|
| Thread: A mental exercise |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 4 · «PREV / NEXT» |
|
Adrius
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Stand and fight!
|
posted March 20, 2011 03:37 PM |
|
Edited by Adrius at 15:41, 20 Mar 2011.
|
Going forward? Haha.
One of my favourite games, Blazblue, has over 10000 handdrawn sprites per character. If that is a step back then I don't like this world anymore.
Both 2D and 3D can look absolutely awesome.
____________
|
|
Jiriki9
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Altar Dweller
|
|
posted March 20, 2011 05:35 PM |
|
|
Yeah...but I'd much rather want a game that works smooth even on not so up-to-date pcs!!! and with 3D, thats even less probable^^
____________
ICTC announced
|
|
War-overlord
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
Presidente of Isla del Tropico
|
|
posted March 20, 2011 05:52 PM |
|
|
'T is a poor carpenter who blames his tools, Jiriki.
I find this mental excercise rather ludicrous. As hypothetical as it might be, the idea of such a game is not of this world.
I strongly agree with Adrius that style/aesthetic is far more important than the "support" 2D over 3D or viceversa.
____________
Vote El Presidente! Or Else!
|
|
vitorsly
Known Hero
Joker!
|
|
posted March 20, 2011 06:20 PM |
|
Edited by vitorsly at 18:20, 20 Mar 2011.
|
Depending on the price.
If they cost the same then I would buy the 3D.
Why?
Because I like seing the sights and looking around and absorving the energy of that beautiful world.
Then my orcs would crush the flowers and trees and anything preety !
|
|
Jiriki9
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Altar Dweller
|
|
posted March 20, 2011 06:22 PM |
|
|
is that so?  I just think, to keep with the carpenter, when I want a chair it should be good in: Sitting on it! And for a strategic game it should be: Fun to play, allowing strategical decisions, etc. For me, neither does the chair need complex ornament, nor a strategic game a 3D graphic. Too complex ornament will make the chair uncomfortable to sit on. And too much investion in 3D graphics (and for me, ANY investion in these on HoMM are too much^^) wastes creation time, perfomance, and money in something unneccessary that should be put in different thigns, imo.
also, I'm not the carpenter, here. I'm not producing, but only consuming!!! And I want things that I can consume with what I have, ratehr than things for whcih to consume I need soemthing else - and soemthign quite expensive - first!
also, I do not like the fast development in pcs hoenstly. I don't wanna buy a new pc all 2 or 3 years to be able to play games^^ PC games are not my only hobby and, for example, compare it to a guitar: If you treat it well, yo have it and that's it, they even sound better with the years. You need to exchange the strings, sometimes, and clean it maybe, but that's all^^ I don't need to buy a new guitar to play a newer song. Just as a parallel thought^^ I don't say they shouldn't use the graphics theys have, but: I'd liek to get low-preferences versions of newer games very much. And I think a 2D version could be a step in that direction. Instead of a completely different version, it could of course also be a swith in the game menu^^
____________
ICTC announced
|
|
Adrius
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Stand and fight!
|
|
posted March 20, 2011 06:36 PM |
|
|
Has any more demanding game than Crysis even been released yet? That was 4 years ago.
____________
|
|
Minnakht
Known Hero
Green eyed monster
|
|
posted March 20, 2011 07:11 PM |
|
|
Yes, but have you ever tried sitting on a flat chair? 3D chairs are much better.
3D adds depth.
It also allows resource piles and paths to be hidden behind terrain features, making for a more interesting map. Have you ever done such a thing in H4, making some kind of a forest that was very passable but hard to see through?
although H4 is theoretically 2D, but the isometric view is so much better
I'm biased, don't listen to me
____________
Shameful Advertising
|
|
Jiriki9
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Altar Dweller
|
|
posted March 20, 2011 07:13 PM |
|
|
Now you'Re exxeggarating an example^^ I don't think 3D added anything to H5 but makeing it confusing. the same game with a simple downsight in 2D would have been MUCH better imo. The only good 3D about it was not even truely 3d - the city screens...
