2D & 3D

[Deleted User 1]

Well... before I post this thread, I want to thank Lord Bishop Black Fang for giving me the idea to create such a thread... so now I will get to the point... what do you think of 2-dimensional games and 3-dimensional games? Which do you think is better? For what reason... most popular changes are the fighting games and all that examples like the mortal kombat series and the street fighter series...

Well... I will begin with my thoughts on this... Firstly I will talk about the Street Fighter series... I loved the street fighter 2 and street fighter 3's on the SNES I use to play it more than around five hours a day...I also love all the street fighter alpha games and turbo games (which might be the same...)... these 2D games were favoured in the fighting genre by me and I still have them... I also like some of the marvel vs. capcom and capcom vs. SNK... but on the subject of the street fighter series, I must admit that I like the 2D ones better than the 3D ones... some such as street Fighter EX plus Alpha hurts me to see a highly favoured game turn near to nothing... the speed was taken away, the good polished looks was stolen from me and the cool fast finishing moves don't look as impressive on the 3D ones... I also love the old music back in the classic games... the Ryu theme, Ken theme and guile theme... now the music sounds too weird in alpha... I would go get the street fighter anniversary game on the Xbox... but this game is best on its original console...the Super Nintendo! Thank God for this game... Also I have got a copy of ‘Capcom Fighting evolutions' but I can't play it without a Japanese Playstation two! Oh man!!!

Now for the Mortal Kombat series. I still have my Mortal Kombat one on the SNES, two on the SNES (but you need an extra component to play this) and three on the playstation which is known as Mortal Kombat trilogy... Compared to the new 3D Mortal Kombats... the old ones are better... they will even be better than the next Mortal Kombat game which will come out with the name known as Mortal Kombat : Shaolin Monks... I have done a full preview of this game and will let this out...
-Almost all the old minigames will come back... even the ones from Mortal Kombat 2!
-Every Mortal Kombat character ever made should be back... including Kung Lao!
-There is a definite visual improvement this time.
-it will explain all the mythos and rumours of mortal kombat...

I can't remember what else to say but now back to the main topic... The fatalities aren't as good as the 2D ones... the 2D fatalities were much more impressive to look at and had better graphics for it! Ho ho... the music was also better, especially for the Mortal Kombat two opening... the cut out some of the best characters in Deception and deadly alliance... Kung Lao (not many people like him but he's still good) Liu Kang... yeah he is unlockable in Deception but he's a zombie here... but in the next game he is human and back to his old self... good? We'll see... and most importantly... the ninjas and ninja cyborgs! Reptile the green boogie, Rain the purple thing and Noob Saibot (I hate noob smoke) and of course ninja smoke... the one with the grey ninja suit... and as for the cyborgs, Cyrax and Sektor... why cut them out? They were great in Mortal Kombat Trilogy... also the speed and control in the 3D Mortal Kombat games are now slow and well... after performing a move, the game won't let you attack for the next one or two seconds... unlike the old ones and Dead or alive series...
But the good thing about the Mortal Kombat 3D games is that in Deception they added Puzzle Kombat... which is a twisted version of Tetris (yeah it does sound lame) but this ones pretty good for a mini game and rather challenging on the hardest difficulty (hehehe) The chess Kombat was rather nothing but a waste of game space... there's no strategy involved what so ever... it's just based on how good you are at fighting which you could be challenged on the arcade mode... The chess Kombat requires you to keep fighting for no reason... well to win but other than that it is just fighting there... the only strategy here (okay maybe there is one tiny one) is to try avoid a trap that the enemy computer has placed on the chess board somewhere... My brother at the age of five beat Chess Kombat... (no, not on the hardest mode) I prefer the old characters finishers and looks compared to the new ones.... Sub-Zero goes bold! Sub-Zero has a thick hoody... Liu Kang's a zombie... but the only costume I liked was the new armoured scorpion... another good thing about the 3D games was just the movies... the intro movies... where in deadly alliance you see how Liu Kang was cut from the game by the deadly alliance... and in Deception you see how raiden the thunder God was defeated by the deadly alliance... and then joined them...

Well there are also some games that put me off a little when they turned into 3D games, suikoden three is a good example... when I saw it turn 3D, I thought of how horrible the graphics looked and wept 24/7 I loved the anime like graphics on suikoden one and suikoden two and didn't want it to change... There are still some great 2D games out there... such as Metal Slug 4 on the Xbox and Ragnarok though I don't like the gameplay that much and the fact that it's a massive multiplayer online game... Plus there are of course a super huge range of great 3D games out there... games like Halo two, Dynasty Warrior four (which would be hard to imagine as a 2D game) and Chrono Cross and well... most of the new sports games... wait Dead or Alive as well... Soul Calibur two oh I could make an endless list but I shouldn't so you guys and gals can think of them and use your imagination...

