Now, everyone would be pretty justified in panning me for referencing a totally irrelevant game, but I've been playing the new Sonic Jump on iPad, and that not only has some of the slickest, cleanest animated sprites I have ever seen, but also features one zone with a background that totally made me thing of fantasy RPGs:
Anyhow, it's obviously not anything remotely to do with RPGs but it's a good example of how 2D graphics can still impress and look fresh.
How about Braid on the PC for an example of modern 2D graphics?
@salieri Genres aside, Baldur's Gate is not a 2D game in the way that game is. There are no sprites or painted -by hand or otherwise- 2D backgrounds in BG. Everything aside from the UI and text was created in 3D. The reason everything got flattened into 2D afterward was computers of the time were not capable of running 3D with sort of graphical fidelity that Bioware wanted.
I completely disagree. Everything in BG2 is 2D and based on sprites running through a 2D background. For graphics to be in 3D they require a polygon based engine which BG2 definitely does not have. The game is 2D Isometric, not 3D in any way whatsoever.
@kamuizin to me a better example is The Witcher 2. I enjoyed it. However it was still weak compared to BG. Horrible bandwidth/information constrained inventory management and while the environment was nicely done it was the same elements over and over and over again. The nice thing about the BG environment is the environmental art -- particularly the overland land scapes were completely unique. Do not see this in 3d games because it is too expensive. Most things in 3d are reused ad-nauseum albeit resized and reoriented but still the same shapes repeated over and over and over. I have the same issues with NWN 1 and 2 as far as the 3d aspect goes. I also did not like the limited point of views, zoom or orientations in NWN 1 and 2. NWN also felt like playing with dolls or puppets while BG felt more alive or natural. Some of that may be more related to uncanny valley issues but that is another issue, I am not overly fond of 3d games because many of them fall into the uncanny valley so often. It just adds one more off putting element in the back of my mind causing cognitive noise.
3D is evolution for an RPG, it improve not only the graphic quality but the quest resources and possibilities. The problem is in reason of some very bad RPG games out there that make people fear 3D issues. When i look a 3D game i think in Assassin's Creed, or even better, Mass Effect, unfortunally today many companies try to make their 3D game in the same style that some MMORPGs are made, and that just doesn't fit right.
@Eiler, Baldur's Gate Dark Alliance was more an diablo alike game than an RPG BG game in PC style.
Zooming won't change the fact, that the areas are pre-rendered isometric in BGEE. I'm pretty sure, BG3 will be something like that too, probably avatars and spell effects will be 3d, though.
People complain about pathfinding in IE games, but actually, pathfinding is worse in 3d games - with the area complexity/distances/party size dumbed down, so you will not need so many nodes for pathfinding.
3D is evolution for an RPG, it improve not only the graphic quality but the quest resources and possibilities. The problem is in reason of some very bad RPG games out there that make people fear 3D issues. When i look a 3D game i think in Assassin's Creed, or even better, Mass Effect, unfortunally today many companies try to make their 3D game in the same style that some MMORPGs are made, and that just doesn't fit right.
Actually, i disagree. 3D is part of a devolution. A dumbing down to please the masses. I've yet to see a real 3D CRPG that is: 1. party based - so witcher, assassin's creed are out 2. not a hybrid action/rpg game - so mass effect, assassin's creed are out 3. has great graphics - so nwn tile based art is out 4. has good and complex dialogs and quests - so mass effect, assassin's creed are out again
The best non IE crpg i played that fulfills these criteria was Mask of the Betrayer. I don't recall any other game that hit that limit.
Well @Avenger_teambg, exactly. You have to yet see a real 3D RPG. What we have atm is action/RPGs and Aurora Engine, among other bad examples of a not so good 3D RPGs, link Dragon Age 2.
Dragon Age Origins was good but didn't had the replayability of Baldur's Gate, their greatest sin there was to make the game with an MMORPG interface style.
