Not logged in, Join Here! or Log In Below:  
 
News Articles Search    
 

 Home / General Programming / the future of 2D games Account Manager
 
Archive Notice: This thread is old and no longer active. It is here for reference purposes. This thread was created on an older version of the flipcode forums, before the site closed in 2005. Please keep that in mind as you view this thread, as many of the topics and opinions may be outdated.
 
Alex J. Champandard

August 18, 1999, 09:54 PM


I've been getting into huge debates recently about the future of 2D games, especially since i read that preview of A2D...

I personnaly think it's just a matter of time before all new releases are 3D. I'll spare you the details of my arguement for now :) But anyone willing to convince me otherwise is welcome.

Alex

 
Gibtek

August 19, 1999, 01:23 AM

There will always be a need for 2d games just like ppl still play SNES on emulation for a reason you know, just for that exact reason: The games are simple; no 6 degrees of freedon or anything like that to worry about, just good ole side scroller shoot up the hundreds of bad guy clones.

 
Kurt Miller

August 19, 1999, 03:30 AM



Gibtek wrote:
>>There will always be a need for 2d games just like ppl still play SNES
>>on emulation for a reason you know, just for that exact reason: The
>>games are simple; no 6 degrees of freedon or anything like that to worry about

Thank you Gibtek, now maybe Alex will believe me >:). Him and I have been
arguing about this for the past few days and although 3D will likely continue
to grow massively, I still believe that 2D games will survive. Just like
Gib said, some people just want it simple and can't stand trying to navigate
a 3D world on a 2D screen. Some people favor the classics (ie, the old
final fantasy or legend of zelda type games). I think its hilarious when
something like Tamagotchis or Gameboy Pokemon come out and sell like hotcakes
while at the same time-- some people (no, I'm not talking about you Alex :) still
refuse to believe that there's more to a game than funky 3D graphics.

Personally, I'm not overly fond of 2D games in general, but I try to be realistic.
Even if *I* don't like 2D games, my opinion sure as hell isn't the same as everyone
else'. There'll always be that crowd that constantly craves a good round of Pac-Man
or whatever.

Ha. This post = All opinions. Very few facts here. *burp* :)

-kurt



 
Alex J. Champandard

August 19, 1999, 06:08 AM


Hmmm, i think i didn't get my point accross :)

I'm not saying people will stop playing 2D games... that won't happen. Most of the best games ever are 2D, i even still play some good old Amstrad games! But my point is to make a NEW 2D game successfull, it would take a lot of effort, and most of all damn good idea.

2D games are now at a stage where they are no longer original (or very few at least), just improvements over previous installments (which can still work, like Starcraft).

Alex

 
Alex J. Champandard

August 19, 1999, 06:11 AM


Hmmm, i think i didn't get my point accross :)

I'm not saying people will stop playing 2D games... that won't happen. Most of the best games ever are 2D, i even still play some good old Amstrad games! But my point is to make a NEW 2D game successfull, it would take a lot of effort, and most of all damn good idea.

2D games are now at a stage where they are no longer original (or very few at least), just improvements over previous installments (which can still work, like Starcraft).

Alex

 
Magic

August 19, 1999, 11:07 AM

>>I'm not saying people will stop playing 2D games... that won't happen. Most of the best games ever are 2D, i even still play some good old Amstrad games! But my point is to make a NEW 2D game successfull, it would take a lot of effort, and most of all damn good idea.
>>
>>2D games are now at a stage where they are no longer original (or very few at least), just improvements over previous installments (which can still work, like Starcraft).

And how many 3D games are original? Most are only 2D with the extra dimension added which does nothing to add to the game, and in some cases detracts from it! What about begginers? They will not program with a 3D graphics engine on their first project! 2D games will never dissapear.

 
Alex J. Champandard

August 19, 1999, 12:01 PM



>And how many 3D games are original?

Not many either, but since 3D games haven't been around for as long, there's a bigger probability that a 3D game will be original :)

>Most are only 2D with the extra dimension added which does nothing to add to the game

Hehe, yeah... that theory applies to tetris 3D, but that's about the only one i can think of. On the other hand, take Hidden and Dangerous. That's just like Jagged Alliance in 3D, but the realism is greatly enhanced, and so much more involving. Admitedly it's harder to play, and some people can't handle / don't enjoy it. But I personnaly reckon it's worth it.

