Jump to content
  • Advertisement

What do you prefer and why?

Recommended Posts

The title says it all. I love both. but I feel I need to give an edge to isometric design. I haven't played too many games that have used isometric, it seem that most games nowadays use 3D or 2D. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advertisement
3 hours ago, mariasmile509 said:

The title says it all. I love both. but I feel I need to give an edge to isometric design. I haven't played too many games that have used isometric, it seem that most games nowadays use 3D or 2D. 

Actually, the title said nothing :)

But if you like isometric games, in the past that was very mainstream, just take any real time strategy game for example, like Age of Empires, Commandos, or even games like Diablo, Xcom, there are just too many. Nowadays it's less trendy because anything can just be done in 3D and with 3D comes the ability to rotate the camera which gives freedom to more game design opportunities. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I'm speaking as a gamer whose main interest are tactics & strategy games.

I find it a bit sad that some of the most popular games out there (I'm particularly looking at you, HOI/CK/EU) seem to use 3D just for the sake of using 3D. These games don't exploit the benefits of the third dimension yet they come with all the potential detriments: to my eyes the engine Paradox uses has no clarity or beauty to it. All I can see are small and clunky-looking 3D models thrown chaotically  over the map. I'd much prefer a hand-crafted 2d map over this. For example, I found the maps of the earlier AGEOD titles so rich of character, beautiful and clear. Just compare these maps (EU, AGEODS WiA, Command Ops 2):
 

Spoiler

 

Bildergebnis für europa universalis

Bildergebnis für ageod wIA

20091028193951.jpg

 

 

 

So, my point is that strategy games can really benefit from the clarity and character that 2d can provide more easily than 3d. Unless a game makes proper use of the third dimension - that is, if it features some kind "action" and the player is allowed to choose the camera-position while watching the action - I see no reason to use 3D. Then again some RTS out there fulfill these requirements but are so fast-paced that the player has no time to "watch" the action anyway because he's busy clicking all the time. Choosing a "cool" camera angle takes time and thus is a detriment to competitive gameplay. In these cases I guess 3D's main purpose is to deliver impressive marketing-pictures?  

 

 

Edited by Mogli

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mogli said:

seem to use 3D just for the sake of using 3D. These games don't exploit the benefits of the third dimension

3D graphics is more optimal and saves time. For example if you have a 2D character that can move in 8 directions, then every animation you make has to have 8 sets for every direction.

With 3D you only make a animation once and can use it in every direction.

3D also makes math involving height easier. So games with archer projectiles is easier in 3D.

 

The examples you show are cluttered because of design choice not art choice. This happens a lot, where a artist is told to do some special effect that makes no sense.

Design choices is what matters here. You can get a clear look using both 3D and 2D if that is your aim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/3/2018 at 3:22 PM, Scouting Ninja said:

3D graphics is more optimal and saves time. For example if you have a 2D character that can move in 8 directions, then every animation you make has to have 8 sets for every direction.

With 3D you only make a animation once and can use it in every direction.

3D also makes math involving height easier. So games with archer projectiles is easier in 3D.

 

The examples you show are cluttered because of design choice not art choice. This happens a lot, where a artist is told to do some special effect that makes no sense.

Design choices is what matters here. You can get a clear look using both 3D and 2D if that is your aim.

I second this ,I switched from 2d to 3d even for simple games that have fixed perspective because it allows me to save time and resources, and i decided this while making a tower defense game as it became obvious how much time i would need to generate each character sprite sheet to allow them to move and have different animations(death,attack) in every direction , in 3d i make the animation on the pose and then import it in the game and it is done , consider for 2d i would have to do this and then render all the sprites make sprite sheets import in engine, define each animation etc etc etc...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Advertisement
×

Important Information

By using GameDev.net, you agree to our community Guidelines, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy.

Participate in the game development conversation and more when you create an account on GameDev.net!

Sign me up!