Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Heresy: There is no reason to expect a 2D-isometric engine again. But now we do have one...

IDtenT

Menace to sobriety!
Patron
Joined
Jan 21, 2012
Messages
14,365
Location
South Africa; My pronouns are: Banal/Shit/Boring
Divinity: Original Sin
The view system, will it force me to manipulate the camera all the time, to play normally?
ITT: We learn Codexers can't use their mouse.

A 3D engine is superior to a 2D engine as far as visual quality and capabilities are concerned. 2D engines however allow you to make art, as is the case in many point-and-click adventure games. There is absolutely zero reason to use a 2D backgrounds in an isometric RPG over a 3D engine with fixed rotation options. That is, if the game's visual style is not artistic or cartoony, both of which do not apply to Eternity.

Are you sure you don't mean that there's absolutely zero reason to use a 3D engine in an isometric RPG? I never felt the need to rotate the camera in an isometric RPG, in fact rotating camera usually fucks up everything, so what else does a 3D engine give me if the camera is fixed? What's its use?
Use of filters and resolutions. Easier to create. There is literally no reason to not use a real time 3D engine, even if you want to lock the camera. Again unless it is for artistic/cartoony reasons, which does not apply to Obsidian RPGs.
 

FeelTheRads

Arcane
Joined
Apr 18, 2008
Messages
13,716
Try to stretch that screenshot to at least 20" monitor and tell me about how good looking it is.

I can resize a screenshot of Crysis 3 to 600x400 and it will look even better too.



3D games have nothing on that glorious 2D detail!

DERP CANT MAEK 2D IN HIGH RESOLUTION MUST MAKE IN 640 AND STRETCH.

Also, nice job cutting a small section of a screenshot and enlarging that. Only proves that you have absolutely no point and just stretch it (I'm clever) to make it look like you have.

And you can't even interact with those objects, can't push them, can't break them. And the size of those areas? Loadscreens every fucking 50 meters.

The interactivity in current 3D games is mindblowing, indeed. Ultima games had more interactivity than that. Again, just because it's possible doesn't mean it's done. So come back when all this awesome 3D potential is actually used.
 

FeelTheRads

Arcane
Joined
Apr 18, 2008
Messages
13,716
Use of filters and resolutions. Easier to create. There is literally no reason to not use a real time 3D engine, even if you want to lock the camera. Again unless it is for artistic/cartoony reasons, which does not apply to Obsidian RPGs.

Can't apply filters to 2D images? Haven't seen 2D games where you can change the resolution?
Easier to create.. who the fuck cares? I asked what are the advantages for the player not for the developers. And if they're easier to create why does everybody cry that the graphics costs of games are astronomical?

Just look at those highly detailed 2D models!
Just look at the face of that guy in 2D screenshot. And his clothes are shining with great pre-rendered 2D detail! What can a shitty 2007 game say to that?

Leaving aside your retarded cropping of the image, faces in 2D isometric games are very important, I understand.
 

MetalCraze

Arcane
Joined
Jul 3, 2007
Messages
21,104
Location
Urkanistan
Also, nice job cutting a small section of a screenshot and enlarging that. Only proves that you have absolutely no point and just stretch it (I'm clever) to make it look like you have.

Well you are saying that modern 3D games have nothing on 2D games - then how come I can see so much detail on a 3D armor and 3D face down to facial expression and even small skin detail - but in a glorious 2D screenshot the dude doesn't even have eyes?

Explain to me if 2D games have more detail - then how come I can see every small rock in Crysis in any resolution - but it's impossible in glorious 2D?

You say that 2D games have more detail - then how come I can see small cracks in a bridge in modern 3D games, but glorious 2D games can show barely anything more than bridge planks.

The interactivity in current 3D games is mindblowing, indeed. Ultima games had more interactivity than that. Again, just because it's possible doesn't mean it's done. So come back when all this awesome 3D potential is actually used.

Very well.