____________
ICTC announced
|
|
Minnakht
Known Hero
Green eyed monster
|
|
posted March 20, 2011 07:17 PM |
|
|
How are the city screens not 3D? Buildings are completely made of polygons, you can see the polygons on the statue's head in the Titan dwelling especially well. And so on.
Either way... again, in 3D, you can hide something behind something. This is much harder to do, since something in a tile generally means said tile is not passable. Those large smoking volcanoes in H3 could use their smoke to obscure something, but when camera angles come into play, it's even funnier!
____________
Shameful Advertising
|
|
creepiestdani
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted March 20, 2011 07:59 PM |
|
|
@Adrius
Quote:
I ain't gonna buy some 2D game just to "support 2D" or something, same with 3D.
I also find separating graphics from gameplay kinda silly, it's all part of the experience.
In the game of Chess, the way the pieces look has no bearing whatsoever on how the game plays. Heroes of Might & Magic is a strategy game. If you deconstruct it, it's actually not that dissimilar to Chess, in that the visual elements that make up the game have no bearing whatsoever on how the game plays. I'm interested in Heroes of Might & Magic only for its being a strategy game. As I previously said, I mostly care about multiplayer. From this perspective, the "experience" you speak of is just a superfluous layer on top of the strategic one. "Experience" is a subjective notion. My experience is different from your experience. For you the graphics are an integral part of the experience. For me they aren't.
@War-overlord
Quote:
I find this mental excercise rather ludicrous. As hypothetical as it might be, the idea of such a game is not of this world.
The idea of such a game is actually doable.
@Minnakht
Quote:
It also allows resource piles and paths to be hidden behind terrain features, making for a more interesting map.
This is one of the things I hated about Heroes 5. Piles hidden behind terrain features actually detract from the game. I'm only interested in strategic decisions, not in pixel hunting.
@Jiriki9
Quote:
Now you'Re exxeggarating an example^^ I don't think 3D added anything to H5 but makeing it confusing. the same game with a simple downsight in 2D would have been MUCH better imo. The only good 3D about it was not even truely 3d - the city screens...
Let's clear things up a little. When I say "3D" I'm referring to polygonal graphics, so graphics which require an accelerator card to display. By "2D" I'm referring to sprites.
The background in this game is 3D, but in the game it's represented as a sprite. Only the character is polygonal.
In Heroes 3 the towns were 3D but not polygonal. In Heroes 5 however the towns were fully polygonal. So let's not use "2D/3D" because it's confusing, and let's use "polygonal/sprite-based" instead.
|
|
MattII
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted March 20, 2011 08:04 PM |
|
Edited by MattII at 20:09, 20 Mar 2011.
|
IMO 3D wouldn't be so bad if they didn't make the terrain so ridiculously large, the 'hero' you see on the map is a representation of your whole army, not the actual hero him/herself. NWC and 3DO understood this, Ubisoft and its partners apparently do not.
Quote:
It also allows resource piles and paths to be hidden behind terrain features, making for a more interesting map.
I'm with creepiestdani on this, this is a strategy game, not a treasure-hunt game you shouldn't need to have to search for those things.
|
|
Adrius
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Stand and fight!
|
|
posted March 20, 2011 08:34 PM |
|
Edited by Adrius at 21:13, 20 Mar 2011.
|
U-huh, then I think I understand your view-point.
You and I simply seek different things from the game.
____________
|
|
creepiestdani
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted March 20, 2011 08:58 PM |
|
|
Indeed.  The game can mean many things to many different people. Here's an interesting article on the subject. As you can imagine, for me and those like me polygonal graphics are not an improvement over sprite-based graphics.
|
|
MattII
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted March 20, 2011 09:49 PM |
|
|
I like a game that feels 'epic', and frankly the only thing about H6 that feels 'epic' to me are the requirements.
