The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
I have recently been thinking about 3D and 2D games, in particular one genre that is now all but extinct. The 2D platformer. Now I am not entirely sure why this is. I have some ideas why, and many of you will probably take the obvious reason, which is because of 3D platformers. But does that extra dimension make the game a whole different genre? I aim to prove that it does with this post.
Think about Super Mario World and the Sonic series in the 16-bit era. Now think about the 3D updates. Granted, those two examples were very different in the 16-bit times, but they had the same basic structure. Get through the level (usually from left to right) without dying. Get to the end of the level and proceed to the next. That is a very simplistic view of it but that’s what it was. Apart from getting to the end of each level there were no specific objectives that you needed to complete.
Now think about in 3D. You often need to enter 3D levels, and it is a very different level design. While, as before you could just run along a level and have enemies as the main obstacles, now you can’t really. Players can just run around the enemy, all due to that extra dimension. This means to make the game anywhere near as challenging, other challenges must be added. If for example, in Mario 64 you just had to reach the end of the level it would be very easy on most levels, because all the enemies are easily avoided in the third dimension, unless you are in a small area.
2D platformers were also simplistic in design, easy to make, so developers could do lots of interesting stuff in the game. Sonic 3 (and Sonic & Knuckles) had loads of separate routes for the various characters, and even had different bosses. Super Mario World had lots of hidden routes and levels, and you could go back to many levels once a secret feature was uncovered to open up a new path. Ideas like this are much harder to implement in the third dimension.
3D platformers also have a harder time being fast paced. In two dimensions you can simply run through, jumping to avoid getting hit by enemies or falling down pits. In 3D you have to worry about the camera, and the camera angle can often be inadequate for pixel (or polygon) perfect jumping.
In my opinion, three dimensional platformers and two dimensional platformers are totally separate genres. For this reason I think developers (especially Nintendo and Sega) should make new 2D platformers for the next generation consoles. They are easy to create, both already have a huge back catalogue of characters and ideas they can implement, and most importantly, this genre is supremely playable. 2D and 3D platformers can exist together, and if developers weren’t so worried that people wouldn’t be ‘wowed’ by them, just because they aren’t 3D, then the two genres would co-exist.
Think about Super Mario World and the Sonic series in the 16-bit era. Now think about the 3D updates. Granted, those two examples were very different in the 16-bit times, but they had the same basic structure. Get through the level (usually from left to right) without dying. Get to the end of the level and proceed to the next. That is a very simplistic view of it but that’s what it was. Apart from getting to the end of each level there were no specific objectives that you needed to complete.
Now think about in 3D. You often need to enter 3D levels, and it is a very different level design. While, as before you could just run along a level and have enemies as the main obstacles, now you can’t really. Players can just run around the enemy, all due to that extra dimension. This means to make the game anywhere near as challenging, other challenges must be added. If for example, in Mario 64 you just had to reach the end of the level it would be very easy on most levels, because all the enemies are easily avoided in the third dimension, unless you are in a small area.
2D platformers were also simplistic in design, easy to make, so developers could do lots of interesting stuff in the game. Sonic 3 (and Sonic & Knuckles) had loads of separate routes for the various characters, and even had different bosses. Super Mario World had lots of hidden routes and levels, and you could go back to many levels once a secret feature was uncovered to open up a new path. Ideas like this are much harder to implement in the third dimension.
3D platformers also have a harder time being fast paced. In two dimensions you can simply run through, jumping to avoid getting hit by enemies or falling down pits. In 3D you have to worry about the camera, and the camera angle can often be inadequate for pixel (or polygon) perfect jumping.
In my opinion, three dimensional platformers and two dimensional platformers are totally separate genres. For this reason I think developers (especially Nintendo and Sega) should make new 2D platformers for the next generation consoles. They are easy to create, both already have a huge back catalogue of characters and ideas they can implement, and most importantly, this genre is supremely playable. 2D and 3D platformers can exist together, and if developers weren’t so worried that people wouldn’t be ‘wowed’ by them, just because they aren’t 3D, then the two genres would co-exist.
As far as I see it, too mant "3d" games are either using 2dimensional gameplay or don't need 3d... they only include it because it's demanded by the consumer.
Even more worrying are those games that are made worse by 3d... like Pac Man!
Sonic
Even more worrying are those games that are made worse by 3d... like Pac Man!
Sonic
Crash Bandicoot is a neat cross between the 3D and 2D platformer. Infact, it was the stepping stone from 2D to 3D.
It has the best of 3D - the good graphics and extra dimension of movement.
It also has the best of 2D - classic A-B platforming.
With Mario being in the exploration style, I'd rather see the next Donkey Kong in the Crash style (semi 3D).
After all, Cash bandicoot was heavily based on the Snes' Donkey Kong Country.
It has the best of 3D - the good graphics and extra dimension of movement.
It also has the best of 2D - classic A-B platforming.
