Just what is ISOMETRIC?

[Art.Whiz]

Who cares? This is as useless as me taking the time to respond to this topic. Most people are dumb, we have to deal with it. Also, I will continue to think that Fallout perspective is isometric. Semantics...

 

[Modron]

I care, the articles on the various forms of projection were interesting. However, I would not fault someone for calling Fallout isometric as that term has kind of become a catch-all for any style of elevated and at an angle camera style at large in the public perspective. Really the only ones who need to know the exact perspective are the programmers and artists developing the game.

 

[KidBoogie]

With U7 you are sitting in a chair upright with gravity directly below you but gravity projecting out of the screen toward you 45 degrees down and to the right. Homo sapiens can't cope with the confusion.

huh?

I drew axes on the pics that represent the illusion of 3 dimensions that we interpret from the corresponding viewpoints:

Like hobbit said, we're used to the convention of the z-axis pointing 'up' and 'down' (in the direction of gravity on earth), because we're restricted in motion along that line (unless you can fly). Notice how in the first picture, the "z"-axis points into the screen at an angle to the right, but in the second picture, the "z"-axis points exactly along our z-axis on earth, so it's something we're used to and it feels natural.

Also note that we don't have a convention for the x and y axes on earth, as we're not limited in motion in those directions. They can be pointing in any direction as long as they're perpendicular to each other and the z-axis, so rotating the x and y axes doesn't feel unnatural to us.

 

[Severian Silk]

In the former, it's an software optimization. You can fit more image data in a rectangular sprite that way. In the latter if you were to look at the sprites you would see lots of empty space. (Just like you can see empty space in corners of the rotated screenshot.) This is less efficient.

Both pictures are headache inducing.

 

[Rpgsaurus Rex]

Never understood all the whining about U7's perspective.

You're not alone.

 

[Moribund]

This insane spergjob of an article is exactly why I could give two shits about what certain people here have to say.

Same goes for following topics:

1. Fallout art direction and MOST but NOT all other comments about art direction.
2. Choice and consequences when it comes to dialogs (yay I can larp 6 different types of overly talkative douchebag).
3. 2D over 3D.
4. Perspective in Ultimas.
5. Grids vs hex.
6. Camera rotation being TEH EVIL.
7. EVERYTHING SHOULD BE GRIMDARK AND DRAB.
8. DOCTOR AND OUTDOORSMAN SKILL IN FALLOUT ARE BROKEN.

You would think these are incredibly vital subjects but over time I have realized it's like all the same 5 guys who even give a shit at all, let alone go mental over it. A lot of times the same guy will be very concerned with EVERY ONE of these inane topics.

 

[Bluebottle]

Like all warpings of language this one comes about mostly because there's isn't a decent concise word which easily describes an intended meaning which people often want to convey, and so some close but technically incorrect word has been adopted to fit. Really the only way that this would ever end would be if another word came in to play which adequately surmised 'looking down from above, but not directly above, at an angle of some kind'. Because of the fact that most people making this mistake in this context have either no understanding of the word or, more importantly, their first encounter of the word is in the incorrect context, they'll probably continue using it even if they know it isn't technically correct. So, while the post is interesting, informative and full of some decent screenshots, my recommendation would be to just accept it as one of the sometimes frustrating examples of the evolution of language.

 

[KidBoogie]

In the former, it's an software optimization. You can fit more image data in a rectangular sprite that way. In the latter if you were to look at the sprites you would see lots of empty space. (Just like you can see empty space in corners of the rotated screenshot.) This is less efficient.

Both pictures are headache inducing.

Well, the rotated picture is still a rectangle, and so i think it would hold the same amount of image data. The reason there's empty space and also the reason the graphics look slightly shittier in the second picture is because the image was rotated, which for the majority of points screws up the intended position of a pixel relative to the ones close to it.

If they design the game from the 45 degree viewpoint then there wouldn't be those empty spaces

 

[villain of the story]

So, while the post is interesting, informative and full of some decent screenshots, my recommendation would be to just accept it as one of the sometimes frustrating examples of the evolution of language.

Which is exactly what I was suggesting, that whether your like it or accept it or not, "isometric" in the context of gaming has come to mean a whole lot of things which can only be described as "looking down from above at an angle", regardless of 2D or 3D but some people still get confused because they attribute certain features to it exclusively. There are even people who think isometric = 2D TB game.

 

[Weierstraß]

And whether you like it or not, RPG has come to mean a third person shooter with romances.

 

[Severian Silk]

Also see the following wiki article for further reading, though beware, it also has some false information:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isometric_graphics_in_video_games_and_pixel_art

What is false about that article? (I might edit it to fix it.)

By the way, this kind of view is missing from the original post, what is its technical name? It's quite common for old arcade games and jRPGs and one of my favourite perspectives, kinda a mix between iso and top-down

I think it's called "oblique" perspective.

 

[Severian Silk]

Isometric projection is serrius bisniz.

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

Oh God, it's fucking horrible!

