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.

Who would like the CSG to be 2d or non-rotatable?

I would prefer the new CSG to have the following perspective-

  • Full 3d with rotating camera (AoD and NWN)

  • 2d (i.e. Fallout), Hybrid (ToEE, PoE), or fixed camera 3d (D:OS)


Results are only viewable after voting.

Roqua

Prospernaut
Dumbfuck Repressed Homosexual In My Safe Space
Joined
Apr 28, 2004
Messages
4,130
Location
YES!
We all know you are dead set on fancy smancy 3d for no apparent reason so I just wanted to get some feedback from your fans to see what they would prefer. We know you are the big boss man and are calling the shots, but that is no reason to explore the pros and cons of this subject.

Speaking of that - let us review the pros and cons of 2d, 2.5d, or fixed camera fancy smancy 3d versus stupid full rotating cameras 3d.

Pros-
2d is much cheaper and ages very, very well compared to 3d.
Every single instant classic crpg besides Wl2 and AoD is 2d or fixed camera 2d/3d hybrid.
2d and fixed camera are much easier to design for since you know the exact perspective of the player and what the player can see.
Rotating cameras and pixel hunting or even missing content due to 3d is very annoying. Annoying customers is not a good business practice.
Learning the controls makes playing and the UI awkward. Try playing Underrail and then play NWN right after. Which is more intuitive and natural, and which is a huge hassle, annoying, and frustrating and makes people want to fly planes into buildings?
2d is much faster to develop for.
You can make a much better looking 2d game with the resources you have.
You will make more money with a better looking, cheaper to develop game with a much shorter dev cycle.
More money equals more fame and prostitutes for Iron Tower employees.
More money would enable you to move out of Canada to a real country with people and things to do.
All of your favorite games are 2d.

Cons-
Cannot spin camera like a retard and go weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!!!!
That is seriously the only con. There are no others. This really is a no-brainer.
 

Trashos

Arcane
Joined
Dec 28, 2015
Messages
3,413
AoD's camera was indeed very annoying before I got used to it. But now that I 'm used to it, I like it. So I am neutral here.

Rotating cameras and pixel hunting or even missing content due to 3d is very annoying.

I don't agree with the "missing content" part. It was much easier to miss content in Fallout with the hidden-behind-walls loot.

In the rest of your arguments, I can see your point.
 

Roqua

Prospernaut
Dumbfuck Repressed Homosexual In My Safe Space
Joined
Apr 28, 2004
Messages
4,130
Location
YES!
I was going to make this topic, surprisingly someone else thought of it first.

I too agree that 3D cameras are annoying. I never saw anything that makes me think "wow, this game is great, but a 3D rotating camera is just what it needs to be even better!"

I think, and I think I am right, that AoD was developed partly due to the demands and ideas of its time (2006 or so), and then it was thought that 3D was the way to go. Today things have changed.

I agree. And now we see the glaring difference between the two. I really like Thunderscape, Mezobertrania, etc, but they are now almost impossible to play due to the awful 3d graphics. Now look how much better EoB or non 3d games aged comparatively.
AoD's camera was indeed very annoying before I got used to it. But now that I 'm used to it, I like it. So I am neutral here.

Rotating cameras and pixel hunting or even missing content due to 3d is very annoying.

I don't agree with the "missing content" part. It was much easier to miss content in Fallout with the hidden-behind-walls loot.

In the rest of your arguments, I can see your point.
I agree with how poorly some game systems were back then and pixel hunting in these games was annoying. But try any 3d game of the time and tell me FO is worse in some pixel hunt, functionality, annoying UI type of way.
 

Vault Dweller

Commissar, Red Star Studio
Developer
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
28,024
I think, and I think I am right, that AoD was developed partly due to the demands and ideas of its time (2006 or so), and then it was thought that 3D was the way to go. Today things have changed.
We started with a 2D engine, ran into issues, had to switch, looked into 2-3 different engines, now long forgotten, picked Torque as the most robust engine with its own scripting engine, which was a bonus. 2D (that can sell well) requires a strong art department, which we don't have. Look at the games listed in the poll: Fallout, ToEE, Pillars, D:OS. We have 1.5 artist at best (Mazin is one but he's working part time, Oscar is working full time but he's artist/designer and spends half of his time scripting things), so as much as I'd love to have awesome backgrounds, we can't. At least not for the second game.
 