@Mungri i hope you can see how much you're pushing the idea to force it as a 2D, cos 3D aceleration is an "option" INSIDE 3D configurations. Baldur's Gate has 3D elements, that's a fact.
Ok, if you say so. But so many bad 3d rpgs really make me think there is an inherent problem with 3d. To be honest, when i first heard that NWN will be 3d, i said: WOW, cool, that'll surely be the greatest thing that happened to rpgs But every new game packed less and less of what i considered good in previous games, while added only a very few really good AND innovative stuff.
I think BG3 could borrow a little inventory management (auto arrange/larger inventory), the really cool interjection system of NWN2 (i think). 3D avatars/effects would spare some time and make for better visual effects. The whole facial animation stuff is probably crap. Though fully voiced dialogs (with PC too) would be great. But if the cost is dumbing down dialogs, then to the hell with full VO. Areas: Well. If it is possible to take the area data just before generating a tileset from it and render it real time, then i think zooming/rotating the map would be possible. If this could be done without totally devastating pathfinding, area animations, active regions, party size etc. then I wouldn't mind 3d areas either.
@Kamuizin feel free to remain obtuse over actual polygonal 3D engines, and 3D video cards being used to accellerate a 2D isometric engine. You have no clue whatsoever regarding the graphics in Baldurs gate.
Feel free to compare the game with 3D accelleration turned off and on and explain exactly what is being turned into 3D. Either way the game still uses 100% 2D pre rendered backgrounds with 2D sprite based characters. The term 3D acceleration in this sense is an oxymoron for the lighting and particle effects such as lightning bolt being rendered using a 3D video card. Games can have 100% 2D engines and use '3D accelleration' to calculate any part of the 2D engine. Do some homework and learn what makes a real 3D engine - clue, polygons, depth and real time accelerated 3D graphics, not pre rendered 2D backgrounds.
Another fact is that if the game actually used a 3D engine, there is no way at all that it would have worked on computer hardware at the time the game was released without a 3D video card, yet it did.
How about - whatever works best for the programmers? I care more about the writing and characters than the mode of displaying graphics. I do think 3D will make better spell animations, but this type of game isn't as dependent on graphics (for me) as story and writing.
How about - whatever works best for the programmers? I care more about the writing and characters than the mode of displaying graphics. I do think 3D will make better spell animations, but this type of game isn't as dependent on graphics (for me) as story and writing.
Pretty odd way to look at things, when no programmer since BG2 has ever managed to recreate a game as good. What works best for the programmers is making a vastly simpler and more streamlined RPG rather than one with the complexity of BG2. If you simply want to play games where they have been made however was for the developers, feel free to play Dragon Age 2 or any other modern RPG. I don't get why you need a potential BG3 being made the same as every other game out there today instead of being a proper worthy successor to BG2.
Do some homework and learn what makes a real 3D engine - clue, polygons, depth and real time accelerated 3D graphics, not pre rendered 2D backgrounds.
Is that really necessary? Does my post deseve this kind of reply, had i resorted to flame or bad language for this?
Anyway no matter what is said an immutable truth is: BG Has 3D elements, i didn't said in any moment that BG is a 3D game, i said that BG has 3D elements, so you could be kind and tell me what i have to study here? cos it isn't very clear what you point is.
Despite the technological terror of the developers I am yet to meet a 3d rpg that would be as good as BG or Planescape. For a decade the only 3d rpg that I liked was Dragon Age Origins, and naturally Bioware messed up the sequel. My vote goes to NO for 3D.
On another note 2D games leave a lot to your imagination and that is what makes them so great.
What 3D elements do you possibly see in a completely flat 2D game without a single polygon? At the most it has 3D sketches for backgrounds, but none of them are accelerated in real time polygonal 3D with or without the 3D settings enabled.
Despite the technological terror of the developers I am yet to meet a 3d rpg that would be as good as BG or Planescape. For a decade the only 3d rpg that I liked was Dragon Age Origins, and naturally Bioware messed up the sequel. My vote goes to NO for 3D.