Let's use some shitty 3D shit like Silent Storm which is from 2002. I can shoot almost every single brick out of walls there one by one. I can blow a hole in a floor and go down to the lower floor without any load screens - seamlessly. That's apart from the usual standard of object pushing.

Now what about the interactivity of your glorious Ultima that totally dumps a 10 years old 3D game?
 

Dexter

Arcane
Joined
Mar 31, 2011
Messages
15,655
Just look at those highly detailed 2D models!
Just look at the face of that guy in 2D screenshot. And his clothes are shining with great pre-rendered 2D detail! What can a shitty 2007 game say to that?

Can't maek higher res gaem in 2D today, haev to pick on 10 year old gaem for having lower res
:retarded:

bannerl.jpg


Omg look at shit textures and models of 3D gaems, 3D gaems suck!

shot1.jpg
 

MetalCraze

Arcane
Joined
Jul 3, 2007
Messages
21,104
Location
Urkanistan
Can't maek higher res gaem in 2D today, haev to pick on 10 year old gaem for having lower res
:retarded:

And if it had higher res what would it change?

Will guards start having faces? No they won't.
Will road stop being a flat surface? No it won't.
Will it have rolling hills and high mountains? No it won't.
Will you be able to see a smallest detail on a random sword? No you won't.

3D is superior. Stop being a pretentious hipster.
 

FeelTheRads

Arcane
Joined
Apr 18, 2008
Messages
13,716
Well you are saying that modern 3D games have nothing on 2D games - then how come I can see so much detail on a 3D armor and 3D face down to facial expression and even small skin detail - but in a glorious 2D screenshot the dude doesn't even have eyes?

Explain to me if 2D games have more detail - then how come I can see every small rock in Crysis in any resolution - but it's impossible in glorious 2D?

You say that 2D games have more detail - then how come I can see small cracks in a bridge in modern 3D games, but glorious 2D games can show barely anything more than bridge planks.

Fucking scale, dumbshit. They're not there, because the scale doesn't require them to be there.

Example:
OvXJD.jpg

Where is your awesome detailed shit if the resolution is reduced?

OR:
8ZmYN.jpg

Why can't I see every single pore if 3D is so awesome? I just stretched the image! I want the details to magically appear!

:retarded:
 

MetalCraze

Arcane
Joined
Jul 3, 2007
Messages
21,104
Location
Urkanistan
Why can't I see every single pore if 3D is so awesome? I just stretched the image! I want the details to magically appear!
Way to miss a point. If I wouldn't stretched that shitty 2D image what would it change? Nothing.

If 3D is so shitty - why can it have for example detailed faces but 2D can't?
 

FeelTheRads

Arcane
Joined
Apr 18, 2008
Messages
13,716
Will guards start having faces? No they won't.
Will road stop being a flat surface? No it won't.
Will it have rolling hills and high mountains? No it won't.
Will you be able to see a smallest detail on a random sword? No you won't.

Does it need all of that? Guess what, it doesn't.

3D is superior. Stop being a pretentious hipster.

Neither is superior for all jobs. Nobody would claim 2D is the way to make a FPS. Stop being a retarded consoletard.
 

FeelTheRads

Arcane
Joined
Apr 18, 2008
Messages
13,716
Why can't I see every single pore if 3D is so awesome? I just stretched the image! I want the details to magically appear!
Way to miss a point. If I wouldn't stretched that shitty 2D image what would it change? Nothing.

What? And what point? Why would you stretch it? Those games were not made for 30" screens, just like early 3D games were not made for the latest video cards.

If 3D is so shitty - why can it have for example detailed faces but 2D can't?

Detailed faces in an isometric game? Who the fuck needs them? Show me the Crysis level of details in an isometric game with huge areas and OMFG rolling hills.
 

MetalCraze

Arcane
Joined
Jul 3, 2007
Messages
21,104
Location
Urkanistan
Does it need all of that? Guess what, it doesn't.
No sorry. This isn't about whether it needs it or not. You claimed 3D games lack detail. I proved it to be otherwise.

