Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

2D Games

Old topic!

Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.

  • You cannot reply to this topic
11 replies to this topic

#1   Members   -  Reputation: 122


Posted 09 March 2000 - 08:06 AM

Since a few days there''s a question concerning me: Have 2D - games like a Jump''n Run a future? Of course, I''m thinking of games which are interesting and designed pretty well? What do you think?

#2   Members   -  Reputation: 122


Posted 09 March 2000 - 08:26 AM

I think all games have a future since, as you said, they are interesting and have something new and additive that can involve the player. The success factor does not depend on a game being 2D, 3D or 50D

That''s what I think

André Luiz Silva
"There is no knowledge that is not power"

#3   Members   -  Reputation: 122


Posted 09 March 2000 - 12:18 PM

Yeah, Jazz Jackrabbit is 2D and it has a community of people who play it. (Web battles especially)

E:cb woof!

#4   Members   -  Reputation: 115


Posted 09 March 2000 - 12:30 PM

I personally think that 2D games are great! I find them superior(usually) !

"Remember, I'm the monkey, and you're the cheese grater. So no messing around."
-Grand Theft Auto, London

#5   Members   -  Reputation: 326


Posted 09 March 2000 - 06:11 PM

For me, I can enjoy a game whether it's 2d or 3d IF it has good gameplay. But given similar games in 2d and 3d with similar gameplay....

...I find I'm often attracted to 2d. While 3d graphics nowadays tend to be saliva-forming, you do lose in some ways:

* 3d controls are usually more complex than 2d
* 3d view is usually more restricted than 2d
* 3d strategies are sometimes more difficult to formulate than 2d

Of course, all the above problems can be resolved, and likewise 2d graphics can be beautiful. But I find some of the games I play the most are 2d...

It's for this reason that I'll be starting a solo project soon: a 2d overhead scrolling shooter using (gasp!) line graphics. Think tempest on steroids.

(Side note: don't get me wrong. 3d is fun, too. In fact, that's currently my paying job; right now I'm working with others on an N64 title. No, I can't tell you anything about it; in fact, I'll have to shoot you now just for asking.)

---- --- -- -
Blue programmer needs food badly. Blue programmer is about to die!

Edited by - mossmoss on 3/10/00 12:13:18 AM

#6   Members   -  Reputation: 122


Posted 09 March 2000 - 09:30 PM

Until you can produce realtime 3D graphics as complex as those found in 2D games, 2D games will be an option. But personally I''m not even sure we''re halfway there yet.
Especially when it comes to online games. Not only the computer hardware is the limit, but also the bandwidth.

Daniel Netz, Sentinel Design
"I'm not stupid, I'm from Sweden" - Unknown

#7   Members   -  Reputation: 122


Posted 09 March 2000 - 09:49 PM

I love 2D games. Right now im working on a source forge project that is a hommage to the 8bit shooters from the old school Nintendo days. I could always play a game of Gradius or Life-Force and have fun. Viva 2D!!!!

Mike Barela

#8   Members   -  Reputation: 122


Posted 09 March 2000 - 09:56 PM

As long as people who enjoy having fun still exist, there will still be a market for 2D games.

My 2 cents.

#9   Members   -  Reputation: 122


Posted 10 March 2000 - 01:37 AM

I thought ( and think! ) like you when I asked you about 2D games. I believe computer games should not be toooo realistic! I think it''s important that the player has got the opportunity to add something to the world he/she is playing in just in his/her mind.
If you play too realistic 3D games you often haven''t got this chance. And very often 3D games haven''t got what one could call a soul. A game should have more than VERY REALISTIC AND ENJOYING 3D graphics because if the game hasn''t got something else it isn''t enjoyable any more!

#10   Members   -  Reputation: 122


Posted 10 March 2000 - 11:04 AM

OK, my thoughts:

Just two years ago, I still believed to latests technology. Quake 2 was a superior game, and I wanted to play all the latests 3D-card games. mmm... but then something happened. I started my first game project (which, ofcourse, collapsed couple of weeks later

During this time, I realized how hard it is to create games. Probably you guys have seen my other posts about topics as "THE RPG ?", "Nethack... nope, but something ",
"The next-generation of gaming".
I realized something with thing that is called balance:

When you have small amount of resources, and you want to create a game, think about what do you want to create that makes the game unique. Putting lots of effort for gameplay drops the quality of graphics for sure, even after YOU are not the artist ! This might sound stupid, but probably you are the leader of the company, and you have to choose what is the most important part in game for you. In this case... it''s the gameplay, --> programming.

Now, my favorite subject: 2D vs 3D

First of all, I state that I DON''T CARE IS THE GAME 2D OR 3D! The most important thing in the game is that it''s fun!
I have put over 20 hours just for freaking stupid (yes, now I can say it text-based "simulation game", that was created probably in 10 hours, but it really made me to play it. Then, there was "I''m Warcraft-Clone, and OK one", which I didn''t even consider playing!

