|
|
Stevie
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
posted December 25, 2014 06:29 PM |
|
|
|
Pawek_13
Supreme Hero
Maths, maths everywhere!
|
|
posted December 25, 2014 09:12 PM |
|
|
Stevie said:
I hope you're being sarcastic of Heroes 6 
But who?
|
|
Stevie
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted December 25, 2014 11:03 PM |
|
|
|
MattII
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted December 26, 2014 08:33 AM |
|
|
Stevie said:
I hope you're being sarcastic of Heroes 6
No I was theorising that you could make a 2D game more cheaply than if you tried to draw every sprite.
|
|
dark-whisperer
Famous Hero
Darkness feels no mercy
|
|
posted December 26, 2014 10:47 AM |
|
|
I need some clarification on your wishes for 2D. Do you peeps want pure 2D game like it was done 15 years ago (hand painted or made in 3d then converted to pure 2D), or 3D with with fixed angle (like Trine)?
And what really bothers you with 3D execution? What are advantages of 2D view?
|
|
okrane
Famous Hero
|
|
posted December 26, 2014 11:37 AM |
|
|
dark-whisperer said:
I need some clarification on your wishes for 2D. Do you peeps want pure 2D game like it was done 15 years ago (hand painted or made in 3d then converted to pure 2D), or 3D with with fixed angle (like Trine)?
And what really bothers you with 3D execution? What are advantages of 2D view?
2D has plenty of advantages.If you compare H5 to H3 you will see that:
1. it's easier to see what's on the map
2. it's better for strategizing movement
3. it's easier to make new maps by any mapmaker
4. the game is cheaper to make
5. the maps seem more rich
6. combat is more clear
It can be a 3D with perspective view like Civilisation or Eador who look very good in our own age
|
|
TDL
Honorable
Supreme Hero
The weak suffer. I endure.
|
|
posted December 26, 2014 02:38 PM |
|
|
Even if I like what they had done with heroes games in the days of yore, I can't see them going back to 2D as it would be just horrendous. They should just swap the FPS look of MMX legacy with an overhead view and we'd have clear and suitable graphics for the game...
____________
|
|
Stevie
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted December 26, 2014 03:28 PM |
|
Edited by Stevie at 15:56, 26 Dec 2014.
|
1. it's easier to see what's on the map - not related to 3D, but to objects and angle.
2. it's better for strategizing movement - how is it better when there's practically no difference?
3. it's easier to make new maps by any mapmaker - not related to 3D but to Map Editor tools.
4. the game is cheaper to make - it would only be cheaper in the absence of any kind of angle switches. If you're animating 2D it's hugely more expensive and harder to make.
5. the maps seem more rich - not related to 3D but to objects.
6. combat is more clear - again not related to 3D but to objects and background designs.
The only real difference that is important for the user is the art and graphical detail, which is imo much better in 2D.
|
|
Galaad
Hero of Order
Li mort as morz, li vif as vis
|
|
posted December 26, 2014 05:13 PM |
|
Edited by Galaad at 17:48, 26 Dec 2014.
|
Business is of course the reason, after all comments I’ve read from young gamers depicting 2D games as “from a prehistoric era”, Ubisoft is probably unwilling to take the risk of going 2D, which would look like a step backwards at first glance. I say which would look, because I surely don't think so.
I too wholly agree that 2D fits better the Heroes franchise, and not only for (that seems obvious to me) aesthetical reasons.
I don’t know about you, but to me 2D has much more visibility and highlights each detail at its best.
One of the reasons I think Ubisoft should go 2D is because they would have more time focusing on content than in-battle cinematics for instance, which asks for a lot of resources. I think they do this in a concern of immersing you into the game, to actually compensate the lack of visibility. In H2 or H3, I simply don’t need those in-battles animations, because I’m already immersed by the game itself. Designers are struggling doing outstanding 3D models that we only will be able to admire within these cut-scenes that I personally disable, while the townscreens being in 3D as in H5 certainly were greatly received by most. So in my opinion, they should be doing the opposite : 2D game with 3D townscreens. Don’t get me wrong though, my personal preference goes for 2D townscreens.
So, my feeling tends towards them doing bad use of working time. Mechanics must be deep for a, sorry, not a but THE King of TBS. I’m always sad when I think about actual technology that permits to create unique atmosphere, ultra detailed game using 2D. Yes, I believe 2D is the real eye candy.
My true feeling is that only a 2D Heroes game (MMH8?) could eventually put back H3 in the closet 
____________
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted December 26, 2014 05:30 PM |
|
|
Well, almost every year, there is a thread about this. Me, Sal, Corribus and bunch of other members agree with the new fella and everybody say why dont they make it but they never do...
It's indeed easier to both navigate and make maps in 2D (unless some hypothetical, incredibely user friendly 3D editor is the case), I learned to use the H3 map editor with all of it's main properties in a few days, not the case with H5. Also 3D random maps are mostly buggy and they crash much more often, the game slows down much more quickly when playing big maps with many AI opponents. Almost everything about a 3D map is an extra burden and in return what do we get, a game that looks better? Not really... Actually, not at all.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
Geny
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
What if Elvin was female?
|
|
posted December 26, 2014 05:37 PM |
|
Edited by Geny at 17:37, 26 Dec 2014.
|
I'm tired of hearing this over and over and over, so I'll just say this: if you think 3D has no place in Heroes, play one of the new King's Bounty games.
Just be ready to be proved wrong.
|
|
Galaad
Hero of Order
Li mort as morz, li vif as vis
|
|
posted December 26, 2014 05:38 PM |
|
Edited by Galaad at 01:04, 28 Dec 2014.
|
I simply disagree
Better than what we've seen from Ubi so far I'll grant you that, but I still favor 2D.
I will just repost the Trine 2 pic.
____________
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted December 26, 2014 05:49 PM |
|
|
Such a 3D battlefield isnt something I would strongly object. It's the 3D adventure map that causes all the issues I speak of.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
Galaad
Hero of Order
Li mort as morz, li vif as vis
|
|
posted December 26, 2014 05:53 PM |
|
|
If you go and look at it, KB's adventure map is clearer than Ubi ones too, but, to my impression, 2D goes far beyond. As Salamandre said, you don't have this camera problem with axes and perspectives.
____________
|
|
MattII
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted December 26, 2014 06:32 PM |
|
|
|
IMO, so many of the issues with the previous 3D versions of heroes aren't matters of perspective, but of scale. Take a look at the size of the trees and mountains in H3 compared to the size of the heroes and visitable map objects.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted December 26, 2014 06:44 PM |
|
|
But that is inevitable with 3D, in 2D map, objects and buildings are icons, their proportion to each other doesnt matter, a barrack and a castle can be close in size. That would look absurd and weird in 3D.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
dark-whisperer
Famous Hero
Darkness feels no mercy
|
|
posted December 26, 2014 07:07 PM |
|
|
Did any of you really missed a creature on combat map because you simply didn't see it? Did you ever misplayed because of that? I say that all the talk about visibility in combat is nonsense.
Adventure map looks like Christmas tree in both games. I missed resources or map objects in both games. 3D view is not interfering with visibility. On Galaad's screenshots I find HVI map to be less cluttered and objects are clearly visible and that is even more enhanced when they are animated.
As for the terrain, map objects, water in particular 3D is light years ahead in my opinion.
It comes to personal preference and taste. There is nothing OBJECTIVELY better or more functional in 2D. It just makes game look cheaper.
|
|
Pawek_13
Supreme Hero
Maths, maths everywhere!
|
|
posted December 26, 2014 07:44 PM |
|
|
dark-whisperer said:
It comes to personal preference and taste. There is nothing OBJECTIVELY better or more functional in 2D. It just makes game look cheaper.
There has been such a big advancement in terms of technology during 15 years from Heroes III that I am sure that costs of creating a 3D game are the same as 2D one (especially when 2D game utilizes 3D sprites like in Heroes III).
The only problem with 3D maps is that in Heroes VI when everything is collected and every creature is beaten they seem to be empty. Otherwise they are just as good as 2D ones. Moreoer, I consider battlefields in 3D to be clearer than ones in 2D.
|
|
kiryu133
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Highly illogical
|
|
posted December 26, 2014 07:55 PM |
|
|
eh, 3d environments always makes the world seem so much smaller. remember that necro-sylvan border missions in h3 and 5? how it was the entire north-eastern Deyjan border in h3 while in h5 it was like one single border control? that's my problem with 3d: scale appears to be much smaller while in 2d you can have maps spanning countries or even continents. Viking we shall go, anyone? that was most of europe in a single map. h5 could never do that without feeling cut-off or small. could be made, but you'd have to zoom out a whole bunch.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted December 26, 2014 08:03 PM |
|
|
There are no huge maps in 3D and we are not talking about hypothetical things here, yes, if you look hard enough, of course you'll find things, it's a game designed to let you, not an archeological site. But 2D is easier on the eye. Most people still play H3, it's still the king of the series and in terms of playability, practicality, revisitability, it's far ahead. It's technology is from 1999, it still beats all the graphic mambo jumbo. And about it being a matter of taste, of course it is, and claiming 2D looks cheap just because it's 2D tells a lot about how refined someone's taste is. That is the equivalent of liking a movie because of special effects although the script sucks.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
