quote:Original post by clayasaurusThey aren''t more detailed. Old 3d games (pre-bumpmapping days) are even less detailed. It''s that 3d-ness that attracts people. Immersion, so to speak.
3D games are more detailed and people are more likely to spend money on them, they take more time and energy to produce.
However, immersion isn''t always necessary. There are types of games that don''t require player immersion such as RTSes, RPGs, and puzzles. These are the games that can still survive even when done in 2D.
3D, although it''s technically more difficult, can be more useful than 2D in some applications of (technical) game design. In game cutscenes, skeletal animations, physics, and many more that simply can''t be done (or has less effect) in 2D.
Players really don''t care whether it''s 2D or 3D. If you do it in 3D and make it appear 2D (i.e Super Smash Brothers for N64), they probably won''t even notice that it''s 3D. Or vice versa, you do it in 2D but using prerendered 3D graphics, they probably think it''s 3D. Think how you want players to play your game, how you want your game to look like. Then from that point, you can decide whether it''s best done in 3D or 2D.