Traditional animation vs. 3D animation...

[Giant Tope]

But it's still done in 3D. Everything but the characters and user interface are in 3D. Not to say that the Telltale Tool is incapable of doing Puzzle Agent using only illustrations (on a 3D axis). The difference is that whereas Puzzle Agent is generally fixed camera, I can't imagine King's Quest, with the cinematic notion that Telltale has taken to, staying fixed all the time. That would complicate things for the 2D backgrounds.

[G.byrne]

Originally Posted by Giant Tope

But it's still done in 3D. Everything but the characters and user interface are in 3D. Not to say that the Telltale Tool is incapable of doing Puzzle Agent using only illustrations (on a 3D axis). The difference is that whereas Puzzle Agent is generally fixed camera, I can't imagine King's Quest, with the cinematic notion that Telltale has taken to, staying fixed all the time. That would complicate things for the 2D backgrounds.

If I was mistaken about the game being 3D I apologize, but my intention was to point out that the game appears to be more hand drawn than 3D CGI. There aren't lots of 3D camera angles, there isn't a lot of wide open environments with CG animations... The game looks like it was drawn by hand where the other games look like they were sculpted on a computer.

[DAISHI]

I'd be thrilled if it looked like The Whispered World.

[thom-22]

Originally Posted by G.byrne

If I was mistaken about the game being 3D I apologize, but my intention was to point out that the game appears to be more hand drawn than 3D CGI.

I got that your real question was more about the look, rather than the technology behind it. So, no, you're not the only one -- I would like KQ to have more of a hand-drawn look. But it's not a huge issue for me, not nearly as important as getting the gameplay right.

[GuybrushWilco]

I don't really care as long as it looks nice. I'd much rather see good 2D than bad 3D.

[icedan]

I have downloaded and played both Monkey Island and BTTF games from TT, both I ended up stopping half way through the first episode because the 3D engine is simply not suitable for adventure games. Adventure games are best designed with a 2D background and preferably a 2D character animation.

I just pretended Monkey Island Tales weren't part of the real franchise and left it alone, just like I did with Monkey Island 4 for mostly the same reason. Then you came out with BTTF, I was excited to hear the news, but that 3D engine kept nagging at the back of my head, I played BTTF and I was right, it's frustrating as hell.

Now TT, you are stepping into fierce territory, you can't just pick up Kings Quest and make it the way you think it's best to. You will be up against the most hardcore of adventure game fans of all time. Kings Quest is meant to be in 2D, it's best in 2D and not only that but you should consider a hard-option by where players have to type in everything, these two should save your arse, if you use your silly 3D engine to make this game, I will have lost any hope for TT. It IS important, it sets the mood, the scene, the users connection with the game. Your puzzles are OK, your stories are fairly good but your engine doesn't work.

I'm not the biggest Kings Quest fan out there, but I am one of the biggest Space Quest and Leisure Suit Larry fans out there and I fear if you take Kings Quest down the path of BTTF or MI Tales, then I'll be pissed if you ever take on the likes of LSL and Space Quest. Please do it right.

[MusicallyInspired]

Lol. No way they're ever going to work in 2D, dude. Ever.

[icedan]

Originally Posted by MusicallyInspired

Lol. No way they're ever going to work in 2D, dude. Ever.

If we don't speak out, then there's no hope for change. I don't think they are even aware how bad their engine is compared to a simple 2D adventure game.

[Woodsyblue]

Pretty much all video game genres have had to move into 3D to survive, some were more successful at this than others. It was called the '90s. I see no reason why an adventure games aren't suitable for 3D.

Grim Fandango is one of the greatest adventure games of all time and it was 3D with pre-rendered backgrounds. I'd like to hear some of your reasons why you believe 'Adventure games are best designed with a flat 2D background.' I can't think of single thing a 2D adventure game can do that a 3D one can't.

[icedan]

Originally Posted by Woodsyblue

Pretty much all video game genres have had to move into 3D to survive, some were more successful at this than others. It was called the '90s. I see no reason why an adventure games aren't suitable for 3D.

Grim Fandango is one of the greatest adventure games of all time and it was 3D with pre-rendered backgrounds. I'd like to hear some of your reasons why you believe 'Adventure games are best designed with a flat 2D background.' I can't think of single thing a 2D adventure game can do that a 3D one can't.

