The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
*The readers gasp in awe at this incredibly original title*
Occassio-
Ocass-
Sometimes, I think about gaming for no particular reason. I have a sudden trivial thought, which erm.. makes me think. (note to self: attempt to increase... um... number of words which I know)
*stops digging*
In the olden days (spectrum, for example), we had 3D games and 2D games coexisting in harmony.
Bubble Bobble and Rastan were classic 2D platformers.
Head over Heels was a 3D adventure/puzzle game.
"But it wasn't proper 3D"
Ah, sod off. You could move in all three dimensions, and that makes it 3D, no? So what if you can only view it from a few angles?
All of a sudden in the last few years, we can have 'true' 3D, which basically means more camera angles. That's the only real difference (between the current 3D and the 'old 3D), so far as I can tell... yet suddenly all the 2D platformers turn 3D and stop having platforms, as if the new style is a turbocharged bandwagon to be hopped onto?
I'm just trying to look at thing from a new angle here. The idea that today's 3D adventure games came from the old 3D adventure games, not from 2D platformers. I don't think 3D gaming was such an 'original' or 'big' step as it was made out to be.
What do you reckon? Does this give you any new thought on the 2D/3D debate? Please note the word 'new'. If anyone tells me why Zelda OOT or Mario 64 were so much better than the SNES prequels, I'll shoot them ;)
Occassio-
Ocass-
Sometimes, I think about gaming for no particular reason. I have a sudden trivial thought, which erm.. makes me think. (note to self: attempt to increase... um... number of words which I know)
*stops digging*
In the olden days (spectrum, for example), we had 3D games and 2D games coexisting in harmony.
Bubble Bobble and Rastan were classic 2D platformers.
Head over Heels was a 3D adventure/puzzle game.
"But it wasn't proper 3D"
Ah, sod off. You could move in all three dimensions, and that makes it 3D, no? So what if you can only view it from a few angles?
All of a sudden in the last few years, we can have 'true' 3D, which basically means more camera angles. That's the only real difference (between the current 3D and the 'old 3D), so far as I can tell... yet suddenly all the 2D platformers turn 3D and stop having platforms, as if the new style is a turbocharged bandwagon to be hopped onto?
I'm just trying to look at thing from a new angle here. The idea that today's 3D adventure games came from the old 3D adventure games, not from 2D platformers. I don't think 3D gaming was such an 'original' or 'big' step as it was made out to be.
What do you reckon? Does this give you any new thought on the 2D/3D debate? Please note the word 'new'. If anyone tells me why Zelda OOT or Mario 64 were so much better than the SNES prequels, I'll shoot them ;)
Fogmaster wrote:
> yes, thats true, e.g. Skid Marks, that looked 3d but only had about 8 images of
> the car, it's the same as Commandos, it looks like 3d, but it isn't I think it's
> clever, but me thinks it would take a lot more work to make a good game with
> this idea.
lol... Rage software (when they used to be Ultimate) became famous by making pseudo-3d titles
> yes, thats true, e.g. Skid Marks, that looked 3d but only had about 8 images of
> the car, it's the same as Commandos, it looks like 3d, but it isn't I think it's
> clever, but me thinks it would take a lot more work to make a good game with
> this idea.
lol... Rage software (when they used to be Ultimate) became famous by making pseudo-3d titles
yes, thats true, e.g. Skid Marks, that looked 3d but only had about 8 images of the car, it's the same as Commandos, it looks like 3d, but it isn't I think it's clever, but me thinks it would take a lot more work to make a good game with this idea.
VenomByte wrote:
"But
> it wasn't proper 3D"
There were plenty of 'true' 3D game about during the 8-Bit period....
Elite, Driller, Sentinal, that one were you had crashed on the planet with no people... Just the same as todays games... just wireframe polys instead of filled.
I'm just trying to look at thing
> from a new angle here. The idea that today's 3D adventure games came from the
> old 3D adventure games, not from 2D platformers. I don't think 3D gaming was
> such an 'original' or 'big' step as it was made out to be.
