Out of 2d and 3d, what do you like best???
for me id say 3D. I am not a 2d hater but i like 3d better.
Full Version: 2d? Or 3d? What One Do You Like Best?
Almost anyone here will tell you that it's entirely depndent on the game itself. Whether it's 2D or 3D means nothing until we know what the game is like. 3D and 2D can be equally good and bad withe equal frequency. This seems like more of a Game Design question too.
Happpy hunting,
manyquestions
Happpy hunting,
manyquestions
u triple posted,
and i mean if the same game has a 2d version and 3d version of it, like a 2d tds or a 3d tds, but the tds has every thing the same except the 3d and 2d point of view
and i mean if the same game has a 2d version and 3d version of it, like a 2d tds or a 3d tds, but the tds has every thing the same except the 3d and 2d point of view
I like 2D the most actually 
2D owns 3D right now with all the 3D limits...
I might get into 3D once it is more flexible, but im fine with 2D.
I might get into 3D once it is more flexible, but im fine with 2D.
Is this about making games in GM or just games in general.
Games in general discussion:
That other topic I mad ranted about this subject. The one where the topic title is something like "Don't you hate the public thinking 2d is worse and that all games need to be 3d?" Well, here:
My exact words.
About GM games:
2D has better functionality and you can really put it to the limit. But when working in 3D, you reach the limit early on. I'm not saying that they can't be good or massive, but right now, it's better to work with 2D in GM than 3D.
Games in general discussion:
That other topic I mad ranted about this subject. The one where the topic title is something like "Don't you hate the public thinking 2d is worse and that all games need to be 3d?" Well, here:
QUOTE (PwnageMage @ Aug 22 2007, 01:18 AM)
2D can be just as good as 3D. Let me share my views.
2 Dimensional games:
Ahh, what beats a good 2D game? Mario, think Mario. Mario has had his hand in 2D and 3D. Mario started off as JumpMan in Japan. Simple graphics, simple gameplay and hours of fun. When he made his first move to a full scale platformer, he took the video game workd by storm, in 2D. Even to this day, you can find Mario lurking around the 2 dimensional world. Sonic is another great example. The 3D Sonic games are starting to lose perspective of what Sonic is. I personally have not played Sonic the Hedgehog for 360 but in my 15 years of existence, I can say that Sonic is at his best when he's 2D. The original Sonic the Hedgehog took your basic platformer and mixed it up a little, in 2D. Pokemon is probably the best example I can come up with. Pokemon started in 2D. Although 3D has enriched the series with stunning visuals, it's truthfully not that different from the 2D versions. Games in 3D give some of us enrichment but truthfully, it all comes from 2D.
3 Dimensional:
3D was a good step in game development but now it's actually taking a turn for the worst. Sure you can find the most beautiful game out there with realistic graphics and things like that, but now they are missing the most important thing that doesn't make people return the game in a week, GAMEPLAY. I'm not saying that all newer games lack gameplay, it's just some are. Nintendo, by my experience, has the best gameplay. Especially since they are now getting into online play a bit more with the Wii(Mario Strikers, anyone?). I'm not trying to dis PS3(never played) and XBOX360(uh, hardly ever played(don't own)), I'm just saying that game companies should start focusing on the true substance that most people want, the gameplay.
Thanks for reading.
-PwnageMage
2 Dimensional games:
Ahh, what beats a good 2D game? Mario, think Mario. Mario has had his hand in 2D and 3D. Mario started off as JumpMan in Japan. Simple graphics, simple gameplay and hours of fun. When he made his first move to a full scale platformer, he took the video game workd by storm, in 2D. Even to this day, you can find Mario lurking around the 2 dimensional world. Sonic is another great example. The 3D Sonic games are starting to lose perspective of what Sonic is. I personally have not played Sonic the Hedgehog for 360 but in my 15 years of existence, I can say that Sonic is at his best when he's 2D. The original Sonic the Hedgehog took your basic platformer and mixed it up a little, in 2D. Pokemon is probably the best example I can come up with. Pokemon started in 2D. Although 3D has enriched the series with stunning visuals, it's truthfully not that different from the 2D versions. Games in 3D give some of us enrichment but truthfully, it all comes from 2D.
3 Dimensional:
3D was a good step in game development but now it's actually taking a turn for the worst. Sure you can find the most beautiful game out there with realistic graphics and things like that, but now they are missing the most important thing that doesn't make people return the game in a week, GAMEPLAY. I'm not saying that all newer games lack gameplay, it's just some are. Nintendo, by my experience, has the best gameplay. Especially since they are now getting into online play a bit more with the Wii(Mario Strikers, anyone?). I'm not trying to dis PS3(never played) and XBOX360(uh, hardly ever played(don't own)), I'm just saying that game companies should start focusing on the true substance that most people want, the gameplay.
