• Log In | Sign Up

  • News
  • Reviews
  • Top Games
  • Search
  • New Releases
  • Daily Deals
  • Forums

Adventure Gamers - Forums

Welcome to Adventure Gamers. Please Sign In or Join Now to post.

You are here: HomeForum Home → Gaming → Adventure → Thread

Post Marker Legend:

  • New Topic New posts
  • Old Topic No new posts

Currently online

LittleRose

Support us, by purchasing through these affiliate links

   

Slideshow or realtime navigation?

Avatar

Total Posts: 1368

Joined 2012-09-28

PM

This is partly carrying over from a post in 1st person revolution thread about types of navigation.

I used to wonder why many 1st person adventures stuck with slideshow movement when the technology was easily capable of realtime 3D environments, and still continue to do it now. In the last decade and a half since Myst we’ve had games with all sorts of navigation modes - slideshow mode (Dark Fall, Scratches), node-based 360 degree rotation (Journeyman Project 3, Yoomurjak’s Ring) and full 3D navigation (Dear Esther, Normality). There hasn’t really been a progression from the ‘inferior’ slide movement to full 3D. Maybe there’s a financial reason for this but i’d like to discuss the artistic and practical merits of each.

Do you have a preference for one of these graphical modes? Is one better than the other?

I don’t really have a preference now, but “realtime is better” doesn’t apply for me any more: it depends on the game. Something like Dear Esther would be unthinkable in slide mode. But slideshow mode has the advantage of being quicker to navigate, removing all the “in-between” bits, and in a slideshow game with difficult puzzles the developer has more control which can be good. When I played Five Cores I was surprised to find that although the puzzles were quite easy, I had trouble with many of them. This might have been because the world was quite barren but I think the free roaming gave the game too much of a loose feel, like a pre-release demo or non-game, and that made me impatient. I had the same experience with Myst 5 and Uru. Framing a slide is a way of artistically directing the game and the gamer’s attention, and that can be a definite advantage in an actionless game.

One realtime game I really liked was Darkness Within 2. The improvement in atmosphere over DW1 was unreal. Also, this is blasphemy for many but Last Express would be much better with free movement. Remake time? Smile

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 401

Joined 2003-09-16

PM

I’m ok with slideshow, but it can get disorienting when they do not use 4 views (sometimes there is an angle view for a hotspot). I do like 3D movement if I can use the mouse. Games like Uru, RealMyst, and GK 3 all have movement controls that I like.

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 487

Joined 2012-10-03

PM

This is what I wrote in the topic 1st person revolution :

Zifnab - 03 October 2012 10:39 AM

On the topic of slideshow vs. free movement - I used to wonder why Myst clones stuck with slideshow movement when technology was easily capable of realtime 3D environments, and still continue to do it now.

Not anyone can do great graphics in realtime 3D ! It’s really hard ! It’s much easier to make nice views for a slideshow game, because you can use softwares like photoshop to make them look better ! So in realtime you have free movement, in slideshow you can reach photorealism with a lot of work. That’s what I try to do in my game, and from what I read here, most of you won’t like that Smile No problem, I knew it was perillous to make a slideshow game in 2012 lol

In fact the problem slideshow vs. free movement really depends on who’s making the game. A studio has no excuse : it has to be in realtime nowadays ! But an amateur or a small indie may choose slideshow for reasons of production difficulties. That’s also a matter of skills in development.

———-
Now, to answer your question slideshow or realtime navigation, I’d say it’s difficult to tell Smile

Slideshow

I like :
+ watching beautiful pictures
+ imagining what happens between views (imagination as more place with slideshow)
+ point & click

I dislike :
- can be confusing
- no sensation of freedom

Realtime

I like :
+ going everywhere I want and moving the camera when I want
+ interactivity
+ more immersive

I dislike :
- needs a good computer Smile
- most of the time it’s not as beautiful as precalc. (compare Myst V with the others)
- moving the character with a keyboard or a pad

———
To conclude, I’d say I didn’t play or see so much adventure games in realtime that convinced me (first person). But I know there are great things to come (Cradle, or the five cores recently).
But I just can’t imagine Riven in realtime ! It was magic only because it was a slideshow game.
Look at this :

It’s a fan remake of Riven in 3D. That’s an awesome work (and I mean awesome !), true, and I know how hard it must be to make this, but that’s not Riven… Riven is like a photo album, it’s not a place to play in 3D.

     

Total Posts: 245

Joined 2006-05-20

PM

I like 3D to be a lot better than slideshow.

