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

[dibens]

It just needs additional rendering and ofcourse additional time to put it in.

Then why the fuck bother in the first place? For satisfying some oldfag's nostalgia? 2D sprite graphics are IMPRACTICAL through and through. Fixed view, fixed resolution, no physics, no nothing. And seriously- has Neverwinter Nights been the last 3d game you played, faggots? 3D engines are ridiculously powerful and capable today. Even some shit made for five year old consoles look epic.

I'll repeat- there is nothing a 2d engine can do better than 3d.

 

[Surf Solar]

I am sorry, but I just happen to like the look of colorpalette limited, crisp static 2d backgrounds. If you can't see the difference between a postprocessed and painted on 2d background and a map rendered on the spot than I can't help you. Truly I am the harbinger of decline, right? Why does it even bother you? The game the thread was inspired by, that Eternity Project by Obsidian is One (1) out of, how many games get produced per year, that uses 2d prerendered backgrounds. You'll have plenty of other 3d games to play when you are so butthurt about this one. Coming to the next question why you are actually so butthurt over this?

 

[Gord]

Captain Shrek is absolutely right.
Doesn't change much about the fact that, due to rose-tinted glasses and a heavy bias, many people will still insist on 2D graphics being inherently superior.

In the end, it's a pointless discussion, imho.
It has nothing to do with the engine (anymore that is, early 3D was indeed often enough butt-ugly, but so was early 2D), but everything with artistic vision and ability of the team behind it.
The percieved pros of 2D over 3D are at best subjective personal taste or at worst denial.
Not that I can't appreciate the beauty of a well-done game in 2D - as I said, it all boils down to the capabilities of the people behind it.

 

[Ion Prothon II]

Then why the fuck bother in the first place? For satisfying some oldfag's nostalgia? 2D sprite graphics are IMPRACTICAL through and through. Fixed view, fixed resolution, no physics, no nothing. And seriously- has Neverwinter Nights been the last 3d game you played, faggots? 3D engines are ridiculously powerful and capable today. Even some shit made for five year old consoles look epic.

I'll repeat- there is nothing a 2d engine can do better than 3d.

For satisfying your mother through and through in fixed position, no condom.

At least pretend you read what others write.

Captain Shrek, do you even know what's the difference between orthographic projection and perspective in isometric graphics?

 

[dibens]

monkey!

 

[made]

As long as it's "isometric" and pretty I don't care if 3D or 2D. As evidenced in this thread, often people can't even tell the difference.

FYI, this is "hand-painted":

Infinity engine is not. Neither is Statis, or Inquisitor.

The only issue with 3D is camera, front objects obscuring the view etc. but this can be taken care of if optimized with that perspective in mind which most modern games sadly don't do.

 

[Ion Prothon II]

I was actually unaware of the technical term "Perspective projection", all the while knowing how orthographic and parallel projections differ. Thanks for making me aware. Does not change anything though except rectifying my ignorance.

Just wanted to be sure. I found your desire to make real- time rotations in ortho a bit confusing.

What's the point of this, anyway? Except some kind of fetishism. I wonder if you're spinning things around too, when you play a board game.

 

[asper]

As long as it's "isometric" and pretty I don't care if 3D or 2D. As evidenced in this thread, often people can't even tell the difference.

FYI, this is "hand-painted":

Infinity engine is not. Neither is Statis, or Inquisitor.

The only issue with 3D is camera, front objects obscuring the view etc. but this can be taken care of if optimized with that perspective in mind which most modern games sadly don't do.

IE games, Stasis, Inquisitor have pre-rendered backgrounds. They were made in 3D, but what is in the game is a 2D picture, the result of the render. What you are talking about is a distinction in how the 2D image is made - by pixelart, or in a 3D program - but the image in the game is still 2D.

That is still a difference with a 3D background that is composed of 3d elements that are rendered in-game, such as in the NWN games. The world is not a picture anymore, but is rendered in-game out of 3D elements. That is the distinction that people talk about when they want a "2D background", and not how the 2D picture is created.

People that are unaware call the IE games "hand-painted", which just shows how pretty they are, but nobody cares how the 2D image is made, just that in the game it will be a 2D image, and not 3D, textured objects.

On topic: if anyone really needs convincing that the IE games look better than 3D rpg's, then this game is probably not for them.

 

[Cassidy]

There is no reason to expect a 2D-isometric engine again

 

[Roguey]

Wasteland 2 versus Shadowrun Returns versus Divinity Original Sin versus Project Eternity (when we see it).

 

[Lyric Suite]

Sorry bro, but the backgrounds in IE games were 3D maps pre-rendered from a fixed perspective.

This is a stupid fucking argument. All art is inherently "3D" (in a visual sense), as long as it has perspective. It doesn't matter if you painted it on a canvas by hand, or you used a 3D engine to build the image. But if the game down't allow you to interact with the third dimension, then its 2D (in an interactive sense, which is what we are talking about here). Fucking twerps learn to reason.

 

[ksjav]

Everyone ITT who wants time consuming pwetty hand-painted 2D backgrounds instead of significantly more lean production of 3D environments that reserve more time in the game development pipeline for polishing gameplay mechanics and QA is a gigantic graphics whore.