I think the problem is that developer have made 3D game from 2D... consoles like SNES and Megadrive didnt really have that many Head Over Heals, Knightlore, Batman, etc... Pseudo 3D titles avalible for them, and so they developed from their 2D base to the 3D environment...
Although, its a great idea... If some Brit developer had considered 3D development from this angle games would have developed in a slightly different direction?
(Arnt they releasing a Head Over Heals game for the GBA?)
"But
> it wasn't proper 3D"
There were plenty of 'true' 3D game about during the 8-Bit period....
Elite, Driller, Sentinal, that one were you had crashed on the planet with no people... Just the same as todays games... just wireframe polys instead of filled.
I'm just trying to look at thing
> from a new angle here. The idea that today's 3D adventure games came from the
> old 3D adventure games, not from 2D platformers. I don't think 3D gaming was
> such an 'original' or 'big' step as it was made out to be.
I think the problem is that developer have made 3D game from 2D... consoles like SNES and Megadrive didnt really have that many Head Over Heals, Knightlore, Batman, etc... Pseudo 3D titles avalible for them, and so they developed from their 2D base to the 3D environment...
Although, its a great idea... If some Brit developer had considered 3D development from this angle games would have developed in a slightly different direction?
(Arnt they releasing a Head Over Heals game for the GBA?)
*The readers gasp in awe at this incredibly original title*
Occassio-
Ocass-
Sometimes, I think about gaming for no particular reason. I have a sudden trivial thought, which erm.. makes me think. (note to self: attempt to increase... um... number of words which I know)
*stops digging*
In the olden days (spectrum, for example), we had 3D games and 2D games coexisting in harmony.
Bubble Bobble and Rastan were classic 2D platformers.
Head over Heels was a 3D adventure/puzzle game.
"But it wasn't proper 3D"
Ah, sod off. You could move in all three dimensions, and that makes it 3D, no? So what if you can only view it from a few angles?
All of a sudden in the last few years, we can have 'true' 3D, which basically means more camera angles. That's the only real difference (between the current 3D and the 'old 3D), so far as I can tell... yet suddenly all the 2D platformers turn 3D and stop having platforms, as if the new style is a turbocharged bandwagon to be hopped onto?
I'm just trying to look at thing from a new angle here. The idea that today's 3D adventure games came from the old 3D adventure games, not from 2D platformers. I don't think 3D gaming was such an 'original' or 'big' step as it was made out to be.
What do you reckon? Does this give you any new thought on the 2D/3D debate? Please note the word 'new'. If anyone tells me why Zelda OOT or Mario 64 were so much better than the SNES prequels, I'll shoot them ;)
Occassio-
Ocass-
Sometimes, I think about gaming for no particular reason. I have a sudden trivial thought, which erm.. makes me think. (note to self: attempt to increase... um... number of words which I know)
*stops digging*
In the olden days (spectrum, for example), we had 3D games and 2D games coexisting in harmony.
Bubble Bobble and Rastan were classic 2D platformers.
Head over Heels was a 3D adventure/puzzle game.
"But it wasn't proper 3D"
Ah, sod off. You could move in all three dimensions, and that makes it 3D, no? So what if you can only view it from a few angles?
All of a sudden in the last few years, we can have 'true' 3D, which basically means more camera angles. That's the only real difference (between the current 3D and the 'old 3D), so far as I can tell... yet suddenly all the 2D platformers turn 3D and stop having platforms, as if the new style is a turbocharged bandwagon to be hopped onto?
I'm just trying to look at thing from a new angle here. The idea that today's 3D adventure games came from the old 3D adventure games, not from 2D platformers. I don't think 3D gaming was such an 'original' or 'big' step as it was made out to be.
What do you reckon? Does this give you any new thought on the 2D/3D debate? Please note the word 'new'. If anyone tells me why Zelda OOT or Mario 64 were so much better than the SNES prequels, I'll shoot them ;)