Adventure Gamers - Forums
You are here: Home → Forum Home → Gaming → Adventure → Thread
Post Marker Legend:
-
New posts -
No new posts
Currently online
King’s Quest licensing speculation
Quest1/MtnPeak, watch this video. It perfectly explains what Bt is talking about.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/jimquisition/7005-Innovation-Gamings-Snake-Oil
He is correct to an extent, but you can’t use that as an apology for adventure games still being exactly what they were in 1990. The 2D/classic vs. 3D/innovation argument would be like if in the 1940s, Disney fans were arguing on internet forums that cartoons were perfectly fine being what they were in Steamboat Willie in 1928. No need for color, complexity, better animation, newer techniques, better sound, feature length films, etc. Just keep doing new stories with 1928 technology/skill and stop innovation cold.
Are you really implying that 2D art and design and 3D art and design are interchangeable? And that 3D is inherently better? Really?? I don’t even know how to respond to that.
Good thing they decided against outsourcing.
*cough*Aliens: Colonial Marines*cough*
Stuart Bradley Newsom - Naughty Shinobi || Our Game: Shadow Over Isolation
Good thing they decided against outsourcing.
*cough*Aliens: Colonial Marines*cough*
There’s nothing wrong with outsourcing, it’s just a question of if the management can handle it. In the case of Aliens, it’s pretty clear that the thing was fucked because of poor management, not because it was outsourced.
Are you really implying that 2D art and design and 3D art and design are interchangeable? And that 3D is inherently better? Really?? I don’t even know how to respond to that.
3D is better if we’re talking about a genre based largely on exploration and eye candy (you can pretend that graphics are not important to adventure games if you want, but they were a major reason for its popularity from 1980-1996 or so). It’s more immersive, prettier and more interesting to explore 3D than 2D in an interactive medium.
Except that black-and-white films are still being made, and we even got the rare silent movie with The Artist last year…
Innovation is not mandatory. And 2D/innovation is also possible…
Yes the occasional black-and-white film is made when the filmmakers feel there is an artistic reason for it, or just to go old-school once in a while. I’m perfectly fine with some 1990-esque adventure games being made for artistic, financial or nostalgic reasons. What I’m not fine with is the knee-jerk reaction against 3D that hardcore adventure fans and developers (such as Ron Gilbert in one of the Kickstarter videos) tend to have.
Good thing they decided against outsourcing.
*cough*Aliens: Colonial Marines*cough*
There’s nothing wrong with outsourcing, it’s just a question of if the management can handle it. In the case of Aliens, it’s pretty clear that the thing was fucked because of poor management, not because it was outsourced.
I never said there was anything wrong with outsourcing. Hence the reason why I specifically said A: CM and not some random outsourced game. You pretty much stated exactly my point. Can Activision handle an outsourced adventure game?
Stuart Bradley Newsom - Naughty Shinobi || Our Game: Shadow Over Isolation
Good thing they decided against outsourcing.
*cough*Aliens: Colonial Marines*cough*
Lol! that was the debacle I was thinking
I don’t always find 3D more “immersive”. Often, I find it more distractive, because it’s so obviously rendered… 3D, even the best stuff today, has always had more of an oddly constructed feel to me than human-drawn hand rendered out. But that’s just my personal preference.
Bad 3D sticks out like a sore thumb.
Bt
Are you really implying that 2D art and design and 3D art and design are interchangeable? And that 3D is inherently better? Really?? I don’t even know how to respond to that.
I think he’s saying (and I’m inclinded to agree) that there’s a lot more unexplored territory in which to innovate with 3D.
Most 3D adventure games play pretty much like 2D adventure games. They have the same camera systems and presentation, and most of them even control the same. I think there’s a lot of room for adventure games to grow, but they’re still very stuck in the ‘90s, and they have to get over that.
Stuff like Under a Killing Moon was trying hard to innovate and move the genre forward into 3D in a meaninful way, but once the genre shifted to become more nostalgia-based, it backslid, and the only “progress” really came in the form of simplified gameplay. If we kept moving in that direction I wonder if the genre would be so niche right now.
I agree that there’s more room for certain kinds of innovation in 3D gameplay and design for adventure games. There’s also room for innovation in 2D - you just have to think a bit differently.
I think there’s room in the world for both styles, though, and I am often baffled by the notion that people think 3D should replace 2D. There’s room for both - and a world with just one style is a pretty boring place.