Roqua

Prospernaut
Dumbfuck Repressed Homosexual In My Safe Space
Joined
Apr 28, 2004
Messages
4,130
Location
YES!
I think, and I think I am right, that AoD was developed partly due to the demands and ideas of its time (2006 or so), and then it was thought that 3D was the way to go. Today things have changed.
We started with a 2D engine, ran into issues, had to switch, looked into 2-3 different engines, now long forgotten, picked Torque as the most robust engine with its own scripting engine, which was a bonus. 2D (that can sell well) requires a strong art department, which we don't have. Look at the games listed in the poll: Fallout, ToEE, Pillars, D:OS. We have 1.5 artist at best (Mazin is one but he's working part time, Oscar is working full time but he's artist/designer and spends half of his time scripting things), so as much as I'd love to have awesome backgrounds, we can't. At least not for the second game.

ToEE was made in 18 months with barely any money.
 

Vault Dweller

Commissar, Red Star Studio
Developer
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
28,024
You see the difference between 6-7 artists working full time for 18 months and 1.5 artists working part-time?
 

Drowed

Arcane
Joined
Dec 28, 2011
Messages
1,676
Location
Core City
It's not that easy to do *good* 2D art, as we all know:

595r1jiv.jpg


I do prefer 2D, but it's not easy to do as it seems. Fixed camera is a good option, I think.
 

Roqua

Prospernaut
Dumbfuck Repressed Homosexual In My Safe Space
Joined
Apr 28, 2004
Messages
4,130
Location
YES!
You see the difference between 6-7 artists working full time for 18 months and 1.5 artists working part-time?

I doubt all the artists worked the full development cycle. if we are generous we can say 12 months. We'll also say seven artist, to keep on being generous. 7*12= 84 man months. Artist are slackers and always work part time regardless of employment status so that effects nothing. So 84/1.5=54 months or 4.5 years. I am assuming you are outsourcing some art like you did with AoD. So we will say you are outsourcing half a person worth. Now we are at 3.5 years. If you hire one or two more artists, which makes infinitely more sense than having 1.5, now you are down to 2.5 years or 1.75 years.

We can assume there is a much larger audience for 2d crpgs since there has not been a full blown smash hit full 3d isometric rpg without a fixed camera in I don't know how long. NWN? WL2 wasn't a full blown megahit (but certainly should have been). But we have D:OS on release with fixed camera. SRR. Diablo 3. PoE. All the hipster games like Bastion, Transistor, whatever else. It goes on and on and on and on and on.

So, if in order to develop games and be profitable you need to shorten development time, I would also say reuse assets and not use them as a sunk cost like only the big multinational corporations can afford to do.

You can also look into alternate pay plans for artists, like pay on release or percentage of sales. And from what I've been seeing is there are an abundance of artists and a shortage of programmers since they are all being swooped up in these indie phone game start ups. Whenever there is more types of workers than work in an unregulated market there are deals to be made. You could hire a couple of struggling Vietnamese artists on a piecemeal contract for 4 cents a piece of art and a pack of Wrigley's spearmint gum.

I can understand only wanting to develop a certain kind of game. Without the desire and passion to make something you want, why bother? But what I keep getting stuck on is the inefficiency of this decision. Maybe if you explained what you feel the benefits are of making only full rotation 3d games we would understand.
What is the point in asking for changes to things that are set in stone already?

Poll needs an idgaf option.

Why do you believe it is set in stone? God mandated the CSG would be full 3d with rotating cameras? I thought they were going to use the same engine and dev tools from AoD but recently found out that they are starting over from scratch with a new engine and all new assets. Do you know something the rest of us do not? Do you not want Iron tower to be super popular and a new Troika (since the new SSI is already filled by TSI).
 

Roqua

Prospernaut
Dumbfuck Repressed Homosexual In My Safe Space
Joined
Apr 28, 2004
Messages
4,130
Location
YES!
It's not that easy to do *good* 2D art, as we all know:

595r1jiv.jpg


I do prefer 2D, but it's not easy to do as it seems. Fixed camera is a good option, I think.

But good 3d art is easy? Or easier? Maybe the additional of dimensions reduces the difficulty in creation in a multiplicative way?
 

Drowed

Arcane
Joined
Dec 28, 2011
Messages
1,676
Location
Core City
But good 3d art is easy? Or easier?

Yes, a lot.

Maybe the additional of dimensions reduces the difficulty in creation in a multiplicative way?

No, but the resources available everywhere, familiarity of the designers and new visual effects helps a lot. Anyone nowdays can make a "kinda-good-ish" 3D game, Steam has a fuckton of them right now. But good 2D art?