With Mario being in the exploration style, I'd rather see the next Donkey Kong in the Crash style (semi 3D).
After all, Cash bandicoot was heavily based on the Snes' Donkey Kong Country.
yeah, but I don't have a PS2... and I want a new Nintendo 2D platformer! Sega are making a new one for GBA!
A bit ironic that Sega are making new 2D games for it, but Nintendo are just re-releasing Mario titles!
A bit ironic that Sega are making new 2D games for it, but Nintendo are just re-releasing Mario titles!
Klonoa 2 on PS2 is a bit of a 2D game though it looks 3D.
Yes, a 2D Platformer made today could be massive in scale, have an interesting story with cut-scenes, and yet still maintain the addictive and fun "old skool" playability. Imagine an modern 2D version of Flash Back for instance on the PS2.... Why new 2D Platformers have all but disappeared is a great loss to videogames. I also agree that 2D and 3D Platformers are seperate genres. Good point.
I have recently been thinking about 3D and 2D games, in particular one genre that is now all but extinct. The 2D platformer. Now I am not entirely sure why this is. I have some ideas why, and many of you will probably take the obvious reason, which is because of 3D platformers. But does that extra dimension make the game a whole different genre? I aim to prove that it does with this post.
Think about Super Mario World and the Sonic series in the 16-bit era. Now think about the 3D updates. Granted, those two examples were very different in the 16-bit times, but they had the same basic structure. Get through the level (usually from left to right) without dying. Get to the end of the level and proceed to the next. That is a very simplistic view of it but that’s what it was. Apart from getting to the end of each level there were no specific objectives that you needed to complete.
Now think about in 3D. You often need to enter 3D levels, and it is a very different level design. While, as before you could just run along a level and have enemies as the main obstacles, now you can’t really. Players can just run around the enemy, all due to that extra dimension. This means to make the game anywhere near as challenging, other challenges must be added. If for example, in Mario 64 you just had to reach the end of the level it would be very easy on most levels, because all the enemies are easily avoided in the third dimension, unless you are in a small area.
2D platformers were also simplistic in design, easy to make, so developers could do lots of interesting stuff in the game. Sonic 3 (and Sonic & Knuckles) had loads of separate routes for the various characters, and even had different bosses. Super Mario World had lots of hidden routes and levels, and you could go back to many levels once a secret feature was uncovered to open up a new path. Ideas like this are much harder to implement in the third dimension.
3D platformers also have a harder time being fast paced. In two dimensions you can simply run through, jumping to avoid getting hit by enemies or falling down pits. In 3D you have to worry about the camera, and the camera angle can often be inadequate for pixel (or polygon) perfect jumping.
In my opinion, three dimensional platformers and two dimensional platformers are totally separate genres. For this reason I think developers (especially Nintendo and Sega) should make new 2D platformers for the next generation consoles. They are easy to create, both already have a huge back catalogue of characters and ideas they can implement, and most importantly, this genre is supremely playable. 2D and 3D platformers can exist together, and if developers weren’t so worried that people wouldn’t be ‘wowed’ by them, just because they aren’t 3D, then the two genres would co-exist.
Think about Super Mario World and the Sonic series in the 16-bit era. Now think about the 3D updates. Granted, those two examples were very different in the 16-bit times, but they had the same basic structure. Get through the level (usually from left to right) without dying. Get to the end of the level and proceed to the next. That is a very simplistic view of it but that’s what it was. Apart from getting to the end of each level there were no specific objectives that you needed to complete.
Now think about in 3D. You often need to enter 3D levels, and it is a very different level design. While, as before you could just run along a level and have enemies as the main obstacles, now you can’t really. Players can just run around the enemy, all due to that extra dimension. This means to make the game anywhere near as challenging, other challenges must be added. If for example, in Mario 64 you just had to reach the end of the level it would be very easy on most levels, because all the enemies are easily avoided in the third dimension, unless you are in a small area.
2D platformers were also simplistic in design, easy to make, so developers could do lots of interesting stuff in the game. Sonic 3 (and Sonic & Knuckles) had loads of separate routes for the various characters, and even had different bosses. Super Mario World had lots of hidden routes and levels, and you could go back to many levels once a secret feature was uncovered to open up a new path. Ideas like this are much harder to implement in the third dimension.
3D platformers also have a harder time being fast paced. In two dimensions you can simply run through, jumping to avoid getting hit by enemies or falling down pits. In 3D you have to worry about the camera, and the camera angle can often be inadequate for pixel (or polygon) perfect jumping.
In my opinion, three dimensional platformers and two dimensional platformers are totally separate genres. For this reason I think developers (especially Nintendo and Sega) should make new 2D platformers for the next generation consoles. They are easy to create, both already have a huge back catalogue of characters and ideas they can implement, and most importantly, this genre is supremely playable. 2D and 3D platformers can exist together, and if developers weren’t so worried that people wouldn’t be ‘wowed’ by them, just because they aren’t 3D, then the two genres would co-exist.