Bt
Most 3D adventure games play pretty much like 2D adventure games. They have the same camera systems and presentation, and most of them even control the same. I think there’s a lot of room for adventure games to grow, but they’re still very stuck in the ‘90s, and they have to get over that.
True.
3D Games that use a mouse control has imo never worked, if you want to make 3d games, then you basically need to use wasd controls and either a first person view or seen from behind like many RPG.
Personally i would love to see some AG using the same presentation and controls as RPG, and i think it would add a lot to the experience.
You have to play the game, to find out why you are playing the game! - eXistenZ
3D is better if we’re talking about a genre based largely on exploration and eye candy (you can pretend that graphics are not important to adventure games if you want, but they were a major reason for its popularity from 1980-1996 or so). It’s more immersive, prettier and more interesting to explore 3D than 2D in an interactive medium.
What you say is so obviously personal opinion, and yet you state it as unequivocal fact.
Certainly, it depends on the style of the game and, as others have said already, what the control scheme is.
I think there’s room in the world for both styles, though, and I am often baffled by the notion that people think 3D should replace 2D. There’s room for both - and a world with just one style is a pretty boring place.
^ This.
Adventure games could use some more 3D games, but 2D works so splendidly that it can’t disappear…
The truth can’t hurt you, it’s just like the dark: it scares you witless but in time you see things clear and stark. - Elvis Costello
Maybe this time I can be strong, but since I know who I am, I’m probably wrong. Maybe this time I can go far, but thinking about where I’ve been ain’t helping me start. - Michael Kiwanuka
I thought we as a species were past the whole “2D vs. 3D” debate.
Okay, this always bothered me. 3D does not require a different gameplay mechanics. Not one 3D adventure game plays it safe. They all having moving cameras in fancy ways. Yeah, I know, the game is in 3d, but I’d prefer the camera to be static. One would say, if the camera should be static, why 3D? 3D goes beyond be aesthetically different, but 3D also gives the developer the ability to make the world dynamic. You don’t need to make it in your face “I’m making everything moving because its 3D”. Seriously, can someone make just a simple PnC adventure game where the only maturation is the environment and world being 3D?
Changing the way the adventure game pnc works in 3D is like mobile games trying to imitated physical console controls. People need to try to get it out of their mind that its not about imitation. The us of 3D doesn’t mean games need to be like Uncharted or Portal. Just make a simple pnc adventure game with 3D visuals and the basic PNC mechanics. Also, its a must to have a capable team who knows how to properly work with 3D.
I don’t always find 3D more “immersive”. Often, I find it more distractive, because it’s so obviously rendered… 3D, even the best stuff today, has always had more of an oddly constructed feel to me than human-drawn hand rendered out. But that’s just my personal preference.
Bad 3D sticks out like a sore thumb.
Bt
Well there is 2D visuals with 3D Prerendered graphics, but I know you’re not talking about that since most of them are TERRIBLE. The only reason why 2D visuals are superior lies in the fact that pixelated painted imperfections are beautiful to us. 3D is by far better than 2D, you just need a good art director and a capable team.
Stuart Bradley Newsom - Naughty Shinobi || Our Game: Shadow Over Isolation
Okay, this always bothered me. 3D does not require a different gameplay mechanics. Not one 3D adventure game plays it safe. They all having moving cameras in fancy ways.
If you consider 100% scripted camera movement with extremely limited environments “fancy.” I would consider that an imitation of the 2D point-and-click tradition, personally.
I think we’re mostly in agreement, but I really have to say, I don’t think 3D has been explored very well in adventure games yet. There aren’t any 3D adventure games that I know that have a dynamic 3D camera like most modern action-adventures, and only even a handful that have true 3D gameplay with a first-person camera. Frankly, I’d like to see 3D taken a lot further.
I agree that there’s more room for certain kinds of innovation in 3D gameplay and design for adventure games. There’s also room for innovation in 2D - you just have to think a bit differently.
I think there’s room in the world for both styles, though, and I am often baffled by the notion that people think 3D should replace 2D. There’s room for both - and a world with just one style is a pretty boring place.
Don’t get me wrong, I love me some 2D adventures, but I feel like there’s more unexplored territory on the 3D side, because 3D adventures haven’t deviated much from their 2D forebears.
You are here: Home → Forum Home → Gaming → Adventure → Thread