Grim Fandango, as you said, has pre-rendered 2D Backgrounds, it never got frustrating. Same goes for The Longest Journey. It's ok if its pre-rendered.

Maybe others here can help me, but off the top of my head:

1. A LOT of detail can be put into the scenes.
2. Detail adds to the gameplay value, there's a sense of adventure and exploration.
3. It looks better.
4. It's easier to navigate when you can see where everything is at once and know where all your exits are, I found in TT games, it wasn't always clear where the other rooms are or where exactly you are standing in a particular room (the Doc's house in BTTF comes to mind).
5. Moving the character around in 3D space can get very frustrating, I can't imagine how frustrating it would be for those who are not experienced with moving in 3D, it would totally alienate them.

[icedan]

Let's compare some scenes:

Flat World:


3D World:


Flat World:


3D World:

Can you see where all the exits are in this screen?

[tomimt]

Modern realtime 3D can be just as detailed, or even more so, than old pre-rendered graphics. It's just the qustion of the style and what the engine used can do. The comparision shots you've chosen aren't really fair, as the art style in them is very different. The pre-rendered ones try to approach realism, in where the realtime ones are more cartoony.

[icedan]

You need to convince me with some evidence tomimt. I know adventure games well, I like to make adventure games and as an artist focus on background and character art as well as the overall design. If there are adventure games out there that play in real-time 3D world with more detail than a 2D game, I'd REALLY like to see it, not because I think it would be better (because you still have to contend with the navigation problems).

[Radogol]

The Longest Journey is every bit as 3D as Escape from Monkey Island. What were you thinking?

[Lambonius]

Originally Posted by Radogol

The Longest Journey is every bit as 3D as Escape from Monkey Island. What were you thinking?

Yeah, that was a really bad comparison. I was just thinking the same thing. They both use 3D characters on 2D backgrounds.

It seems to me what you dislike more than 3D vs. 2D is a cartoon aesthetic vs. a realistic one. The only difference in "detail" in the examples you've shown has to do with the art direction, not the engine.

Granted, I'd love to see a KQ game with hand-painted 2D backgrounds in 1080p. That would be a dream come true. But no one will ever do it, unfortunately. It just doesn't fit the current model for what a video game is supposed to be.

[icedan]

The Longest Journey's background are pre-rendered, not real-time. There is a huge difference in the way the viewing angle is presented, the navigation controls of the main character and you can touch up still images in photoshop.

I don't care if it's cartooned (although I prefer it not to be), but you've missed the point if you think that's why I dislike 3D.

[Radogol]

Originally Posted by icedan

The Longest Journey's background are pre-rendered, not real-time.

So are Escape's.

Originally Posted by icedan

There is a huge difference in the way the viewing angle is presented, the navigation controls of the main character.

All right, but that's a design choice, not something that results from using real-time graphics over pre-baked ones.

[icedan]

Originally Posted by Radogol

So are Escape's.

Are you serious? *mind blown*.

[Olaus Petrus]

This brings back memories as I had the discussion if 3D is suitable for adventure games back in the 90s. And I actually preferred 3D compared to FMV (which was hot back then), because for example in GK3 it gave much greater feeling of exploring and direct control than FMV of GK2.

It's true that 3D of 90's hasn't aged particularly well, although it looked nice back then. However many more recent adventures which use 3D graphics don't look that badly aged, I still think that, for example, Syberia II (2004) has pretty graphics.

Besides these days most adventure games are either 3D or use 3D graphics which are disguised to look like 2D and real 2D is rarity. So I don't see why KQ should use real 2D.

Also I would find it suitable that new game would use similar style as first four KQ games, which were advertised as 3D games, although this time with real 3D graphics.

[icedan]

Being popular doesn't make it right. I've dealt with both 3D and 2D engines for different genres, in the beginning I was fighting for 3D because back in the 90's it seemed like the next thing. But I have come to the strong conclusion that in some cases, 2D is just better. 3D is good if you want to move around the world quickly. It's not good if you are going from one scene to another that contains many puzzles using many objects lying around.


btw, 3D graphics these days are still as terrible as they have been for a long time. I have a strong feeling most graphic designers do not want to use 3D to make their games because they know it downgrades the overall quality, in other words, it has no feeling, no character, art requires finer touches than modeled shapes and rendered textures.