 

[ohWOW]

There is no reason to expect a 2D-isometric engine again

It's funny how this pic is taken from a 3D game.

 

[MetalCraze]

Why the hell is the codex so excited about a 2D isometric game engine similar to Infinity engine???????

Because Codex is full of newfag post 2011 hipsters who pretend to like things because they are old but will never play them. They came to Codex and saw people appreciate old 2D games but again because they never played them they figured it's because of 2D since in no way gameplay can be better than their GOTYs like Skyrim and Dark Souls. And thus you have retarded comments by them ITT and "2D > 3D derp" in others.

Also nowadays doing this gives you KKK. So stop questioning things and be like the rest


There was a time when 2D graphics indeed looked better than 3D but modern graphics cards are fully capable of much more

 

[Lyric Suite]

As long as it's "isometric" and pretty I don't care if 3D or 2D. As evidenced in this thread, often people can't even tell the difference.

FYI, this is "hand-painted":

Infinity engine is not. Neither is Statis, or Inquisitor.

The only issue with 3D is camera, front objects obscuring the view etc. but this can be taken care of if optimized with that perspective in mind which most modern games sadly don't do.

IE games, Stasis, Inquisitor have pre-rendered backgrounds. They were made in 3D, but what is in the game is a 2D picture, the result of the render. What you are talking about is a distinction in how the 2D image is made - by pixelart, or in a 3D program - but the image in the game is still 2D.

That is still a difference with a 3D background that is composed of 3d elements that are rendered in-game, such as in the NWN games. The world is not a picture anymore, but is rendered in-game out of 3D elements. That is the distinction that people talk about when they want a "2D background", and not how the 2D picture is created.

People that are unaware call the IE games "hand-painted", which just shows how pretty they are, but nobody cares how the 2D image is made, just that in the game it will be a 2D image, and not 3D, textured objects.

On topic: if anyone really needs convincing that the IE games look better than 3D rpg's, then this game is probably not for them.

Bleh, beaten to it.

 

[FeelTheRads]

This is a stupid fucking argument. All art is inherently "3D" (in a visual sense), as long as it has perspective. It doesn't matter if you painted it on a canvas by hand, or you used a 3D engine to build the image. But if the game down't allow you to interact with the third dimension, then its 2D (in an interactive sense, which is what we are talking about here). Fucking twerps learn to reason.

Yeah, you have no idea what you're talking about.

Average Manatee said this:

BTW, infinity engine only used 3D models for character sprites, which are near universally agreed to be at best okay-ish. The areas, which are the real strong point, are pure 2D art.

He made a comparison with the character models. Basically saying, characters are done with 3D models, but not the backgrounds. Which is FALSE.

But thanks for your pseudo-intellectual valuable input.

 

[thesoup]

There was a time when 2D graphics indeed looked better than 3D but modern graphics cards are fully capable of much more

Not like the average codexer would know with his rusty 486.

 

[FeelTheRads]

There was a time when 2D graphics indeed looked better than 3D but modern graphics cards are fully capable of much more

Yeah, too bad we don't see it, huh?

 

[J_C]

Thread is retarded, OP is a faggot.

It OP was right, we should have a lot of games that looks better than the IE games, since there are some amazing artists out there. Yet there are none. In a 3D engine the devs have to make sure that they don't use too much resources, so the game doesn't need a monster PC to run. In the IE games you could make very detailed backgrounds, because the scenes are going to be pre-rendered anyway.

 

[Dexter]

This thread is one of the worthiest for retardo-land I've seen so far...

HERP, DEY ALWAYS WANTED TO MAEK SHOOTERS! They just couldn't, really! So they made RPGs instead. Nobody wants to play round-based games, everybody just did them because they didn't know how to make Action games and because of limiations of their time, now that there's DIABLOW we can stop making thems anymore! Strategy games aren't contemporary anymore! Painting shit is for fags, haven't you idiots heard of photography? And so on...

The reason people don't want 3D is because it LOOKS LIKE SHIT.

Once games actually look like their concept art and has some actual style to it:

Instead of whatever this is:

you can come back with this shitty thread and try again...
Only the rarest 3D games come even anywhere close to art style used over a decade ago, it was actually the other way around in that people DIDN'T WANT 3D for the most part, but they tried pushing that shit onto everyone back in the day, because it was the new cool shit and marketing and everyone said it's awesome and had to be done, almost damning entire genres to extinction with their abhorrent stupidity:

What's next? Want Adventure games to also all go 3D too, because obviously that is just so much fucking better.

These people...

 

[MetalCraze]

Not like the average codexer would know with his rusty 486.

Your number is 126 too big.

 

[Infinitron]

Not like the average codexer would know with his rusty 486.

Your number is 126 too big.

 

[MetalCraze]

The reason people don't want 3D is because it LOOKS LIKE SHIT.

*examples*

What's next? Want Adventure games to also all go 3D too, because obviously that is just so much fucking better.

*examples*

These people...

But 2D games totally don't look like shit

 

[FeelTheRads]

But 2D games totally don't look like shit

So everything looks like shit in the end or what are you trying to prove with that?

 

[Ynk]

Weta still keeps a 40 000+ core render farm around, they never heard of a Geforce?
But more importantly 2d != pre-rendered 3d. I would love a 2d game using miniatures...