Slideshows can get confusing when the views are not what you expect, eg: you move west and then see the scene as if you are looking east. The reverse is also true, you move to a room from a different direction and see a scene which is different from what you saw last time in that room. So, both ways are confusing.

Also, its painful to go click, click, click to keep moving. I much prefer using the mouse & keyboard combination. But mouse/keyboard requires a fair amount of familiarity and its very easy to get disoriented / dizzy if the player is not used to it.

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 514

Joined 2010-08-03

PM

i think we can conclude that like everything else it depends on who does the job and how well.yes slideshow can be tedious because it’s somewhat rigid,you always have to click to move.but that is something i’m willing to sacrifice if the end game is good.same goes with 3D.i do understand what Simon is talking about.not many artists know how to create 3D graphics.most of them know photoshop though(or some other tool along those lines).and they can create a game a lot easier with just that knowledge.

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 487

Joined 2012-10-03

PM

I suppose slideshow games are a bit prehistoric now. People born before a certain date and who started playing on old machines will still like slideshow games nowadays, where the youngers won’t. So, is that a conflict of generations ? Smile

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 514

Joined 2010-08-03

PM

naaah…it’s only tastes….i mean i was born with 3D games started playing mostly non-adventure(sports and FPS),but i still prefer adventure over others(i still play most of the other genres too).my first slideshow must have been Dark Fall.I really liked it.some time after that it was Scratches.it’s like they say,hate the gamer not the game.well in this case hate the game not the genre(or subgenre for that matter).the guys at Senscape are doing a very good job in revitalising slideshow with Asylum.shows it’s not dead yet.

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 259

Joined 2004-03-09

PM

May I suggest you consider ‘panorama’ to differentiate between plain slideshow and 360 panning? It’s an important distinction because the former is always static, while the latter can be much more dynamic. It would be a middle ground between slideshow and realtime.

     

Senscape // Founder // Designer | Working on: Asylum | Twitter: @AgustinCordes

Avatar

Total Posts: 514

Joined 2010-08-03

PM

true that’s why i used the word revitalise.will remember “panorama” though Wink

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 487

Joined 2012-10-03

PM

jhetfield21 - 03 October 2012 12:29 PM

naaah…it’s only tastes….

If that’s the case, I’m glad to read that Smile

@Agustin : you’re right about panoramas.

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 6584

Joined 2007-07-22

PM

It’s a funny thing actually, just like you can’t claim that 2.5D adventure is better than 2D.

“More is not always better” unless we’re talking FPS/RPG which revolve around action. As for storytelling/puzzle solving, graphics engine is of less importance. As already said, it’s how the narrative/puzzle solving flow works within the specified graphics framework. If it sucks, no free-roaming world is going to help it.


And I think its actually as much hard (or costly) to come up with beautiful “slideshow” graphics as with 3D engine. Just like Telltale is doing 3D because it’s more efficient and less time-consuming in regard to their resources, I see many indie developers jumping on the “3D” bandwagon, but that really doesn’t make necessarily a better game. Or prettier.


What I’d like to see is some middle ground - let’s not forget that many 1st persons utilized more than just a slideshow, with walking animation between the scenes. It added to the immersion, although it’s not perfect as well.

     

Recently finished: Four Last Things 4/5, Edna & Harvey: The Breakout 5/5, Chains of Satinav 3,95/5, A Vampyre Story 88, Sam Peters 3/5, Broken Sword 1 4,5/5, Broken Sword 2 4,3/5, Broken Sword 3 85, Broken Sword 5 81, Gray Matter 4/5\nCurrently playing: Broken Sword 4, Keepsake (Let\‘s Play), Callahan\‘s Crosstime Saloon (post-Community Playthrough)\nLooking forward to: A Playwright’s Tale

Avatar

Total Posts: 4011

Joined 2011-04-01

PM

I prefer slideshow or even better, 360-degree panorama. I just find it ideal for exploration in these type of games, and the 2D graphics have more character.

From a development perspective, the process for making a realtime 3D game and a slideshow game must be very different, and not just in a technical sense. The difference is for realtime 3D ‘the world’ of the game is a standalone environment of objects, while in slideshow view it’s just what the player sees. Two very different ways of building the world. That may have been why, for me, RealMyst lost something from the original.

colpet - 03 October 2012 11:21 AM

I’m ok with slideshow, but it can get disorienting when they do not use 4 views (sometimes there is an angle view for a hotspot).