 

[Severian Silk]

Posting this in GRPG because the context in which this term is used the most and also the one that is most relevant to us here is that of CRPGs. Oh and, sticky maybe?​

I've recently noticed that there seems to be some confusion and intentional ambiguity regarding ISOMETRIC and associated projection types in general and sometimes it can kind of detract from a discussion when people use the same terms to mean different things. Few are aware of the technical distinctions of the terminology and fewer give a crap. So I thought it might be worthwhile to explain these and maybe reach an agreement.​

~

I guess it would be right to say that, generally speaking, "isometric", in the context of gaming, has come to be used as an umbrella term to mean most single character to squad-level or otherwise strategy* games where you interact with the game through an overview interface (and possibly one that is partially or exclusively point&click in most cases -right?) for its tactical value games that you view from above at an angle, without any distinction between 2D, 3D or projection type. At least that's the definition that I think most people would almost universally commonly think of when somebody told them "I'm making an isometric game".​

(*: see made's comments down and on page 2)​

So, Age of Decadence, UFO: After<crap> series, Dungeon Siege series, Diablo 3 and even DA:O in tactical mode (3D games all of them) are considered "isometric" just as X-COM, Ultima 7 - 8, Fallout, FO:T, IE games and JA2 also are, even though not all (or maybe none!) of the latter are technically isometric either.​

Anyway, I believe the actual confusion stems from a lack of understanding of what "isometric" itself technically means. Sometimes, for instance, 3D games like the the former group above are called "isometric 3D" or some other mishmash of terms to try and make sense but end up inaccurate in 99% of the cases anyway, even though the term itself might be technically valid on its own but not in its appliance to a particular game. (Roughly speaking, I think it's kind of like calling a liquid an ionised gas because both are fluids and both are states of matter where the latter is even a valid terminology albeit not for liquids but for plasma).​

To put it elementally, isometric, in graphics, is one of the subtypes of parallel projection where parallel lines or edges of objects are also parallel in the resulting image after the projection, except with skewed angles and foreshortening and all representations of any given object have the same dimensions anywhere throughout the scene due to lack of a focal point (or because parallel projections have an infinite focal length), as opposed to otherwise parallel lines or edges getting closer or further apart in perspective projection, thus objects looking smaller or bigger in respect to the distance to focal point.​

The distinction of a projection being "isometric" stems from the particular use of the angles and foreshortening. Examples of parallel projections:​

Notice how only one of them is actually isometric though I'm sure many here will recall games looking like either of them and still being called isometric.​

HOW ANY OF THIS RELATES TO GAMES​

Technically, a 2D game can be rendered in either isometric or an otherwise parallel projection (leaving out other types of graphics eg. symbolic, ASCII or whatever, which are irrelevant to the subject). A 3D game can be rendered in either isometric, otherwise parallel or a perspective projection.​

2D games with parallel projection -isometric or otherwise:​

(the games from top down are: Crusader: No Regret, X-COM Enemy Unknown/UFO Defense, Temple of Elemental Evil, Chicago 1930, Commandos 2, Veil of Darkness, Divine Divinity, Diablo 2, Throne of Darkness)​

As you might have noticed, there's quite a bit of variation in angles and the amount of foreshortening but just about anyone would call all of these games isometric, while technically, not all of them are. But they all employ parallel projection. Moving on.​

3D games rendered with perspective projection:​

(the games are: Diablo 3, NWN2 Storm of Zehir, Trapped Dead, Dead Horde, Van Buren, Desperados 2, Titan Quest)​

Even though all of these 3D games are rendered with perspective projection and therefore can not possibly be isometric by technical definition, virtually anyone will call these isometric just the same, as the term conveys a certain type of viewpoint game or gameplay as can be gleamed from (all) these screens. Moving on.​

3D games rendered with parallel projection:​

(the games are: Prelude to Darkness, UFO: Alien Invasion, Syndicate Wars (DOS and PS versions), Depths of Peril, Dungeon Keeper)​

All of those are 3D and rendered with parallel projection. You could rotate the camera in one or two axes on some of these and can not rotate it at all in one of the examples there; camera axes are locked in Depths of Peril. While I'm not certain if the particular fixed angle of the camera in Depths of Peril technically qualifies as isometric, all of these games are, well, duh, isometric by gaming terminology (however, you could also match the technical definition by playing with camera angles in some of those games).​

Finally, some of those 3D games also come with a toggle: you can switch between parallel and perspective projection (though I think only one or two among those examples qualify: UFO: Alien Invasion certainly does and perhaps Prelude To Darkness as well but I don't remember for certain). It would be nice if one particular vapourware in development with a demo coming soon also did that :hint:​

Also see the following wiki article for further reading, though beware, it also has some false information:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isometric_graphics_in_video_games_and_pixel_art​

That's all, folks. Objections? Suggestions? Thoughts?​

Good post. Would brofist if I could.

 

[Excidium II]

Why didn't you back in 2013?

 

[Severian Silk]

I dunno. It was worth a brofist regardless.

 

[Severian Silk]

By the way, this kind of view is missing from the original post, what is its technical name? It's quite common for old arcade games and jRPGs and one of my favourite perspectives, kinda a mix between iso and top-down

It is always hard to tell with hand-drawn artwork, especially in the second image. Note how the round blue platforms are oval shaped. This could indicate that it in fact uses axonometric projection. You could tell for sure if, in the game, you can move horizontally faster than vertically.

The first image uses oblique projection.