Quote:
Here's an interesting article on the subject.
I'm a Timmy without a doubt, probably a Diversity Timmy.
|
|
War-overlord
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
Presidente of Isla del Tropico
|
|
posted March 20, 2011 10:07 PM |
|
|
Quote:
I just think, to keep with the carpenter, when I want a chair it should be good in: Sitting on it! And for a strategic game it should be: Fun to play, allowing strategical decisions, etc. For me, neither does the chair need complex ornament, nor a strategic game a 3D graphic. Too complex ornament will make the chair uncomfortable to sit on. And too much investion in 3D graphics (and for me, ANY investion in these on HoMM are too much^^) wastes creation time, perfomance, and money in something unneccessary that should be put in different thigns, imo.
also, I'm not the carpenter, here. I'm not producing, but only consuming!!! And I want things that I can consume with what I have, ratehr than things for whcih to consume I need soemthing else - and soemthign quite expensive - first!
also, I do not like the fast development in pcs hoenstly. I don't wanna buy a new pc all 2 or 3 years to be able to play games^^ PC games are not my only hobby and, for example, compare it to a guitar: If you treat it well, yo have it and that's it, they even sound better with the years. You need to exchange the strings, sometimes, and clean it maybe, but that's all^^ I don't need to buy a new guitar to play a newer song. Just as a parallel thought^^ I don't say they shouldn't use the graphics theys have, but: I'd liek to get low-preferences versions of newer games very much. And I think a 2D version could be a step in that direction. Instead of a completely different version, it could of course also be a swith in the game menu^^
That is not how the analogy works here, my friend.
In this case, you are the carpenter. And a carpenter makes things with wood 'n nails and a hammer.(Oversimplifying here, but that doesn't matter) You, as a PC gamer, play games on your PC. If a carpenter makes bad products, he should not blame his hammer and nails, or the quality of the wood, but his lack of skill. And as a PC-gamer, you should not blame developers for making the games as they are, but rather yourself for refusal to work with adequate material.
And you guitar analogy does not hold water. As they do not compare at all to pc(-games).
Quote:
The idea of such a game is actually doable.
Is it? Do you honestly think that creating to seperate and radically different version of the same game is in any way cost-efficient?
____________
Vote El Presidente! Or Else!
|
|
creepiestdani
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted March 20, 2011 10:24 PM |
|
|
@War-overlord
Quote:
Is it? Do you honestly think that creating to seperate and radically different version of the same game is in any way cost-efficient?
The two versions are actually not that different. Look at it this way: they are made up of the same building blocks, only the material of those blocks differs. All those fancy polygonal objects occupy the exact same space on the game's grid. They already have the 3D models. All that remains is to convert them to sprites.
@MattII
Quote:
I'm a Timmy without a doubt, probably a Diversity Timmy.
I'm a Johnny/Timmy/Spike when it comes to Magic the Gathering. In Heroes I'm a Spike/Johnny.
|
|
War-overlord
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
Presidente of Isla del Tropico
|
|
posted March 20, 2011 10:38 PM |
|
|
Quote:
The two versions are actually not that different. Look at it this way: they are made up of the same building blocks, only the material of those blocks differs. All those fancy polygonal objects occupy the exact same space on the game's grid. They already have the 3D models. All that remains is to convert them to sprites.
Oh yes, they are that different.
For rendering a 2D game, one needs a radically different game-engine from one for rendering a 3D one.
Let alone the incredible effort it would take to have those two different engines to be able to interact with oneanother.
So effectively your making 2 games, which do exactly the same. Now you're going to have to make those two games and to get them to effectively interact takes extra time. And say that half the fans take the 2D one and the other half the 3D one. Now you've spent enough money for 2-3 games and get the revenue for a single game. Yeah, that there is certainly cost-efficient.
Now you are right that this is theoretically posible. But it's not practical.