There are still some 2D games being made like the alien game coming out (on the Playstation 2... I can't remember what it's called) well you are an alien trying to get back to your ship, it's 2D and you fight through fifteen long levels like the metal slug series with basic buttons and all... originally this was a flash made game but when millions downloaded it they makers finally got the hint to make a console game out of this... though the difference is you didn't have to pay to download... lol...
As for the online 2D fighting games... well who ever is interested... and good (looks around for mad mage) at fighting and arcade games... we should face each other or something... there already is that 2D street fighter online... wait a good one is Capcom versus SNK 2 I think... well... also there is one more thing...

Lord Bishop Black Fang... I look forward to one day facing you hehehe... I promise to give you a good match even after hearing how good you may be at these games hehehe... :wink: hope to face ya one day... that will be all from me for no... I hope to see all your opinions and thought soon...

[Arcana]

Oh man, I just participated in a topic like this in OCRemix. It amounted to a ton of people revelling in nostalgia, wishing for their old 2D games back.
_________________
Woo, 2000 posts as of Tuesday, 2007 August 28.

[Sophita]

I think both of them are valid ways to go and both of them have their uses. It's a choice that ultimately comes down as to which suits the game better. I will say that I think 2d graphics certainly look more distinct than their 3d counterparts, as today almost very game is 3d. (Just as 3d looked distinct when 2d games were the norm.) It really just depends on the game. Certain games may benefit from a 2d perspective; others really need 3d to achieve their full potential.

As far as Mortal Kombat goes, it's downfall was never from it's graphics. In fact, the point where Mortal Kombat jumped the shark was Mortal Kombat 3, one of the last 2d games in the series. It's problem is that the creators of Mortal Kombat never really advanced the game system at the same rate other games did. Even now, characters still only have about 6-10 unique moves - compared to other fighteres, even lean fighters like DoA, which have at least 50+. It's canned combo system has mostly gone south as well. In short, gamers grew out of Mortal Kombat.

They also unwisely killed off one of the most popular characters (Scorpion), radicalled altered another (Sub-Zero), and didn't bother to feature some of the more popular players from the second game (Kitana, Mileena, Baraka, etc.). The new characters were completely lame, and totally devoid of any original thought - you have the native american shaman (Nightwolf - who, yes, uses a tomahawk), a bunch of rather lame androids (Cyrex, Sektor, Smoke, etc). The third one made some bad decisions which the series has still not yet recovered from.

I think they also ran out of ideas at that point, because for years, the only actiont he MK license was seeing was when it was being repackaged - Ultimate Mortal Kombat 3, Mortal Kombat Trilogy, etc. By the time Mortal Kombat 4 got out the door, the graphics were outdated and the game played ...exactly the same as it had in the first game, except now the graphics were 3d.

[Deleted User 1]

They also unwisely killed off one of the most popular characters (Scorpion),

No they didn't kill off Scorpian unless the Mortal Kombat game on your ming is not Deception or deadly alliance... or an of the 2 dimensional ones for that matter... scorpian was the makers favourite and they put him in (I think) every Mortal Kombat game because of the main success of the character and not forgetting the famous spear move of his... Come here!!!

Oh come on... Dynasty are famous for their 3 dimensional traveling hack and slch style and people wouldn't like it to just turn 2 dimensional... of course, I can imagine it as a 2d game when I give it some thought, but they would lose the thing that made them famous (if they are) the Dynasty franchise has shown that, 'that' style of the game is the only best way to play the game... in 3 dimensional graphics from a third person view... making it 2 dimensions will only cause more problems than what they have now with the screen thing... where enemyies come out of nowhere... yeah Dynasty has a great chance being 2 dimensions but it can't and mustn't...