If you're lucky, you get something about Jeff Vogel's level - which it is tolerable, but not really attractive.

--

Edit/Add: Perhaps the closest to unite the two worlds is to follow the path of Baldur's Gate, with pre-rendered scenes. But this brings many other problems.
 
Last edited:

Roqua

Prospernaut
Dumbfuck Repressed Homosexual In My Safe Space
Joined
Apr 28, 2004
Messages
4,130
Location
YES!
But good 3d art is easy? Or easier?

Yes, a lot.

Maybe the additional of dimensions reduces the difficulty in creation in a multiplicative way?

No, but the resources available everywhere, familiarity of the designers and new visual effects helps a lot. Anyone nowdays can make a "kinda-good-ish" 3D game Steam has a fuckton of them right now. But good 2D art?

If you're lucky, you get something about Jeff Vogel's level - which it is tolerable, but not really attractive.

--

Edit/Add: Perhaps the closest to unite the two worlds is to follow the path of Baldur's Gate, with pre-rendered scenes. But this brings many other problems.

What are some kind of goodish 3d games?

And steam has a fuckton of super mega hit 2d games made by very small teams. Are there any super mega hit kinda goodish 3d games made by a small team? Please don't say Minecraft as that is a kids game and looks like shit. If you think that is good graphics or even kind of good, I'll take any Spiderweb game any day of the week.
 

Roqua

Prospernaut
Dumbfuck Repressed Homosexual In My Safe Space
Joined
Apr 28, 2004
Messages
4,130
Location
YES!
It's not that easy to do *good* 2D art, as we all know:

595r1jiv.jpg


I do prefer 2D, but it's not easy to do as it seems. Fixed camera is a good option, I think.

Still better than Vogel's graphics olololololololol


Also, this seems like fantastic fodder for a demake.

Honestly that is better than NWN's graphics and (not knocking all the hard work and effort that went into it) AoD's graphics. It is clean, sharp, clear and looked good 10 years ago and still looks good now.

It is also better than a ton of games I have played lately, and definitely looks better than most 3d games released on steam nowadays that don't have a 10 bazillion dollar budget; hell, it looks a lot better than most 2d games released nowadays.
 

Mustawd

Guest
It's not that easy to do *good* 2D art, as we all know:

595r1jiv.jpg


I do prefer 2D, but it's not easy to do as it seems. Fixed camera is a good option, I think.

ExploringRuins.JPG


Dat UI though....*shudder*


EDIT: Actually, I wonder how hard it'd be to remake AoD in Vogel's Blades of Avernum Engine.....Maybe change some sprites and tiles?

EDIT 2: The look of course. Not the reactivity or stat system.
 

hivemind

Guest
I like 3d rotating camera more because I like the interactivity and playing around with the camera to get a different look at things.
 

Drowed

Arcane
Joined
Dec 28, 2011
Messages
1,676
Location
Core City
What are some kind of goodish 3d games?

And steam has a fuckton of super mega hit 2d games made by very small teams. Are there any super mega hit kinda goodish 3d games made by a small team? Please don't say Minecraft as that is a kids game and looks like shit. If you think that is good graphics or even kind of good, I'll take any Spiderweb game any day of the week.

I would post some games, but then I read this:

Honestly that is better than NWN's graphics and (not knocking all the hard work and effort that went into it) AoD's graphics. It is clean, sharp, clear and looked good 10 years ago and still looks good now.

You're cleary a "2D fag" and would like anything that is made in 2D, that is, if you think those early AOD screens is anything but cringeworthy - and dear god, *berter* that the final game in any way. (I would play the game anyway since graphics aren't as important point for me, but this isn't the issue here. Oh, and NWN is pretty ugly indeed, but any generic game made nowdays usually exceed it by far.)

That explains why you think that making 2D is easier: you would accept any kind of frankenstein-mashup-art as better. Given this, there isn't much to be said anymore.
 
Self-Ejected

Lurker King

Self-Ejected
The Real Fanboy
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
1,865,419
Well, Underrail has 2D art. It’s not as gorgeous as PoE, but it is good. They didn’t have a bunch of artists too.
 

Vault Dweller

Commissar, Red Star Studio
Developer
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
28,024
So, if in order to develop games and be profitable you need to shorten development time...
What a brilliant idea! Why didn't we think of that?