On another note 2D games leave a lot to your imagination and that is what makes them so great.
Go onto steam, look up and buy Magicka, Cthulhu saves the world, and Penny Arcade on the rain slick 3. They aren't anything like BG but they are entirely different to the normal modern 3D RPG.
Since NWN, 3D engines have completely destroyed this genre of games. In over a decade, not one video game company has managed to create an RPG at least equal to BG2. DaO came very close, but it didn't last long and just look atwhat they did to the sequel.
How about - whatever works best for the programmers? I care more about the writing and characters than the mode of displaying graphics. I do think 3D will make better spell animations, but this type of game isn't as dependent on graphics (for me) as story and writing.
Pretty odd way to look at things, when no programmer since BG2 has ever managed to recreate a game as good. What works best for the programmers is making a vastly simpler and more streamlined RPG rather than one with the complexity of BG2. If you simply want to play games where they have been made however was for the developers, feel free to play Dragon Age 2 or any other modern RPG. I don't get why you need a potential BG3 being made the same as every other game out there today instead of being a proper worthy successor to BG2.
I don't agree. It was not the programmers who wanted this dumbed down experience. It is... the players. Not you or me, apparently. But the mainstream or even casual players. They are apparently numerous and apparently the programmers work for money. Only recently it became apparent, that there is a growing demand for the classic RPG too. Hence Obsidian's kickstarter and BGEE itself.
No don't blame the players, they never asked for it. No player on the PC asked for the games to be dumbed down, what happened was that Bioware saw how popular console FPS games were, and they wanted a slice of the pie with their newer RPGs, so they purposefully made the games how they thought would appeal to the average console gamer. This didn't work at all because neither fans of RPGs liked it, and fans of fps games like COD would have rather carried on playing COD.
For many years on end PC gamers have been demanding new games like Baldurs Gate even on Bioware's own forums. There have never, or very rarely been requests asking for any kind of dumbed down game, the only reason the developers do that is because they want their games to appeal to the average console FPS player as well, and they never actually succeed in doing that.
Ah, the greater disappointment, NWN. Yes it was a bad games by a lot of reasons, where the graphic and camera issue where only 1 among many defects on the game. People has a selective memory and like to justify a concept with an isolated example, so if NWN didn't work let's forget 3D... what an astounting logic! The truth of truths.
By th way, Aurora Engine so bad evaluated in reason of it's failure in NWN is also the engine used for "The Witcher".
2d isometric view. I do love my Morrowind and Skyrim but these are completely different games for me. Perhaps it's just my old age, but I prefer it when the world does not go spinning around. No. Why we love BG1 and 2 and HoMM 3 (not 4 or 5!) - isometric view :P
Another gripe I have with every single top down 3D game is that none of them let you zoom out enough. The camera view and controls in 3D games tend to be far too restrictive, and on max zoom out you can still barely see enough of the map to make a comfortable gaming experience.
Because it doesnt work with this style of game. All 3D engines in the D&D series of games since infinity have been completely terrible.
Temple of Elemental Evil was bugridden, so I've read, but was that to blame on the engine being 3D or where there other reasons? Neverwinter Nights wasn't isometric. Are there other isometric 3D engine D&D games that give you the impression 3D isometric doesn't work? I'm not sure you have a valid argument here.
I think it's unrealistic to expect a 2D release of BG3. BG3 would probably be a rather largely funded product, so it will be 3D, no matter what. Games have evolved past 2D with the exception of indie games (most of which are still 3D in some respect.)
I think it's unrealistic to expect a 2D release of BG3. BG3 would probably be a rather largely funded product, so it will be 3D, no matter what. Games have evolved past 2D with the exception of indie games (most of which are still 3D in some respect.)
