This topic is sort of about 2d games competing with 3d games, and aimed more at game developers. Is 2D in the past? With modern gaming, would you even consider purchasing a 2D game?

I use trap17 to run a site for RPG Maker XP/VX(I know a few others on trap17 do also), which is an all round site for creating 2D games. Some interesting discussions have come up on the forums on 2d vs 3d game making. I usually go with 3D saying that it is much better than 2D, and with todays modern games, creating games in 2D is just going backwards.

But I think most of us on trap17 are not making commercial games, so a decent discussion of 2D vs 3D can be made. With 2D software such as RPG Maker XP and RPG Maker VX, you can start the program and start creating the game straight away. A lot of experienced users could create a couple of hours game play in a couple of days. With the resources and user-friendliness of these programs that kind of thing is possible. Everything from the main players stats to battle animations can be done with a few clicks. It's that simple to do, with good results. On top of that, there are scripting possibilities meaning the only limitation is a 2D game. The scripting is not as advanced as professional scripting languages(it uses ruby), but its a scripting language none the less, and that means some advanced gaming systems. So what I'm getting at here(sorry for sounding like I'm adversing the program), is that it's possible to make good 2D games, and its so simple with todays software. Amazing 2D games can be made, and just about anyone can do it. But, they're not 3D. Does that put people off? Is a game automatically ruled by the average gamer because it is not 3D?

3D games on the other hard are very difficult to make. I'm not as experienced with them, and I know its possible to get engines with template scripts. But to make your games, and unique ones, you have to create 3D environments, models, skins, etc. Compared with 2D games, its very difficult, and thats where 2D game development is more attractive to potential game developers. 3D games are generally more advanced, better looking, and the player feels more involved with the realism of a 3D world. As a game developer, can 2D even compete with that? Even with its advanced scripting and simplicity?

To summarize the main point of the topic, is 2D game creation a thing of the past? Or are they still able to compete against 3D? For you players out there, would you still consider playing 2D games even with your Wii's, XBox360's and PS3's?

 

 

 

Reply

Personally, I think 2D games are great still. In fact, I could argue that the advancement of games into 3D has damaged the development of real quality games. For instance, take a look at Halo. There is no story to Halo, no real innovations to it at all. The game is a chance for plaers to move and shoot and drivein 3D. That needs no story for it to sell. And instead of working on making the gameplay better, Halo one, two and three have successively had better graphics, with no huge differences in gameplay. If a 2D game has no good gampley or no good story, there's no way anyone will buy it. Since the graphics cannot make the player believe he or she is an elf, the story must convince the player they are an elf. Of course, not every 3D game has no story or has bad gameplay. There are still games like Return to Castle Wolfenstein and Knights of the Old Republic that stand out, not for their graphics, but for the game itself. With 2D games, the developer generally has to work harder to convince the player to put down the 3D game.

In my opinion, certain genres are just better in 2D eitehr way. Final fantasy, I think, is more immersive in 2D. Any sort of Tactical RPG (Fire Emblem, Gemfire) I think also works betrter in 2D.

 

 

 

Reply

Personally, I'd say that some of the best games I've ever played were 2d, not 3d.
Then again, I find nethack, FFI, and SpyHunter to be really amusing. Ah well, that's my bias.

2d didn't look so hot originally, so people spent a good while trying to come up with a plot and something entertaining. 3d games nowadays, I'm seeing less of that.

E.g. Crysis? Cool-looking but BORING.
Old school mario games? That was were it was at.

So until someone brings the sexy back, I'm going to claim that 3d is just an excuse for most developers to not actually make a plot.

2d's usually more portable, resource efficient, and more easily developed than 3d games - 2d's still going strong and isn't about to die anytime soon.

Reply

2-d games will always have a cult following as that is were the originals of gaming began. I still play them from time to time just to seek a challenge and what not, however, the only 2d games you will see are on cellphones and that would be about it.

Reply

2D games are alive and well! You won't see a lot of them on the next gen consoles, but they DO exist on them. There are even more of them on the handhelds, and there are LOADS of them on the internet! They can be just as fun as 3D games, so there is no reason they should die out. Personally, I LOVE 2D games!

Reply

Meh, 2D games are easier on the eyes as well. If you see a monster in some 3D game, it could be a giant behemoth that's really far away, that only pretends to be a small monster.

Reply

I think 2D games can also have very beautiful graphics, especially the Japanese ones. I don't think 2D games are a game of the past. If the storyline and gameplay is good, I would still enjoy it.

Reply

That's what I say. A game with good graphics isn't necessarily fun, and a game with good gameplay doesn't necessarily have good graphics. I would certainly play a game like Gemfire for the NES before I'd play the newest Medal of Honor. Even if a game has good graphics, you can tell when a company just wanted to release a game for money, and when a company actually tried to make a good game. (Not that both can't happen )

Reply

DeM0nFiRe is completely right. What many people don't realise is that, while graphics can make a good game better, they can't make a bad game good. Gameplay is the most important part of a game - if a game isn't fun to play, and there is no reason to keep playing it, then nobody will play it.

Call me old-fashioned, but I actually prefer many retro games to modern ones. I can't get enough of Mario, Sonic the Hedgehog, Donkey Kong and all those games. In fact, I recently bought one of those compendiums of old games that you can get on almost all consoles and handhelds now. Many of the games were over 20 years old, but I'm addicted to them all. NOW tell me that graphics mean something...

Reply

One of the biggest thing I have noticed.... and it may not be true in most cases.... but I have 2 friends with epilepsy..... and of the two of them.... 2d games they can play without having an episode (for a while mind you.... after too long its inevitable) but when it comes to 3d.... something about the transition and flash of it causes episodes..... so I think that even with the masses of people like myself whom adore both 2d and 3d games..... 2d will remain as much if not close to as important as 3d.... I could be wrong.... but thats simply my opinion....
good topic by the way

hecatomb

Reply