Disorienting can be good - Edanna from Myst 3 comes to mind. A huge jumbled tree maze you can really get lost in Heart Eyes

But I can understand that disorientation is why developers can find slideshow restrictive. If you compare Rhem 1 to the rest of the series, after the first game (which was confusing at times) the world became much more geometrical and by 4 it became a geometrical lattice of straight pathways and grids. That’s a type of world that could only work in a Rhem game.

diego - 03 October 2012 02:15 PM

What I’d like to see is some middle ground - let’s not forget that many 1st persons utilized more than just a slideshow, with walking animation between the scenes. It added to the immersion, although it’s not perfect as well.

Were there any other than The 7th Guest? I loved moving between the nodes in T7G at the start, but halfway through the game it was something I just wanted to skip. When there’s a lot of backtracking it can get tiring. But I have to say it worked well there.

I loved the panorama views in Journeyman Project 3 and Baron Wittard. In theory, it’s the perfect navigation because you skip the travelling but you can still examine everything in detail.

 

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 946

Joined 2005-06-02

PM

Oscar - 03 October 2012 10:46 PM
diego - 03 October 2012 02:15 PM

What I’d like to see is some middle ground - let’s not forget that many 1st persons utilized more than just a slideshow, with walking animation between the scenes. It added to the immersion, although it’s not perfect as well.

Were there any other than The 7th Guest? I loved moving between the nodes in T7G at the start, but halfway through the game it was something I just wanted to skip. When there’s a lot of backtracking it can get tiring. But I have to say it worked well there.

The Blackstone Chronicles. You could turn off the walking animation too.
Zork Grand Inquisitor. I don’t remember if you could turn it off, but I never wanted to anyway. Smile

     

Now playing: ——-
Recently finished: don’t remember
Up next:  Eh…
Looking forward to:
Ithaka of the Clouds; The Last Crown; all the kickstarter adventure games I supported

Avatar

Total Posts: 8471

Joined 2011-10-21

PM

^ Darkstar: The Interactive Movie does that too.

     

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

Avatar

Total Posts: 278

Joined 2008-07-11

PM

For me, a panoramic view is essential for node-based games. Without the ability to look round, pre-rendered environments feel lifeless and disjointed. Flipping through static pictures is a poor way to represent a 3D space and I don’t think many people would tolerate it nowadays, besides a few hardcore adventure fans.

Panoramic view is much more tolerable because you have a better idea of where you are in the environment, but it’s still not as seamless as realtime 3D.

As I mentioned in the other thread, if I had to play a first-person 2D game, I’d want it to be in the Japanese visual novel style, where each environment is just one scene with close-up shots when investigating. The reason I like this style is because it’s not trying to convince you that you’re in a 3D space. Games like Snatcher and Phoenix Wright are designed around the fact that you’re playing a 2D game, which makes a lot more sense to me. Save 3D for y’know, real 3D.

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 487

Joined 2012-10-03

PM

orient - 04 October 2012 07:18 AM

Save 3D for y’know, real 3D.

I understand your point of view on the subject slideshow vs realtime, even if I don’t share it. But on this very point, “save 3d for real 3d”, I have to react !

OK, 3D is often better in realtime but using 3D for static pictures mustn’t be seen as a fault, even in video games ! That all depends on the way to use it :

1 - 3D is often a great economy of time to make great pictures compared to drawing beautiful things (you speak of Phenix Wright which is not 3D, except the 5th to come). It’s not surprising many people use 3D in their games instead of using traditional techniques. Always the question of money and time saving.

2 - 3D is still a way for an artist to express is point of view… it’s a tool in the same way as painting and guitar, and lot of people seem to forget it nowadays because 3D has become too common (thanks to the industry) ! but not anyone can make great things with 3D.
Have you never been amazed in front of a wonderful 3D picture ? I have, even if it doesn’t move. Maybe that’s more a question of imagination (what did the artist exactly, and why ? Why placing the camera here, was there a reason ? etc…).

And on top of that, show me a realtime game with photorealistic graphics ? You won’t find any, because in realtime we still don’t know how to make it. True, we’re starting to get very close, but precalculated brings here something more. And I personaly like to visit photorealistic worlds that can’t exist, even if it means slideshow ! Heart Eyes True, I’ve been touched for life by Riven : when I was a child and played it, I didn’t imagine a second it was in 3D, can you trust that ?

On the other hand, if we speak of this in maybe 5 or 10 years, when realtime will be able to make things as realistic as precalc, then I won’t have the same speech.

So right now, in 2012, I’d say that if a game is good, it doesn’t matter if it’s slideshow or realtime ! We mustn’t have a closed mind.

Sorry if you disagree, but I believe this deeply !

     

You are here: HomeForum Home → Gaming → Adventure → Thread

Welcome to the Adventure Gamers forums!

Back to the top