Also the aforementioned camera issues.
To be honest, I really hope 2D games rise to popularity again. I've gone through so many 2D games that have such wonderful sprite animation and art direction it plays with the eye and it looks like you're looking at a three-dimensional object. Just about any game from Raizing or Irem will show you that 3D graphics aren't always necessary to show off detail. If forced to, I could live perfectly well with 2D games of any genre. Hell, the first Clock Tower game was 2D and it was the hands-down best Clock Tower game in the series!
Don't forget that handhelds, phones and internet games are still by and large in 2D, so I would say it's far from dead. Those markets are booming.
I miss the 2D/3D blend of the transitional period; Pandemonium comes to mind. Excellent platformer, 2D with a 3D flare.
Some games should be in 2D or isometric views, much like a Monopoly board wouldn't be much more interesting if it were a 3D model of, say, NY City. But I used to think a 3D platformer was just undoable, but Prince of Persia: Sands Of Time proved me wrong. Thus, in my mind, a 2D Gears of War might be possible by a good enough level designer.
I miss the 2D/3D blend of the transitional period; Pandemonium comes to mind. Excellent platformer, 2D with a 3D flare.
Some games should be in 2D or isometric views, much like a Monopoly board wouldn't be much more interesting if it were a 3D model of, say, NY City. But I used to think a 3D platformer was just undoable, but Prince of Persia: Sands Of Time proved me wrong. Thus, in my mind, a 2D Gears of War might be possible by a good enough level designer.
I love 2D games. It reminds me of staying up 'late', which was about 9:30, when I was younger, playing the old games I had.
The thing is, I also really like graphics and going anywhere.
I suppose it just really depends if I want to shoot things realistically or collect sweet golden rings and kill ladybirds.
The thing is, I also really like graphics and going anywhere.
I suppose it just really depends if I want to shoot things realistically or collect sweet golden rings and kill ladybirds.
2D games are still kicking- a few recent releases like Castlevania X Chronicles and Contra 4 show they're still getting some love- but expect sprite-based graphics to become increasingly niche as even most handheld platforms now can handle polygons artwork rather well.
The reason is that, barring for simple, low-animation titles, it's cheaper, faster, and easier to make and animate a 3D model then it is to draw out the sprites for the 2D one. Add in the greater ability to alter or edit a 3D model for purposes of costume additions or other large visual changes without having to create a whole new set of animations and you got a serious time-saver for stuff like action-platformers and fighting games (Anyone who was holding out for SF4 to be sprite-based was likely kidding themselves, regardless of how awesome GGX-caliber sprites would look with SF3-caliber animation)
The reason is that, barring for simple, low-animation titles, it's cheaper, faster, and easier to make and animate a 3D model then it is to draw out the sprites for the 2D one. Add in the greater ability to alter or edit a 3D model for purposes of costume additions or other large visual changes without having to create a whole new set of animations and you got a serious time-saver for stuff like action-platformers and fighting games (Anyone who was holding out for SF4 to be sprite-based was likely kidding themselves, regardless of how awesome GGX-caliber sprites would look with SF3-caliber animation)