Now, as I told before, I used to look for games that use only latest technology, because it was "pop". Then, after a while, the 3D-games started to repeat themselves, and 2D-games were allready stupid "I''m C&C -clone" stuff. I started to think why 3D games are so poor clones ?
The reason probably was that the engines were in need of upgrading all the time, and so there was no way that companies could put some effort for the complexity of the gameworld. This caused me to have a "stupid" and fun idea:

Why not to make 2D game with complicated worlds ? I''m telling some of my ideas:
David Brabens Elite in 2D ---> Less bugs, more effort for simple ideas that work
Star Control (clone) ---> Hey, I have played every part of this game serie, and I''m still playing latest one
Arcade Hall Simulator: (Unfinished project) It''s stupid, it''s poor idea, it cannot be a game, so it has to be an ARCADE HALL SIMULATOR ! This was the stupid text-based game that I told about before, but I would like to add some menu graphics and make to look little more like a game... It is actually really fun and addictive to think that "I can really buy coinops for my OWN ARCADE HALL !"
2D-Sidescroller-RPG: NO JOKE ! If I have to state "the most fun game for long time period", and it has to be a RPG, then it will be a GUARDIAN HEROES: The game, where RPG is minimal, and fighting is in front part. Actually the game was just one of the most coolest ones ever, because it had
a) Good "complicated" and DYNAMIC ! plot
b) Lots of action, that could have not been possible in 3D
c) An original idea ! ... Well, allmost, some other games tried this before, like Golden Axe, but first time it was made "just right way"

Actually, I got this 2D-RPG-Scroller idea first time when I played some game, which was just fantasy-jump-scroller: The world was pretty darn big, and it had lots of scroller elements, but it would have been fun to turn for a HC-rpg
For an example, Wonder Boy 3 (Sega Mastersystem, middle 80''s) has pretty much samekind of idea, but in too simple form.

I have been thinking about designing a Raptor/Tyrian stylish "adventure / shooter" with light rpg elements, so that the world would be actually "living" in the game, but each time when the player gets into fight, it will be held with oldschool stylish scrolling system that goes only up
I have too many actual ideas for this kind of game, so I''m not really getting into it... the problem is that this kind of game needs pretty much 2D-graphics, and I wouldn''t have enough resources to hire about 10 artists for fullday job
Well... Tyrian wasn''t made with big group, but they had demoscene background probably...

2D Fighting games are my favorites ! In 2D fighters, games are starting to have REALLY complicated AND comprehensive gameplay, because old characters can be just thrown for a sequel, with couple of new moves. Nowdays, standard 2D fighter has OVER 20 characters to choose from, and this is really nice ! And even after big number of characters, these characters are really complicated to study because of big amount of the moves. And how in 3D ? Well.. ern... Lets ask this way : Who has played Virtual Fighter II or III ? Now, there is a complicated game ! What about Soulcalibur ? Well... it''s little bit more simple, even after it has more moves, but still it''s pretty complicated. I could still say that 2D-games have great distance from 3D fighters, because just for an example, Street Fighter 3 Alpha (I hope I don''t remember wrong... the new one that is going to be released for the Dreamcast during this month) has about 30-40 (I don''t know exact amount, never counted characters to choose from, and every character has unique gameplay. All so you can play Alpha in MANY different game modes (and I''m talking about WAY MORE than Soul Calibur), and it supports internet game (in Japan only, but technically the next version is going to include netgame for sure !).

The only way that 2D-games can go over 3D, is that 2D-games can be created FASTER, and more complicated than 3D. If you would take a look at the old topic ("next generation of gaming", or whatever), the last 10-20 messages were discussion about future of 3D games, and we were stating that:
"During someday in not-so-far future, the 3D games will finally get standard engine, that is probably created by big company with nice amount of resources. This engine is easily patchable, and include feature so that new features can be added easily, as in Direct-X. Probably the game developer wants to create cool looking physically "REAL" grass, that waves when the wind hits it, and so he just adds this for the old engine, and this feature will be used for the next games, just like new 3D-card features are becoming supported with all the 3D-cards, as the new features are added into Direct-X"

Well... this was rather big post, but I had fun time writing it
Forgive me my sloppy english


#11   Members   -  Reputation: 122


Posted 10 March 2000 - 11:08 AM

Hmm... and really simple reply for the first message:

I believe that Run''n Jump games will have good future as long as:
1) They have advance from other game styles or they are REALLY traditional
2) Well... I won''t buy any traditional Jump''n Run game, because the price is too big for the amount of fun time that I''m going to have, so I believe that Shareware Jump''n Runs will have better time than commercial ones.
3) If gameplay is top notch, there should be no problem

#12   Members   -  Reputation: 374


Posted 14 March 2000 - 09:27 AM

I don''t know about the jump ''n'' runs, but 2D games definately have a future. As was already mentioned, they are used for many online-only games. Plus, most independent developers who make games for fun rather than for profit only develop 2D and many people still play these games. On the professional side, take a look at RTS''s. Sure, now they have really good graphics (take a look at Tiberian Sun), but they''re not really 3-D. For the RTS genre anyway, 2D will stay for a while. Besides, there''s also those isometric games which have become pretty popular lately (although in many cases it is done w/ fixed-camera angle 3-D, but that''s almost the same as 2D). Basically, if you can make a fun and challenging games (with good graphics, of course) people will play it.

If you code it, they will come.

Commander M

Old topic!

Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.