And yes it does need more detail. Flat surfaces are boring for one. Look at Jagged Alliance 2 - the only downside of it is actually that it's 2D. Can't have terrain height variation. Can't have multi-storey buildings. Can't have the interactivity of Men of War where you can blow up a car and use its wheel for cover (and other parts).

Look at the upcoming Larian's RPG. They use 3D physics for mixing spells of chars - something that is not possible in 2D.


Neither is superior for all jobs. Nobody would claim 2D is the way to make a FPS. Stop being a retarded consoletard.

2D isn't the way to make any other game anymore either for that matter.

Look what 3D does in Penumbra which is an adventure game for one.

What? And what point? Why would you stretch it? Those games were not made for 30" screens, just like early 3D games were not made for the latest video cards.

No the point is that it's impossible to make a 2D game that will have the amount of detail of a modern 3D game.

To render the random unit of World in Conflict from 2007 to use in a 2D game you will have to waste dozens of hours just capturing every possible animation frame (smooth animations aren't possible in 2D either that isn't just a cutscene).

And yet in a 3D game that is WiC it's MUCH more detailed than any unit in any IE game.

FeelTheRads said:
Detailed faces in an isometric game? Who the fuck needs them?

Yeah keep backpedaling. You said 2D has more detail. I proved it to be bullshit.

And why not? 3D allows it, 2D didn't.

Faces with mimics looked great in VtmB btw.

Show me the Crysis level of details in an isometric game with huge areas and OMFG rolling hills.

Put camera 50m above the ground of Crysis and detail won't change. And you will have your "isometric" game.
'Isometric' is nothing but a view perspective, dude.
 

Dexter

Arcane
Joined
Mar 31, 2011
Messages
15,655
Now you're just being daft/retarded for the sake of it or what? xD
You can just as well make faces in 2D/drawn games and similar, there's just very few of them that make use of it cause there's not enough EMOSHIONAL CUTSCENES! in them:
screenshot_1_n_ismelda.jpg

2143359-the_banner_saga_conversation.jpg


If they're well animated, they can often even convey emotions a lot better than rigid modeled faces. But this isn't what this was about.
Go ahead and show detailed faeces in that (Company of Heroes?) shot someone posted above or StarCraft II, or almost any game that don't play in emoshonal close-up but also has a birds eye perspective. You don't need to design something that doesn't make sense in a particular type of game.

Regarding Jagged Alliance, wasn't there a Jagged Alliance 3D?
617372f87822d975e12b11d80d0c1d39.jpg


Ah, fuck this...
 

MetalCraze

Arcane
Joined
Jul 3, 2007
Messages
21,104
Location
Urkanistan
So you posted 2 shitty looking 2D games and a shitty looking 3D one.

What's your point exactly?

Regarding Jagged Alliance, wasn't there a Jagged Alliance 3D?

No there wasn't. Do your homework, newfag.

Go ahead and show detailed faeces in that (Company of Heroes?) shot someone posted above or StarCraft II, or almost any game that don't play in emoshonal close-up but also has a birds eye perspective.

Units in CoH2 still look much more detailed than chars in 2D RPGs. Also lololo SC2 did have detailed chars with detailed faces.
Plus animations are much better.

COH2-5.jpg


You can easily see that they have human heads and not white balls for a head like BG chars.
 

Zboj Lamignat

Arcane
Joined
Feb 15, 2012
Messages
5,523
My top10 list of best looking games would contain 2d titles only, so I don't give a shit about your arguments lol.

The only time 3d proves its superiority is when it is actually tied to gameplay mechanics, and examples here would be Myth, Silent Storm or Total Annihilation, not fucking brick puzzles or rolling bodies from action gemz.

Another thing that springs to mind is that when game series jump from 2d to 3d they imediately start looking hideous (paradox games for example).
 

