|
| Thread: A mental exercise |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 4 · «PREV |
|
creepiestdani
Adventuring Hero
|
posted March 23, 2011 09:40 AM |
|
|
@Minnakht
Quote:
Then let's directly affect gameplay! Put some z-axis in the movement of everything! H4 had bridges, which allowed you to pass over terrain, forming what could be essentially two paths, one above and one below.
We are in two different language games, as Wittgenstein would put it, we use the word "3D" with different meanings. When I initially said "3D" I was actually referring to polygonal graphics.
There are two kinds of graphics systems: sprite-based and polygonal. A sprite-based game can be "3D" in that it can use the z-axis, but it comes with inherent limitations, owing to the grid system. Only a polygonal game can be truly 3D. In being turn-based, Heroes 6 is subject to the inherent limitations of the grid system, that is, by the inherent limitations of a sprite-based game.
You could have one hero on top of another in H4 because there were two grids, one over the other, thus creating two elevation levels.
Quote:
Now imagine that, but with even more path levels! With more than surface and subterranean. Imagine a map in a hollowed-out mountain, with several floor levels inside it. Mint-boggling maps with so many extra paths you can ambush the hell out of people or avoid other armies.
Even the battlefields could have high and low ground on them instead of being flat like an unlucky girl.
Also hiding behind objects
I've played Dwarf Fortress myself. It is a 2D game - why, it's an ASCII game, even. But it has those z-levels, and how.
As you yourself admitted, it can be done in 2D, or, more clearly, with sprites. The question however is: is it good for Heroes? More complex does not necessarily mean better, as those who made Master of Orion 3 have surely learned, especially since Heroes is great the way it is. Plus, much complexity can be achieved with the current system. These are great ideas but, in my view, not for Heroes. Surely, you can riddle the Chess board with obstacles and change the function of the pieces, and you might even get a great game, but it would no longer be Chess.
@Kenishi
Quote:
First thing that comes in mind is a more interactive battle ground, right now to some degree is being implemented like flooding area and appearing obstacles during battles etc, so I'm thinking of plain levels higher and lower ground for example moving archers on high ground would eliminate ranged penalty (to some degree or entirely), or increases the dmg it deals.
Charging from a higher ground would increase the speed while the opposite would be true also.
Destroying castle walls in a siege would deal some dmg in form of debris to the creatures in it's vicinity.
That's some of the things I can think of there could be more, but as i said the option to use it is there just not implemented.
All those things can be done with sprites. You can't do more with polygonal graphics because you're restricted by the grid system.
Quote:
as it seams among us there would find audience for a 2D version
I'm very curious how many are out there.
I managed to delete my old post by mistake while editing it. Silly me. :|
|
|
Kenishi
Famous Hero
passed out drunk in Tavern's
|
|
posted March 23, 2011 10:16 AM |
|
Edited by Kenishi at 10:19, 23 Mar 2011.
|
|
creepiestdani
Adventuring Hero
|
posted March 23, 2011 10:23 AM |
|
|
Quote:
http://www.cpp-home.com/tutorials/199_1.htm although the top is a bit different still interesting read
http://www.gameproducer.net/2009/04/05/2d-versus-3d/
Some good points in those articles. But what it all boils down to in the end is:
Is there still a market for 2D games?
I'd argue, not really. It's not a question of whether there are people who would play such games, clearly there are, but whether there are people willing to pay for them. If you make a 2D and 3D versions of the same game, you can't charge as much for the 2D version due to public perception, even if just as much work went into into making it.
|
|
MattII
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted March 23, 2011 11:53 AM |
|
|
|
Nocturnal
Promising
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted March 23, 2011 02:13 PM |
|
|
Quote:
This is how I would illustrate the difference between 2D-sprites, 3D-sprites, and polygons:
images
Three visual styles, the same game. The same with Heroes.
Thanks for this images, they cleared the air for me. But, seing this, what you prefer H6 to be the most is 2D-sprites or 3D-sprites?
|
|
creepiestdani
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted March 23, 2011 02:46 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Thanks for this images, they cleared the air for me. But, seing this, what you prefer H6 to be the most is 2D-sprites or 3D-sprites?
I prefer 2D-sprites, but the new battle system that uses a chess-like grid is more difficult to represent with 2D-sprites. Here are a few more pictures illustrating the difference:
Heroes 3, the adventure map (2D-sprites)
Heroes 4, the adventure map (3D-sprites)
Heroes 3, during battles (2D-sprites)
Heroes 4, during battles (3D-sprites)
For a 2D version of Heroes 6 they could use either 2D or 3D-sprites on the adventure map, and 3D-sprites during battles.
|
|
MattII
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted March 23, 2011 08:07 PM |
|
|
|
Um, creepiestdani, H4 uses 2D isometric sprites, not 3D sprites.
|
|
creepiestdani
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted March 23, 2011 09:02 PM |
|
|
Ah, "isometric", that's the word I needed. 
The term "3D-sprites" is an invention of mine, and describes 3D objects turned into sprites. Most (if not all) in-game models in Heroes 4, from dwellings to creatures, are 3D objects, but were converted into isometric sprites. Also, certain in-game models in Heroes 3, such as the creatures, were also 3D objects, but converted into non-isometric sprites. They could have achieved the same effect using 2D objects, but it would have involved a lot more work, and in case of isometric sprites, mind-bogglingly more work.
In this game keep in mind they had to manually draw the characters facing all eight directions, and then create animations for each frame by frame!
|
|
MrDragon
Supreme Hero
Eats people with Ketchup
|
|
posted March 24, 2011 12:20 AM |
|
Edited by MrDragon at 00:24, 24 Mar 2011.
|
2D/3D hybrid game coming out later this year for the PS3. (well coming our in US/Europe, Japan's already had it for about a month... lucky snows.)
Only the terrain is 3D, because the way the combat system works and you can (and have to) turn the camera sometimes to see what's going on.
All the character graphics are completely 2D though, and loving it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PsdxO-xZgDQ
Yes it's very silly, no, you shouldn't take it seriously, but it is a big budget title of a surprisingly popular RPG series. (I myself own Disgaea 2 AND 3, love both those games.)
And all it's character graphics are in 2D AND ITS FINE THAT WAY!
In fact, I predict if you tried to design these characters in 3D, they'd lose a lot of their charm.
Once again though to re-itterate: I don't care about 2D or 3D, graphics-wise as long as the game is playable and looks good enough (good enough for me being Snes graphics from the 90s.) I'm not complaining about graphics.
Edit: I think that's prolly the most outragously stupid looking trailer Nippon Ichi ever put together, but it illustrates my point nicely.
|
| |
|
|
Never so an implementation of this sort in a 2D game ...