[Sophita]

[Horned Loa]

Well to answer the questions first off. I'd agree with Sophita that certain games suit a certain style but saying that I also believe that a good 2D game can be done far better than a good 3D simply because 2D has pretty much reached its peak where as 3D has a long way to go even thought the special effects are amazing. (I'm seeing loads of you disagreeing with this point but oh well.....I'm game)

The second thing is that games such as Street Fighter, SNK, X-Men, Dragon Ball and anything that came from a cartoon should STRICTLY REMAIN 2D!!! The old school characters such as Ken and Ryu from Street Fighter were PERFECT in the game because they were HAND DRAWN just like the cartoons so they looked exactly as they should have. In 3D games however (this is MOST clear with wrestling games) the characters always look square-ish and you see limbs and other pieces falling off. I've been replaying the game that shall not be named VII and its only after I played X that I noticed how SQUARE the characters are. I mean Cloud alone is comprised of about 3 squares per limb and a further 4 for the torso with another square and about 10 triangles for the head. I also played Tekken 2 after playing Tekken 4 and noticed a MASSIVE change. I mean, when those games first came out I was blown away with the graphics, but if you really look for it we are still VERY far from the ideal 3D games which is why many series (such as DBZ Budokai, Robotech...) that sprung from cartoons are going back to their 2D roots.

In short 2D will ALWAYS be better for games that are translated from cartoons and up until this point can achieve a more realistic effect. 3D games are great and can achive MUCH better explosive graphics (such as summons in the game that shall not be mentioned or the rune spells in the latter Suikodens) but there are still little things such as Tidus's 4 layers of hair that will always make it look superficial. If they manage to make the 3D games as good as the game that shall not be named X's movies.....then I'll take this whole comment back as that is about as good as 3D needs to go graphics wise.

As for Mortal Kombat....well I'd go with Sophita here saying the it was really 3 that killed it when they cut out and destroyed the coolest characters in the game and brought in a bunch of replacements which seem to have been created in 3 days time tops. They also brought in the weapons which I kind of found crap to be blunt. Well they were a good addition but it wasn't really what Mortal Kombat was about. The other thing that killed that game as Sophita stated were the limited amount of moves. Surely the Bestialities, Brutalities, Babyalities and the Fatalities were fun but after seeing them all so many times it kind of got old, and with a lack of more moves throughout the fights themselves,......the game was destined to die.

[Deleted User 1]

[Arcana]

Wow, someone should change the title of this thread to, "Which Mortak Kombat game sucks the most?" :)

I don't necessarily agree with Black Fang's statement that "cartoons should stay 2D". That only applies if the source material was actually a cartoon. If you're designing a new game, how do you determine whether or not you should use 2D or 3D?

Xenosaga, for example, could be easily have been a 2D game, but they made it 3D instead. I don't think the game lost anything for being in 3D. It's the same with Suikoden III - the game lost nothing in its 3D transition, in my opinion. I can't speak for IV, unfortunately, havning never played it myself.

A lot of games, however, are in essense two-dimensional. A game like Half Life or Quake or Soul Calibur are 3D games in the sense they're designed with three distinct axis of movement in mind.

The rest of the games that use 3D but don't have multiple axes of movement are really just using 3D models. Why use 3D Models? Because 3D models are easier to use in a game than 2D models, that's why. A game like Suikoden III can benefit from 3D models because it uses multiple camera angles during battle, but in essense, you could have had S3 in 2D because you really moved only left, right, up, and down, and on occasion, in and out.

It's difficult to compare because the two techniques are often used in compliment with each other as well. La Pucelle used 2D sprites on a 3D map. They could have replaced the sprites with 3D models, for example, and the game would ahve been exactly the same. It's really just a style thing. If you look at the N64 side, Paper Mario *looks* like a 2D game (hahahah! I kill me) but it actually is very much a game that uses 3D capabilities. Watch how Mario turns in that game - you can't do that in a 3D engine.

2D and 3D are not opposing views of thought. They are one and the same and are both used in many ways. 2D and 3D are also mutually exclusive, because if you have a 2D-style game play, you can NOT have 3D style gameplay within the same game mode. Let me try to explain this statement - if you have a 2D overhead game, like Final Fantasy, and change it to 3D graphics, it's still a 2D game. There's absolutely no way you can incorporate the third degree of movement without turning it into a 3D game. You can't add "jump" in the game and have it remain 2D. Doesn't work. Adding depth can mean adding a whole new dimension (oh boy I'm on a roll) to the experience.

The question is, in essense, whether or not players prefer a 2D game or a 3D game. That is a question of preference and cannot be evaluated through a process of logical decision making. If you like 2D games, then you do, and nothing I can really do will change your mind. :)

I hope that made sense.
_________________
Woo, 2000 posts as of Tuesday, 2007 August 28.