FeelTheRads

Arcane
Joined
Apr 18, 2008
Messages
13,716
No sorry. This isn't about whether it needs it or not. You claimed 3D games lack detail. I proved it to be otherwise.

Yeah keep backpedaling. You said 2D has more detail. I proved it to be bullshit.

And why not? 3D allows it, 2D didn't.

You proved shit. You still have to show me a 3D game that has the level of detail of IWD.
So I guess 3D doesn't allow that level of terrain detail, huh? You know, terrain, the stuff that you actually see in an isometric game, not faces. But yeah, post some more hills which have the same brown texture stretched all over them and claim that's detail.

Put camera 50m above the ground of Crysis and detail won't change. And you will have your "isometric" game.

Actually no, it will look like crap because all your awesome textures will blend into one blurry mass of shit. And what will the performance hit be to render all that view at the same time?

'Isometric' is nothing but a view perspective, dude.

No fucking shit, Sherlock. Maybe you should learn what it is, because:

Faces with mimics looked great in VtmB btw.

Bloodlines is not an isometric game.
 

MetalCraze

Arcane
Joined
Jul 3, 2007
Messages
21,104
Location
Urkanistan
FeelTheRads said:
You proved shit. You still have to show me a 3D game that has the level of detail of IWD.
You mean like any 3D game I used as an example thus far?

IWD looks even worse than Bioware IE games FYI.

So I guess 3D doesn't allow that level of terrain detail, huh? You know, terrain, the stuff that you actually see in an isometric game, not faces. But yeah, post some more hills which have the same brown texture stretched all over them and claim that's detail.

That terrain man. It's so overly detailed and not flat as fuck.

icewind2_ss1.jpg


Seawater alone here has more detail than that "terrain"

total-war-shogun-2-fall-of-the-samurai--02.jpg


Bloodlines is not an isometric game.

Switch to 3rd person, move your mouse up a bit = voila Bloodlines is an isometric game.
 

FeelTheRads

Arcane
Joined
Apr 18, 2008
Messages
13,716
You mean like any 3D game I used as an example thus far?

Especially that one with the same shit brown texture stretched over mountains and hills alike with ZERO variation. Great details on that one.

IWD looks even worse than Bioware IE games FYI.

:retarded: Actually that's IWD2 which does look shitty. Take a screenshot from Lonelywood in Heart of Winter maybe and then we're gonna talk.

Switch to 3rd person, move your mouse up a bit = voila Bloodlines is an isometric game.

:retarded: Please do that and take a screenshot. But let's say that magically turns it isometric... what's your fucking point? It was developed as a first-person game, obviously faces were given attention. No point in doing that if it was developed as an isometric game.
 

J1M

Arcane
Joined
May 14, 2008
Messages
14,616
Since the results are still good looking (and graphics isn't the main thing I look for in a game) I would prefer more 2D games. Generally speaking, it is a lot cheaper for someone to paint a background than to create a 3D scene.

Additionally, creating a static 3D shot and rendering it out is a lot cheaper than worrying about poly counts, UVs, graphics pipeline tools, things looking good from every angle, etc.

Less money spent on graphics = a good thing. Lower budgets mean more room for risk and creativity and more dollars available for something else, like AI or other aspects of game design.
 

mondblut

Arcane
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Messages
22,205
Location
Ingrija
Regarding camera rotations per se, I was relieved when these became standard. In IE games, there were often maps that were hard to navigate because of obstructed views or paths that were not obvious where they actually went. Games like Divine Divinity were even worse in that regard. Being able to rotate the camera as in true 3D would have solved these issues easily.

Wrong. Turning on one's brain and keeping the perspective in mind while making a level would have solved these issues. Even if it takes inventing some silly lore about why the doors outside are never placed in northern and western walls.

Instead, we've got the "so what if they cannot see it, they'll just rotate the camera" crap by the buckets. You get to control the fucking camera more than you get to control the characters. Fuck this shit, I want to play RPGs, not a cameraman simulator.
 

