Whats with this forum lately, seems like in the last few months it''s been slowly dying. are most of the people that post here students and have since returned to school and dont have time to post? Raymond Jacobs, www.EDIGames.com www.EtherealDarkness.com


Voice your discontent! help stop the flames!

I am very interested in iso programming, but I have been learning 3d and will change to this, which will take time. I also dont have any questions regarding iso programming at this time. But I think 2d iso programming is dying and will turn into 3d iso games soon enough, which these people are moving to the dx and ogl forums.

It''s sad to see the 2D iso genre is given up by so many people, especially when the new gaming platforms (like PocketPC devices) do not support 3D, and as such are archetypical 2D-game platforms.

yeah =/

I admit after i finish my current game and maybe one other my focus will turn to 3D games *though with a 3rd person isometric view*

i will still keep my 2D engine around, as it is very capable, and probably use it for smaller free games.



Raymond Jacobs,

www.EDIGames.com
www.EtherealDarkness.com



Voice your discontent! help stop the flames!

As well, just about all that can be said about iso HAS been said. I''m not saying that the sum of all iso knowledge is fully available, or that there isn''t still room for innovation. But the things which make isometric games work are all in the public domain and easily found by searching. What new topics that do crop up around here are generally re-hashes of problems that have usually already been covered.

I first read about isometric games in an issue of Dr. Dobbs'' Sourcebook back in 1996, when the style was still fairly new. It stands to reason that in the intervening span of time, most questions that can be asked about isometrics (a style of game that to be honest, isn''t all that complicated) have been asked at some point, and answered. Archived posts in this forum are still a base for research as I program Golem, but I highly doubt anybody will bring up anything new for which I can say the same.

It does, however, still pain me to see this forum so quiet. I have an absolute love for isometric games that I am afraid full 3D bonanzas simply can not touch. Even games such as Neverwinter Nights or Dungeon Siege strike me as pale, imitational wannabes, and nothing makes me sicker to my stomach than seeing a game character rendered as a low-polygon count model, full of ugly planes and angles, as these aformentioned games do.

Josh
vertexnormal AT linuxmail DOT org

Check out Golem: Lands of Shadow, an isometrically rendered hack-and-slash inspired equally by Nethack and Diablo.

I second that (ugly models)
which is why when i start doing 3D games it will have to be up to par in quality, the whole reason to make things as stunningly beautiful but in 3 dimensions, im sure it''s possible to do=)

especialy with new hardware coming out every day.


speaking of hardware a long while ago i was warey of using hardware accelerated api''s since i figured users would not upgrade, but it now seems the industry operates on the notion that ''in order to play our game you will probably have to upgrade your hardware'' so i guess if the big companies are doing it then why not develop for next generation or atleast current generation top of the line hardware... it''s just interesting back in the early 90''s you could play most any game on your 486 with a standard vga card, but now you have to buy hardware with the game=) heheh they should offer bundles *buy this game, or buy this game bundled with the Geforce FX, you save $80!* LOL


Raymond Jacobs,

www.EDIGames.com
www.EtherealDarkness.com



Voice your discontent! help stop the flames!

Yeah, I''m going to have to actually play Age of Mytholgy one of these days and see if they had reason to abandon the great look of AOE/AOE2. The screenshots for AOM look like shit if you ask me. I can''t see why they wasted all that calc time on the units just so someone can change their camra angle? (I hope they can, or there is just no reason to have that bad of graphics)

I myself see no reason to use inferrier looking graphics just to save maybe what? 10% or less disk space for the graphics, and then increase the time the processer is working on them, and not AI or something. A 3D shooter does need 3D graphics, but a Tatics or startagy game comanding multiple uints is so much nicer in tile/sprite isometric. Anyone every play Myth? I see no real reason why that was done that way. Sure no one else had a game that played like that, but really the rotating view just pissed me off, and i was forever trying just to find my own men, let alone fight the battles. (Needless to say, I only got to level 2 by luck, and only saw level 3 with a cheat,...)

the only real benefit i would see in doing my game in full 3d would be to enhance the feel of battle and character interaction...

for instance you could be running down a hall, passing by torches hearing the doppler effect of the flames,

and all of a sudden be attacked by a horde, you cross swords with them, sparks fly, camera moves round the scene... it could make things more dramatic, almost like watching a movie=)

all in all 2D is the way to be for me at the moment=)

Raymond Jacobs,

www.EDIGames.com
www.EtherealDarkness.com



Voice your discontent! help stop the flames!

I think the main reason for using 3D on look down games is they are easier, faster and cheaper to develop. There is a hell of a lot of work in getting a prerendered unit to the screen in an RPG. Getting the attached animations to line up is murder. In 3D all you need to do is skin the model and animate it and the engine does the rest.

I do agree with you though. 3D models in prerendered games look ugly. Take a look at the failed Static project if you want to see what I mean.