____________
Vote El Presidente! Or Else!
|
|
creepiestdani
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted March 20, 2011 10:51 PM |
|
|
Quote:
For rendering a 2D game, one needs a radically different game-engine from one for rendering a 3D one.
Let alone the incredible effort it would take to have those two different engines to be able to interact with oneanother.
All you need is the rendering engine, which you only create once. And no, having them interact is not that difficult. If you strip the graphics layer away, all you have is a grid with colored rectangles: some colored rectangles represent impassible terrain, others represent functional objects, and so on. The interaction occurs at this level. So I'd argue it's both theoretically and practically possible, but obviously not at this stage of the game.
|
|
vitorsly
Known Hero
Joker!
|
|
posted March 20, 2011 11:01 PM |
|
|
Quote:
is that so? I just think, to keep with the carpenter, when I want a chair it should be good in: Sitting on it! And for a strategic game it should be: Fun to play, allowing strategical decisions, etc. For me, neither does the chair need complex ornament, nor a strategic game a 3D graphic. Too complex ornament will make the chair uncomfortable to sit on. And too much investion in 3D graphics (and for me, ANY investion in these on HoMM are too much^^) wastes creation time, perfomance, and money in something unneccessary that should be put in different thigns, imo.
also, I'm not the carpenter, here. I'm not producing, but only consuming!!! And I want things that I can consume with what I have, ratehr than things for whcih to consume I need soemthing else - and soemthign quite expensive - first!
also, I do not like the fast development in pcs hoenstly. I don't wanna buy a new pc all 2 or 3 years to be able to play games^^ PC games are not my only hobby and, for example, compare it to a guitar: If you treat it well, yo have it and that's it, they even sound better with the years. You need to exchange the strings, sometimes, and clean it maybe, but that's all^^ I don't need to buy a new guitar to play a newer song. Just as a parallel thought^^ I don't say they shouldn't use the graphics theys have, but: I'd liek to get low-preferences versions of newer games very much. And I think a 2D version could be a step in that direction. Instead of a completely different version, it could of course also be a swith in the game menu^^
You are totaaly right and if I had to choose between graphics and gameplay I would choose gameplay.
But I think that I saw in the first post saying something about the same game BUT different graphics. If the 3D is done correctly not only you can see perfectly well from the top of the map but you can also look at the map and admire it.
|
|
polaris
Promising
Known Hero
|
|
posted March 22, 2011 12:47 AM |
|
|
If they could somehow create a magical 2D version for minimal cost then why not?
Of course, if it were so easy, then why haven't we seen any games follow this path before? The answer, obviously, is that it's not that easy.
Sure the interface is already 2D and you already have 3D models which can be rendered from fixed angles to get your 2D sprites- no problem there. But consider just how much more data that is when you're storing a collection of 2D frames versus a model, a texture, and some animation commands. It's like storing a new texture for every frame of every creature for every action. The 2D version would be orders of magnitude larger in it's install size, and you've only supported one resolution (pre-rendered sprites don't scale too well). People with different resolutions STILL don't get too compelling of a product compared to just playing the 3D game on lowest settings.
Maybe you work around THAT by using lower quality stills, targetting an even lower resolution, or eliminating animation altogether. But you can do those things with 3D as well. It's still possible to target integrated graphics for lowest quality 3D, and some games even target netbooks with 3D engines. This is easier to do because it's simply stripping out features already made, as opposed to creating new assets from the old assets and presenting them in a different way. Not to mention that there are now 2 versions to support and to patch which creates some headaches as there are many ways they could lose parity over time through negligence, accident, or market demand.
Attacking the problem from the other side is that hardware improves over time. Is it worth all the investment of planning, designing, and supporting a 2D version which has such a limitted shelf life? This is a short-term plan with long term costs so there needs to be a really big payoff for it to be worth the risk. I sincerely doubt that people who aren't upgrading their computers and still using something ancient are the kind of audience that a gaming company is expecting big dividends from.
____________
|
| |
|
|
