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.