You can also look into alternate pay plans for artists, like pay on release or percentage of sales. And from what I've been seeing is there are an abundance of artists and a shortage of programmers since they are all being swooped up in these indie phone game start ups. Whenever there is more types of workers than work in an unregulated market there are deals to be made. You could hire a couple of struggling Vietnamese artists on a piecemeal contract for 4 cents a piece of art and a pack of Wrigley's spearmint gum.
Everything sounds easy on paper, especially when it's presented in a single sentence. Trust me, it's not that fucking simple (but something tells me you already know that via personal experience).
 

Roqua

Prospernaut
Dumbfuck Repressed Homosexual In My Safe Space
Joined
Apr 28, 2004
Messages
4,130
Location
YES!
I like 3d rotating camera more because I like the interactivity and playing around with the camera to get a different look at things.

Of course you do.
What are some kind of goodish 3d games?

And steam has a fuckton of super mega hit 2d games made by very small teams. Are there any super mega hit kinda goodish 3d games made by a small team? Please don't say Minecraft as that is a kids game and looks like shit. If you think that is good graphics or even kind of good, I'll take any Spiderweb game any day of the week.

I would post some games, but then I read this:

Honestly that is better than NWN's graphics and (not knocking all the hard work and effort that went into it) AoD's graphics. It is clean, sharp, clear and looked good 10 years ago and still looks good now.

You're cleary a "2D fag" and would like anything that is made in 2D, that is, if you think those early AOD screens is anything but cringeworthy - and dear god, *berter* that the final game in any way. (I would play the game anyway since graphics aren't as important point for me, but this isn't the issue here. Oh, and NWN is pretty ugly indeed, but any generic game made nowdays usually exceed it by far.)

That explains why you think that making 2D is easier: you would accept any kind of frankenstein-mashup-art as better. Given this, there isn't much to be said anymore.

Of course you can't name any games to make a point, just call me a 2d homosexual and win! Well, you are a 3d homosexual. Take that you bully.

And please, tell me some games so we can see who makes more sense regardless of penis insertion hole preferences.

So, if in order to develop games and be profitable you need to shorten development time...
What a brilliant idea! Why didn't we think of that?

You can also look into alternate pay plans for artists, like pay on release or percentage of sales. And from what I've been seeing is there are an abundance of artists and a shortage of programmers since they are all being swooped up in these indie phone game start ups. Whenever there is more types of workers than work in an unregulated market there are deals to be made. You could hire a couple of struggling Vietnamese artists on a piecemeal contract for 4 cents a piece of art and a pack of Wrigley's spearmint gum.
Everything sounds easy on paper, especially when it's presented in a single sentence. Trust me, it's not that fucking simple (but something tells me you already know that via personal experience).

Again, this is all nice and super informative but an explanation on exactly why 3d rotatable is such a no brainer compared to 2d in relation to cost, benefits, development time, tools, assets, and game enhancements.

If the answer is you want the games to be 3d rotatable because you like 3d games and only want to make games that are 3d rotatable that is a rock solid answer.

If you are open to perspective and actually weighed the pros and cons of 2d vs fixed camera 2.5 or 3d, vs full 3d with rotating cameras from a development, gameplay, and cost analysis I think we would all be interested in an explanation.

Do you owe us an explanation? No, of course not. But since the beginning you have been pretty forthcoming with your ideas and reasons. Since the beginning I was a big proponent of 2d, and I strongly believe most of the people who buy your game would prefer 2d or fixed camera 2.5. I do not know much of game development but from what I understand 2d is cheaper, shorter, easier, and has a much longer shelf life than 3d. You often hint at, without actually explaining, that there are some benefits to 3d regarding cost, development cycle, ease of creation, and gameplay enhancement that are just not apparent to us.

I honestly just want to understand. And again, if I was making a game I would make it a certain way regardless of cost or efficiency or any other benefits. It would be full party creation with the most retardedly complex and convoluted rpg system ever conceived. Even if it meant only four people bought the game, I don't care. So if you are only interested in making full rotatable camera 3d games because that is what you want to do - and any reasons to do it otherwise be damned - I completely understand.
 

Mustawd

Guest
2D is truly a lost art. Most up and coming artists in video games have switched to or started in 3D a long time ago. And it's because that's how most of the games are being played, there are a ton of free tools, and it's, quite frankly, much easier to learn and be effective at the beginning.

Think about this, to be a good 2d artist you need to understand lighting inside and out, you need to understand perspective (along with all other types of visual distortions, depending on the specific look you want to achieve), you need a fuck ton of hours of practice just to get your dexterity to a level where you can get your hand to move how you want it, and you need to learn photoshop or gimp or some other program well enough to not just use the software as intended, but many times know it so well that you meed to find tricks in order to make it look like an actual painting.