Thanks for reading.
-PwnageMage
My exact words.
About GM games:
2D has better functionality and you can really put it to the limit. But when working in 3D, you reach the limit early on. I'm not saying that they can't be good or massive, but right now, it's better to work with 2D in GM than 3D.
My computer was being stupid and slow, once I threatened it with leaving, it sped up.
Anyway, in that case, I'd actually prefer the 2D version because the 3D one is just taking advantage of the 3D graohics and nothing else. It's only selling point compared to the 2D version is that it looks 3D, which is not good, it's using 3D as a gimmick. The only time it's acceptable for a 3D game to advertize itself as being 3D is when it actually takes advantage of the 3rd dimension for gameplay purposes. But that's not to say that a 2D game is bad just because it uses 3D graphics. Take New Super Mario Bros. and Super Smash Bros. for example. They used 3D graphics and it looked great, but they also had a lot of great gameplay functions. The graphics were never the reason for buying the game, they didn't say "Come play this it's 3D", because it was a 2D game, yet they had many other reasons for people to play and that's what made them acceptable.
I hope that made sense, it's hard to get this thought down on paper (computer screen, whatever).
Happy hunting,
manyquestions
Anyway, in that case, I'd actually prefer the 2D version because the 3D one is just taking advantage of the 3D graohics and nothing else. It's only selling point compared to the 2D version is that it looks 3D, which is not good, it's using 3D as a gimmick. The only time it's acceptable for a 3D game to advertize itself as being 3D is when it actually takes advantage of the 3rd dimension for gameplay purposes. But that's not to say that a 2D game is bad just because it uses 3D graphics. Take New Super Mario Bros. and Super Smash Bros. for example. They used 3D graphics and it looked great, but they also had a lot of great gameplay functions. The graphics were never the reason for buying the game, they didn't say "Come play this it's 3D", because it was a 2D game, yet they had many other reasons for people to play and that's what made them acceptable.
I hope that made sense, it's hard to get this thought down on paper (computer screen, whatever).
Happy hunting,
manyquestions
QUOTE (manyquestions @ Sep 8 2007, 11:12 PM)
My computer was being stupid and slow, once I threatened it with leaving, it sped up.
Anyway, in that case, I'd actually prefer the 2D version because the 3D one is just taking advantage of the 3D graohics and nothing else. It's only selling point compared to the 2D version is that it looks 3D, which is not good, it's using 3D as a gimmick. The only time it's acceptable for a 3D game to advertize itself as being 3D is when it actually takes advantage of the 3rd dimension for gameplay purposes. But that's not to say that a 2D game is bad just because it uses 3D graphics. Take New Super Mario Bros. and Super Smash Bros. for example. They used 3D graphics and it looked great, but they also had a lot of great gameplay functions. The graphics were never the reason for buying the game, they didn't say "Come play this it's 3D", because it was a 2D game, yet they had many other reasons for people to play and that's what made them acceptable.
I hope that made sense, it's hard to get this thought down on paper (computer screen, whatever).
Happy hunting,
manyquestions
Anyway, in that case, I'd actually prefer the 2D version because the 3D one is just taking advantage of the 3D graohics and nothing else. It's only selling point compared to the 2D version is that it looks 3D, which is not good, it's using 3D as a gimmick. The only time it's acceptable for a 3D game to advertize itself as being 3D is when it actually takes advantage of the 3rd dimension for gameplay purposes. But that's not to say that a 2D game is bad just because it uses 3D graphics. Take New Super Mario Bros. and Super Smash Bros. for example. They used 3D graphics and it looked great, but they also had a lot of great gameplay functions. The graphics were never the reason for buying the game, they didn't say "Come play this it's 3D", because it was a 2D game, yet they had many other reasons for people to play and that's what made them acceptable.
I hope that made sense, it's hard to get this thought down on paper (computer screen, whatever).
Happy hunting,
manyquestions
I think when someone uses 3-D models as rendered sprites or whatever it is, it's 2.5-D or something.
I like making 3d games(i just started making them lol)
as it looks heeps better and you dont have thousands of people just saying its bad because its 2d.
as it looks heeps better and you dont have thousands of people just saying its bad because its 2d.
3D is definitely better in my opinion than 2D, but once again, it depends on the game. But think about it, even 2D games like sonic in cooperate depth 
definately 2d with gm. i have yet to see anyone do anything visually impressive with 3d in gm. nor have i seen any gm games use 3d in a way that benefit's the gameplay, which is far more important.
in professional games i like either as long as it's done well.
in professional games i like either as long as it's done well.
Most of my favourite games are 2D.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.