>What about begginers?

Definetly agreed!! Programming 2D games / effects is by far the best way to learn...

> 2D games will never dissapear.

Shareware / Freeware 2D games won't. High profile 2D games will, and that's my point.

Only a few execeptions will make it... And besides even games you would normally class as 2D will soon be 3D accelerated.

Alex

 
Jan Niestadt

August 19, 1999, 12:43 PM

>> 2D games will never dissapear.
>
>Shareware / Freeware 2D games won't. High profile 2D games will, and that's my point.
>
>Only a few execeptions will make it... And besides even games you would normally class as 2D will soon be 3D accelerated.

I disagree. Maybe an interesting parallel is this: why aren't more cartoons on TV 3d rendered?

I personally think 2d, hand-drawn cartoons will never disappear because they have a visual style of their own that is appreciated by a lot of people. The same goes for 2d games.

Ultra-realism is not some holy grail that all games must try to reach!

Jan.

 
George

August 19, 1999, 02:07 PM

I think one great example which proves 2-d games will still be around is castlevania for the playstation. When it was first said that it was going to be a 2d game it got a lot of flack(sp) but once the actually game came out, and people remembered how much fun a good sidescroller can be, it got great reviews (at least i remember reading great reviews). Another example is bomberman. original bombermans were great, bomberman64 got some pretty bad reviews because of the switch to 3d. I think it will get harder for the 2d games to compete, but there will always be people there to play them. Hell people still play MUDS which are really just text and no graphics at all, but theres still an audience there. I guess what im trying to say is that all the bells and whistles of 3d is great, but once you play a game for a few hours it must have much more than jsut bells and whistles. A good game is needed, regardless of technology. Windows is still shipped with minesweeper and solitaire. All in all, the market for 2d games will greatly diminish, but still be there, and if done right, im sure a well done 2d game can do just as good as a 3d.

 
Kurt Miller

August 19, 1999, 04:49 PM


If anyone wants to support their point either way, here's a piece
of info that might help:

http://www.avault.com/news/displaynews.asp?story=8191999-133435

Which is PC Data's list of top 10 selling games for July 25 through 31
according to Avault. I really have no idea whether most of them are
2D or 3D, but Starcraft is on top.

-kurt

 
Alex J. Champandard

August 20, 1999, 12:27 AM


>>I personally think 2d, hand-drawn cartoons will never disappear because they have a visual style of their own that is appreciated by a lot of people. The same goes for 2d games.

That's a very good point. Just like the sprites in Dungeon Keeper are so much better that the models in DK2. I sometimes think 3D models are an easy way out... but that's just cause i'm a a programmer, so disregard that comment :)

Have you played The Curse Of Monkey Island?? Now i personnaly think the cartoony feel, the overall visual quality combined with a cool game concept makes it absolutely awesome. The amount of detail in each scene is outstanding... but that comes at a price: HARD WORK. And game developpers realize this.
Notice most sprites nowadays are rendered with 3DS. And games that use sprites rendered with 3DS will loose nothing when rendered realtime in 3D, when the rendering power is sufficiant to make models look as good.

I don't want 2D games to die... i've had so much fun in the past with 2D games, but the fact remains that the market is evolving quickly towards 3D games, at the expense of 2D games.


 
Alex J. Champandard

August 20, 1999, 12:42 AM

> original bombermans were great, bomberman64 got some pretty bad reviews because of the switch to 3d

Ah, maybe most of the problem is the definition of the concept of the 2D / 3D game.

Say you had the original bomberman, and just did everything the same except that you'd draw the tiles as polys and the sprites as models (no fancy camera movement, or any other stereotypical 3D techniques :) Now would you class that as a 3D game?

Does the fact that you render a 2D game in 3D make it 3D? (without concept change of course)
For me it does, but that's probably the part where we disagree.


 
Alex J. Champandard

August 20, 1999, 12:50 AM


>>while at the same time-- some people (no, I'm not talking about you Alex :) still
>>refuse to believe that there's more to a game than funky 3D graphics.