Comments
https://www.google.co.uk/search?client=opera&rls=en-GB&q=braid+screenshots&oe=utf-8&channel=suggest&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hl=en&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi&ei=Sm2TUJSSLsHJ0AXNhoGADQ&biw=1920&bih=1116&sei=TW2TUJTSF-bF0QWSsYHQCQ
I dont understand how to embed images on this forum, its so awkward.
People complain about pathfinding in IE games, but actually, pathfinding is worse in 3d games - with the area complexity/distances/party size dumbed down, so you will not need so many nodes for pathfinding.
1. party based - so witcher, assassin's creed are out
2. not a hybrid action/rpg game - so mass effect, assassin's creed are out
3. has great graphics - so nwn tile based art is out
4. has good and complex dialogs and quests - so mass effect, assassin's creed are out again
The best non IE crpg i played that fulfills these criteria was Mask of the Betrayer.
I don't recall any other game that hit that limit.
Dragon Age Origins was good but didn't had the replayability of Baldur's Gate, their greatest sin there was to make the game with an MMORPG interface style.
@Mungri i hope you can see how much you're pushing the idea to force it as a 2D, cos 3D aceleration is an "option" INSIDE 3D configurations. Baldur's Gate has 3D elements, that's a fact.
To be honest, when i first heard that NWN will be 3d, i said: WOW, cool, that'll surely be the greatest thing that happened to rpgs
But every new game packed less and less of what i considered good in previous games, while added only a very few really good AND innovative stuff.
I think BG3 could borrow a little inventory management (auto arrange/larger inventory), the really cool interjection system of NWN2 (i think). 3D avatars/effects would spare some time and make for better visual effects.
The whole facial animation stuff is probably crap.
Though fully voiced dialogs (with PC too) would be great. But if the cost is dumbing down dialogs, then to the hell with full VO.
Areas: Well. If it is possible to take the area data just before generating a tileset from it and render it real time, then i think zooming/rotating the map would be possible. If this could be done without totally devastating pathfinding, area animations, active regions, party size etc. then I wouldn't mind 3d areas either.
Feel free to compare the game with 3D accelleration turned off and on and explain exactly what is being turned into 3D. Either way the game still uses 100% 2D pre rendered backgrounds with 2D sprite based characters. The term 3D acceleration in this sense is an oxymoron for the lighting and particle effects such as lightning bolt being rendered using a 3D video card. Games can have 100% 2D engines and use '3D accelleration' to calculate any part of the 2D engine. Do some homework and learn what makes a real 3D engine - clue, polygons, depth and real time accelerated 3D graphics, not pre rendered 2D backgrounds.
Another fact is that if the game actually used a 3D engine, there is no way at all that it would have worked on computer hardware at the time the game was released without a 3D video card, yet it did.
Anyway no matter what is said an immutable truth is: BG Has 3D elements, i didn't said in any moment that BG is a 3D game, i said that BG has 3D elements, so you could be kind and tell me what i have to study here? cos it isn't very clear what you point is.
On another note 2D games leave a lot to your imagination and that is what makes them so great.
Since NWN, 3D engines have completely destroyed this genre of games. In over a decade, not one video game company has managed to create an RPG at least equal to BG2. DaO came very close, but it didn't last long and just look atwhat they did to the sequel.
I don't agree. It was not the programmers who wanted this dumbed down experience. It is... the players. Not you or me, apparently. But the mainstream or even casual players. They are apparently numerous and apparently the programmers work for money. Only recently it became apparent, that there is a growing demand for the classic RPG too. Hence Obsidian's kickstarter and BGEE itself.
For many years on end PC gamers have been demanding new games like Baldurs Gate even on Bioware's own forums. There have never, or very rarely been requests asking for any kind of dumbed down game, the only reason the developers do that is because they want their games to appeal to the average console FPS player as well, and they never actually succeed in doing that.
By th way, Aurora Engine so bad evaluated in reason of it's failure in NWN is also the engine used for "The Witcher".