[Locke]

I miss qaulity 2D platform games. Sure, games such as Mario 64 were great. But, I dunno, 3D Sonic never worked for me. My favorite Mario games was Super Mario World on the SNES. To me that did everything right. Mario, Luigi, Peach and Bowser all looked as I thought they should. You never had to worry about missing a jump because of a bad camera angle.

That's my biggest complaint about 3D games. Most of them seem to have trouble with the camera. You never saw that in a 2D game. Mainly because the only time the camera moved was when you moved far enough for it to move. None of this rotating or anything.

I miss the days of Super Mario World and Castlevania 3 and Castlevania SOTN.

I still think the next Mario game should go back to 2D, or that 2 and a half D they had in Yoshi's Island.

Oh, and to stay on the Mortal Kombat kick. That series stunk after MK 2. Then again I was always a Street Fighter 2 guy myself.
_________________
Legendary Locke


3 Time Suikox WWE Fantasy Champion

[Horned Loa]

[Vincent Chase]

I don't even want to try to follow exactly what Bishop Black Fang or Sir JNX said, but I do agree with some that certain styles fit certain games.

I think 2D is good for games where you want people to realize that they're just playing a game, and 3D is meant more for immersion of the senses, and making people want to believe that they are living the game. Alot of the puzzle games, like Tetris and the classic Dr. Mario (Where the hell is my sequel, Nintendo!?) are better done in 2D because I think the third dimension would add a higher degree of complexity to the games.

But games like the Zelda series and the Shenume series, that have a focus towards realism, need to be in 3D. 3D is, as I said, a better way to immerse the player in the game that they're playing, and story-heavy games should all be in 3D.

[Lunarblade]

Well, though everybody's writing a ton on this, I'll keep it real pithy:

It doesn't matter what dimension the games are in, as long as the gameplay and story are good. Game, set, match.
_________________

[Rincewind]

I have to put my two cents into this. As far as Castlevania goes, and with the current effort Konami is willing to put out, I really have to go with 2D.

In the games, Super Castlevania IV, Castlevania: Symphony of the Night, and Castlevania: Aria of Sorrow, let's you go through Dracula's castle with some really cool backgrounds to the game. Weird event's that happen that make you wonder.

Like the confessional in SotN. Also the random eyeball outside the long windows in Symphony of the Night, always wondered what was up with that eyeball. You get to explore many area's that make you wonder what purpose they served in Dracula's history. Also the fountain that the water turns to blood in Olrox's quarters always made me wonder what I did to upset the fountain.

Super Castlevania IV, in the opening, you are wandering through the stables and you just see a nice country side an animals in the background. As you progress, the terrain becomes much less like a nice little European country side. The Library always made me wonder what type of books were kept in there.

Well, now on to Castlevania's 3d games. I never played the two for N64, but I heard they were lacking. I have played the one for PS2. I was really upset with the job that they did on designing the castle. They took a few basic room shapes for each area and used them over and over again. It didn't even have the feel of Dracula's castle. No real weird Stuff going on in the background, you would just get locked in a room and have to fight enemies, how fun. The story wasn't lacking, but enviroment really makes a castlevania game for me. Makes me wonder about what all that stuff in the background is for as I beat up stuff.

[Beethoven4567]

In my humble opinion, i think certain games are not suited to be tunrned into 3D games. An example of that would be Lunar:Siver Star Story Complete and Lunar 2:Eternal Blue Complete. The 2D graphics in the game are very detailed and crisp. The character sprites are cool, too.

I couldn't imagine what would Lunar 3 be like if it is 3D :shock: . It would not suit well because the Lunar games have always emphasized storytelling over graphics. An attempt to make Lunar 3 with 3D graphics would undoubtedly spell disaster.
_________________
"In war there is no substitute for victory"

[John Layfield]

Only if it did so out of the belief that it had to have better graphics than gameplay to keep up with the more popular RPGs on the market.

If Lunar went 3D simply because the developers felt that it was a logical step and that they could only tell the story they wanted to tell in 3D then I'd have no complaints.

That's why there was a backlash against 3D Suikoden with the release of Suikoden III. It didn't need to be 3D at all, it just did it to try and be 'hip', as it were.

Suikoden IV, however, is a different matter. Naval battles simply can't be done very well in 2D, especially as stand-alone scenes, that's why I never complained about Suikoden IV being 3D even though I'd love a return to 2D with beautiful locations and detailed sprites.
_________________
One day, I shall come back. Yes, we shall all come back. Until then, there must be no regrets, no tears, no anxieties. Just go forward in all your beliefs and prove to me that I am not mistaken in mine.