Yeah, and Unreal is the perfect example. Ok it look cool, but the multiplayer experience is appauling, and single player is nothing special at all. Yet still people bought it. I personnaly think it doesn't even come close to what Doom was, but that's just an opinion :)

I'd better stop now... i'd like people to think i've got better things to do :)

 
Karel Donk

August 23, 1999, 12:45 AM

2D gaming won't be dead certainly for a while to come. I always say, a game does not have to be 3D to be fun to play. These days you can't ignore the constant hype around 3D gaming, and more and more games which come out now are all 3D. Frankly, I would prefer a 2D game like Megaman over ANY 3D game out there. Just look at the number of FPS's being released each year. They all feature the same gameplay, it's really boring! Just be honest and ask yourself what these games offer to you in gameplay that is new? Nothing! The only thing that changes, is the technology which gets better and better. The games they make are essentially all the same as Doom. Quake3 is nothing but Doom using a better technology. The gameplay is just the same. You just can't argue with that. And if you have all those FPS's out there, featuring the same gameplay, it gets really boring really fast. In fact, I feel like throwing up when I hear the word FPS.

There's nothing wrong with improving technology though. And that's the only thing happening right now. The same games get released with a better 3D technology. And I dont see this changing very soon. If it keeps going on like this, it won't be long before the 3D gaming industry is going to feel the consequences.
Improving technology is good, and I would consider it a must, but what is important in a game, is GAMEPLAY. I repeat: GAMEPLAY, not beautiful graphics or whatever. Without good gameplay, a game gets boring really fast, and you don't want to touch it at all. Beautiful graphics, good music and lifelike sound all add to the experience, but what really keeps one playing in the end is the gameplay. A game with crummy graphics and sound but with good gameplay lasts longer than a game with the best gfx and special fx, but without good and interesting gameplay. Keep in mind, that it is the gameplay which works addicting, not the sound or graphics. Sounds and visuals are only things through which the player can experience the gameplay.

Given that, it's easy to understand that a 2D game with good gameplay can still become a big success. And yes, if you have beautiful graphics and sounds etc. etc., that all would add to the total experience and would make the game better. Once again, you can have a game with good gameplay and bad graphics that is fun to play, but you can NOT have a game with good graphics and the best technology with bad/boring gameplay which is fun to play. Think about that.

I still believe in 2D, and that's why I'm working on A2D. You can still make fun and good games using 2D technology, and nothing will change this. Just look at Starcraft. 2D games can still be big. Just offer people GAMEPLAY. Many people dont realize it, but that's the essential part of the game which keeps you playing.

As for 2D technology, trust me when I say that it will get better. 2D games will even use 3D hardware in the near future to create stunning effects never yet seen before in a 2D game. A2D will try to give 2D gaming a technological push. That won't be enough though, because in the end, you can have the best technology at your hands, but it all depends on the right idea's and the right gameplay elements to make a game special.

Karel Donk
Lead Engineer, Miraesoft
http://www.miraesoft.com

 
Warren Marshall

August 23, 1999, 03:44 PM


See I think that is something worthwhile. I think if you are developing something like a mario style, side scroller it would make sense to make the characters out of 3D models for the simple reason that it would look better in the game. You could give them lots of nifty animations and wouldn't have to render out several sprites of the character from different angles ... the 3D model could rotate, animate and model fluidly through the 2D environment, act like it was 2D for collision detection and stuff, but it would enhance the feel of the game a lot since he would look more fluid (i.e. instead of just snapping from facing left to facing right, he could rotate quickly -- maybe even throw in a quick spin animation).

That doesn't make it a 3D game ... but instead uses 3D to enhance a 2D game.

 
Warren Marshall

August 23, 1999, 03:44 PM


See I think that is something worthwhile. I think if you are developing something like a mario style, side scroller it would make sense to make the characters out of 3D models for the simple reason that it would look better in the game. You could give them lots of nifty animations and wouldn't have to render out several sprites of the character from different angles ... the 3D model could rotate, animate and model fluidly through the 2D environment, act like it was 2D for collision detection and stuff, but it would enhance the feel of the game a lot since he would look more fluid (i.e. instead of just snapping from facing left to facing right, he could rotate quickly -- maybe even throw in a quick spin animation).

That doesn't make it a 3D game ... but instead uses 3D to enhance a 2D game.

 
This thread contains 16 messages.
 
 
Hosting by Solid Eight Studios, maker of PhotoTangler Collage Maker.