FeelTheRads

Arcane
Joined
Apr 18, 2008
Messages
13,716
Fuck this shit, I want to play RPGs, not a cameraman simulator.

:salute:

All that "need" to rotate the camera is caused by getting used to all the games that have it. If the game is designed with a fixed perspective, there's absolutely no need to rotate the camera. It would be like.. I don't know.. feeling the need to rotate the camera in Heroes 3. Speaking of which, what's the great advantage of making Heroes 3D? Just so you can now play find the hidden chest by rotating the camera? Great fucking use, couldn't live without that.

Only a fucking consoletard would claim that 3D is inherently better than 2D and for each and every genre.
 

MetalCraze

Arcane
Joined
Jul 3, 2007
Messages
21,104
Location
Urkanistan
FeelTheRads said:
Especially that one with the same shit brown texture stretched over mountains and hills alike with ZERO variation. Great details on that one.
Mountains and hills? what's that man? My 2D game with 30m viewdistance no understand

Actually that's IWD2 which does look shitty. Take a screenshot from Lonelywood in Heart of Winter maybe and then we're gonna talk.

"BG and PS:T have awesome graphics!11 Show me a 3D game that has more detail!"
"OK well they don't need that amount of detail anywaythey are isometric!!!"
"But IWD... IWD has awesome 2D graphics! Show me a 3D game that has more detail!"
"No man that's IWD2! IWD2 is shit yeah even if it has the same assets from IWD1, now IWD1 and HoW have awesome graphics!"

:lol:

Dude you are 360-ing so hard you can power a village.

Please do that and take a screenshot. But let's say that magically turns it isometric... what's your fucking point? It was developed as a first-person game, obviously faces were given attention. No point in doing that if it was developed as an isometric game.

Why not? "Isometric" is just a perspective. It's not an excuse for games to look shitty and be outdated in everything.
 

ohWOW

Sucking on dicks and being proud of it
Dumbfuck Queued
Joined
Nov 15, 2011
Messages
2,449
All that "need" to rotate the camera is caused by getting used to all the games that have it. If the game is designed with a fixed perspective, there's absolutely no need to rotate the camera. It would be like.. I don't know.. feeling the need to rotate the camera in Heroes 3. Speaking of which, what's the great advantage of making Heroes 3D? Just so you can now play find the hidden chest by rotating the camera? Great fucking use, couldn't live without that.

Only a fucking consoletard would claim that 3D is inherently better than 2D and for each and every genre.
Gotta admit I hated Heroes 5, although it was exactly H3, but in 3D. That fucking ugly city screeens that got old in few months and small, gay sparkling maps you gotta rotate to find shit.
 

FeelTheRads

Arcane
Joined
Apr 18, 2008
Messages
13,716
Dude you are 360-ing so hard you can power a village.

You mean like this:

Mountains and hills? what's that man? My 2D game with 30m viewdistance no understand

When I point out the shit of the textures you start with awesome distance. Good one.

"OK well they don't need that amount of detail anywaythey are isometric!!!"

Exactly, they don't need fucking faces. What don't you understand. All you've proven is that 3D is good for close-ups, which has no fucking use in isometric games. Now prove that 3D is just as good as 2D for an isometric view.

"No man that's IWD2! IWD2 is shit yeah even if it has the same assets from IWD1, now IWD1 and HoW have awesome graphics!"

HERP DERP. What assets? The characters? The backgrounds are completely different and they are pretty much shitty in IWD2, at least compared to IWD1. Yeah, same assets. :retarded:

Why not? "Isometric" is just a perspective. It's not an excuse for games to look shitty and be outdated in everything.

Yeah, why not make ultra-detailed faces in a game with a fixed isometric camera, faces that nobody would ever see. Makes perfect fucking sense. And no, there's absolutely no fucking reason why you would want to zoom in to the face of a character in an isometric game. To claim that 2D isometric games are inferior because you can't see the faces is the ultimate consoletard retardation.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom