User Avatar Image

2D vs. 3D

posted by Anonymous on - last edited - Viewed by 821 users

Who around here agrees with me that the old school 2D adventure games had a better atmosphere than most of the new 3D adventure games?? Sam and Max looks really good so far and is one of the few adventure games I can say of that it feels like the 2D adventure games, but the 4th monkey island game was ruined by the 3D style (probably because the 3d graphics weren't very advanced back then) and while I loved Grim Fandango I didn't like the 3D much. The controlls were kinda hard. I love how telltale uses the point a click style in 3D.

I guess it takes a much longer time to make a 2D adventure game than a 3D modelled one, cause in 3D you can reuse items and models etc.. The game a runaway is fully in 2D and I think that captures the atmosphere the best. It really gives you the feeling you're playing a cartoon and not a 3D shooter.. The 3D style makes a lot of adventure games look dull.. Take the demo of broken sword 4 as example.. It just doesn't feel right. The game Ankh had a good atmosphere though and felt more old-school. Still if I had a choise I would say 2D adventure games for the win..

15 Comments - Linear Discussion: Classic Style
  • User Avatar Image
    Anonymous

    I vote 3D! - Or actually, whichever seems most relevant to the project...

    2D graphics can definitely add a storybook atmosphere, but I can never get over the impression it's just some 2D graphics with a load of bounding boxes thrown on the screen... PacMan with a storyline :D

    Whereas with 3D the character is genuinely moving around & interacting with their environment (abet in a mathematical sense).

  • Cassius Pearl.... thanks for the info, I'll be checking it VERY often :D Looks great!

  • [quote]Sometimes the adventure games just look too empty if they're in 3D. 2D or 2.5D games just have this certain charm around them that can't really be done with 3D games.. A lot of emotion gets lost in 3D games.[/quote]

    I think this depends a lot more on the art direction than whether the graphics are 2D or 3D.

    If you look at a game like Syberia... a lot of people think those are gorgeous graphics. To me, they're very blah and drab, and it's not helped by the fact that there's practically nothing to interact with.

  • User Avatar Image
    Anonymous

    Personally I think that 3D really helps to improve the visual narration, because it allows to change shots without the additional work Emily was talking about. Looking at the comparison between the BS4 shot and the Runaway 2 shot the first thing I think is that in BS4 I will be able to watch the characters from every angle. The only chance I'll have to do that in Runaway 2 will be during the cutscenes. ;)
    When I play old-school graphic adventures I feel like I'm watching a play, with the characters acting on a stage. It may be more detailed, but it's static. I'm not a rookie, I've been playing adventure games for more than 15 years, but I really think that a good solid 3D is the way to go for the future.
    That said, I don't mind a good 2D adventure game like Runaway once in a while.

  • More info on Cassius Pearl (incl. link to trailer) here on the Adventuregamers forums.

  • 2D games feel to me to be less enthralling for the player. Sure, you're clicking away and having fun but YOU can't really explore the world presented yourself. 3D on the other hand allows you to actually see the world and explore it much like reality. It's a little like the difference between looking at a picture of an event and watching a video of the event. You get a lot of detail from one but the other allows you to actually almost experience the event for yourself albiet in a basic way.

    As for more "emotion", I've been replaying Dreamfall lately. That has got to be one of the most beautiful worlds I have ever seen in a game. Apart from the vibrant and stunning graphics, the world was detailed and alive enough to actually seem real. It doesn't really matter which way you set the game (2D or 3D), what really gives it an "emotional" feel is how much effort the developers put into it. Furthermore, as I was able to personally explore the world and there was still plenty enough to see and do, it gave me that warm fuzzy feeling that games like Monkey Island and Sam and Max give me as it was exceptionally detailed.

    That said, I also enjoyed playing The Longest Journey. In my opinion, it doesn't really matter whether the game is 2D or 3D, it all comes down to how alive the world is. If the world is poorly designed and coloured, then the game isn't going to be particularly fun regardless of whether it's in 2D or 3D. If the world is filled with interesting things and little bits of detail PLUS it's actually easy to explore, then you've got a winner.

    Finally, having clicked numerous links it appears there's going to be a DS port of Cassius Pearl. I'm excited despite only having a very basic level of knowledge surrounding what the game is about! But it's by the French which can only be a good thing!

  • I started to play Dreamfall yesterday and I must say it really impressed me. In spite of 3D and a "serious" plot, it's really fresh and lovable to play.
    Anyway! I can't wait for the release of The Whispered World and The Orgastic 4, if you never heard about them take a look http://www.bad-brain.com
    Old-school adventure fashion!

  • User Avatar Image
    Anonymous

    I agree that dreamfall had a great world.. It looks great.. I love the colours. The game was more like a movie though and I prefer the longest journey 1 over dreamfall.

  • User Avatar Image
    Anonymous

    I agree with you, absolutely. There's something intangibly wonderful about the atmosphere of cartoony, 2-dimensional adventure games.

  • User Avatar Image
    Anonymous

    For graphic adventure games, it rarely matters. It's all about solving puzzles at no particular pace, exploring environments, interacting with characters, seeing a story unfold.... Where do any of these things have particular advantage in 3D or 2D? I suppose you could make an argument that environments are more alive in 2D games, but it still comes down to art, basically. 2D or 3D, they can be ugly if the art isn't any good.

    I'm not really a fan of choosing 3D for bone. Moving to 3D lost the feel of a graphic novel. Maybe they could have kept it with a much larger budget, but whatever. From what little I've played of Bone, it seemed to nail the writing, character voice and story of Bone with more than enough accuracy.

Add Comment