This is before we even start talking about animating sprites or the fact that many artists are specialists once they get to a certain skill level. They focus on portraits, character design, animation, environments, creatures, vehicles or a combination of a few different things (portrait and character/creature design work well together for example).

In addition, 2d artists typically study the hell out of anatomy. Why? Because in 2d, things like character poses and positioning can change from draft to draft. So how does someone look in position a, b or c? What does their body do? Is there foreshortening? Is said foreshortening, even if technically correct, cause distortions in a way that you need to correct for in order to make it realistic?

This is just scratching the surface. It's a shitload of issues that 3d artists can find ways to get around. Posing? Who cares, the model is already created. I can pose him how I want. Lighting? Oh cool, the software has a light renderer. Animation? Meh, I'll take video of myself and just record the model doing the same thing (not easy but hardly needing as much skill in animation as a 2d artist). Textures? Oh, no need to actually learn it right now, lemme just use a pre-existing texture. Perspective? Software does it all for me.

And on and on and on. Many more shortcuts for 3d than for 2d. And even shortcuts for 2d tend to look like crap when used by amateurs because they don't have the proper context to apply it.

All this...all this before you're even in the pipeline to create assets for the game. FFS, it's no wonder finding a good 2D art team is difficult AND expensive. That's not even considering the fact that in 2D, if you want to change something basic/fundamental, like perspective, then you need to redo fucking everything. Not necessarily the case with 3D.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Vault Dweller

Commissar, Red Star Studio
Developer
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
28,024
Again, this is all nice and super informative but an explanation on exactly why 3d rotatable is such a no brainer compared to 2d in relation to cost, benefits, development time, tools, assets, and game enhancements.
Because doing passable 3D (aka AoD) is much, MUCH easier than doing passable 2D. I don't have time to explain in details, so I hope you'll take my word for it.

If the answer is you want the games to be 3d rotatable because you like 3d games and only want to make games that are 3d rotatable that is a rock solid answer.
I don't care about that at all.

If you are open to perspective and actually weighed the pros and cons of 2d vs fixed camera 2.5 or 3d, vs full 3d with rotating cameras from a development, gameplay, and cost analysis I think we would all be interested in an explanation.
A proper explanation would take pages to write. Maybe I'll write a comprehensive guide to game development one day but not today. Suffice to say that art was and still remains our biggest problem. I've been dealing with art and artists for the last 2 weeks (long story) and the problem is still unresolved. Basically, you'd be surprised how much art even a crappy looking RPG like AoD requires, how time consuming it is, how hard it is to find artists who are skilled yet affordable (the skilled ones usually make 80-100k a year, working for larger companies) and who can follow direction and do what you want them to do rather than what they'd rather do, how expensive it is. I honestly wish I didn't have to deal with it at all but I don't have a choice.

We're struggling to cover the bare minimum requirements for the CSG and make sure that all pieces fit AND have some kind of art direction on top of that, and here you ask why we won't do nice 2D backgrounds. Why indeed.
 

Drowed

Arcane
Joined
Dec 28, 2011
Messages
1,676
Location
Core City
Well, Underrail has 2D art. It’s not as gorgeous as PoE, but it is good. They didn’t have a bunch of artists too.

Styg is literally a genius. Not that I believe that his game is perfect, it isn't, but he is one of those rare cases that transcend normality. There are very few individuals who make make alone something that, often, not even entire teams can do. Another one-of-a-kind game like that is "Dust: An Elysian Tail", when we speak of art alone, it was just one guy.

If we use the exception as a rule, nothing will ever make sense. How many other "Stygs" you see out there?


Well said, I have nothing to add. Unfortunately, writing in English is something that I don't have much patience to do, and I certainly wouldn't be able to express myself as clearly and concisely as that.
 
Self-Ejected

Excidium II

Self-Ejected
Joined
Jun 21, 2015
Messages
1,866,227
Location
Third World
3D, because it's where their expertise lies. But fixed camera.

I don't understand the reasoning for rotating camera. It's just busywork for the player.
 

Drowed

Arcane
Joined
Dec 28, 2011
Messages
1,676
Location
Core City
I agree. With the camera fixed, the developer will always be sure of what the player will be seeing on your his screen, so it's easy to know if the objects of the map are visible and easily accessible. Also, you only need to make things looks good/beautiful from a single angle, which helps.

Although, after so many complaints from players, the extended version of D:OS changed so that the camera could be used in 360º. Go figure.
 

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