Your thoughts on franchises gone 3D?

[elviticus]

Racing games - these are a really good use of 3D. Other than this genre, I mostly prefer 2D. I hate (mostly) 3D platformers - make you sick, and hard to figure out what you're doing! However, first person shooters - good in 3D.

 

The remake of a classic I liked in 3D - Defender. Not perfect, but a pretty fun and faithful remake. (PS2 version, not the weird Jaguar one)

[darthkur]

IHMO, the fundamental reason why 2D games rarely make good transitions to 3D is related to play mechanics. Gamers who grew up during the 2D era (Atari 2600 to SNES/Genesis) developed a preference (some could even say "fondness") for games that they could get into quickly, without the need to read a 24+ page manual just to understand the controls and in-game features. In a 2D platform game, you walk/run, you press a button to jump, another button to shoot, and you learn the rest as you play. In an old-school RPG, you move characters around a world map, engage in random battles and experience the game's feature through an easy-to-use menu system. In a shoot'em-up, you maneuver your little ship in a 2D plane and shoot everything that moves. Almost all of the 2D classics take seconds to learn and get into, and that's where their enduring appeal lies.

 

And then there's 3D, which introduced us to the joy of having 10 different buttons on our controllers, with each new 3D game using these 10 buttons in a different way. Under these conditions, learning the controls and getting into a game is a far more time-consuming affair, and when the actual game is not that good to begin with, is it so surprising that many people look back to the "old days" with nostalgia?

 

 

Precisely! I can't see how any game can be fun when the requisites are studying a manual the size of a small novel and memorizing three dozen complex combinations on a controller that looks more like a remote control for an entire entertainment system. Plus it doesn't help that the different rates of motion from the foreground, background and main characters make you violently ill.

[vdub_bobby]

I'll try to sum up some of the comments so far:

 

Good 2D-to-3D transitions:

Metroid

Ninja Gaiden

Super Mario Bros.

Daytona USA

Metal Gear

Duke Nukem

GTA

Donkey Kong (Country)

Pong

Dune

Missile Command

Racing games

Defender

 

Bad 2D-to-3D transitions:

Sonic

Mega Man

Castlevania

Frogger

Outrun

Fatal Fury

Blaster Master

Gex

Street Fighter

Bubsy

EA NHL series

 

 

Mixed reactions:

Prince of Persia

Zelda

Edited May 14, 2007 by vdub_bobby

[Segataritensoftii]

Bad 2D-to-3D transitions:

Sonic

Mega Man

Castlevania

Frogger

Outrun

Fatal Fury

Blaster Master

Gex

Street Fighter

Bubsy

EA NHL series

Many may disagree with you on Outrun. From what I've heard, Outrun 2 and Coast 2 Coast are absolutely stellar 3D conversions. Or is there a terrible "Outrun 3D" I haven't heard about. Also, put Road Rash on there. RR3D is fecking terrible from what I've heard.

 

Fun fact: Did you know there were no less than 3 different 3D conversions of Lode Runner? 2(LR3D, Lode Runner 2) are from companies, while the last one(Turbo Lode) is freeware. All are great games, and well worth your time and money.

[jboypacman]

Coast to Coast is a blast to play.

[JB]

Racing games - these are a really good use of 3D. Other than this genre, I mostly prefer 2D. I hate (mostly) 3D platformers - make you sick, and hard to figure out what you're doing!

I hate 3D platformers too.

Largely because the illusion of depth isn't good enough for me to do accurate platforming.

 

 

However, first person shooters - good in 3D.

I don't think there's such a thing as a 2D FPS.

[Segataritensoftii]

I don't think there's such a thing as a 2D FPS.

Don't be so sure. A few have talked about doing it, so you never know. Basically a 2D FPS is a Wolf3D style game where the view is 2D from the first person. A line, basically. With other lines that would grow or shrink as they moved closer or further away from you. Weird, huh? Edited May 15, 2007 by Segataritensoftii

[vdub_bobby]

I don't think there's such a thing as a 2D FPS.

Don't be so sure. A few have talked about doing it, so you never know. Basically a 2D FPS is a Wolf3D style game where the view is 2D from the first person. A line, basically. With other lines that would grow or shrink as they moved closer or further away from you. Weird, huh?

If such a thing existed, it would basically be a completely linear FPS. Instead of X, Y, and depth, you'd have depth and X or Y.

 

It would be weird.

 

And my comment above wasn't necessarily my opinion; I was just trying to sum up what had been said in the thread so far.

[joeybastard]

I don't think there's such a thing as a 2D FPS.

 

I think something like Taito's Operation Wolf would qualify as 2D FPS. It's definitely linear though.

[vdub_bobby]

I don't think there's such a thing as a 2D FPS.

 

I think something like Taito's Operation Wolf would qualify as 2D FPS. It's definitely linear though.

Actually...something like Wolfenstein 3D is probably closer to a 2D FPS. There is depth and width but no height. At least that's what I remember. Other candidates would be Skeleton on the 2600 or Battlezone and probably most other FPSes on the 2600. A true 3D FPS on the 2600 would be Star Fire.

 

Using 'FPS' somewhat loosely, of course.

[JB]

I don't think there's such a thing as a 2D FPS.

 

I think something like Taito's Operation Wolf would qualify as 2D FPS. It's definitely linear though.

Actually...something like Wolfenstein 3D is probably closer to a 2D FPS. There is depth and width but no height. At least that's what I remember.

Fixed height, but not no height. Otherwise everything would be too short to see.

[Hoodoo]

I think the difference is, when the 3d was good, you had a decent camera, and when it was bad, you didn't.

 

 

How many times did you die in Mario64 because you...didn't turn the fucking camera? YOU, the player should not be required to control the camera. That would be like going to the Matrix and looking at Keanu's ear for three hours because you didn't push the right buttons. Other times, like Zelda64, it wasn't so bad, because you could easily "snap" the focus back to exactly where you wanted it with one button press.

 

It isn't always the camera...sometimes, they take a game and completely change the essence of what the character normally does, like (yes I hated these too...) Mega Man legends, which had almost NONE of the fast paced action that made the originals so fun to play. I don't see it as nostalgia, per se, I see it more of "It wasn't broke....why'd they fix it?" I think these companies can't figure out how to do the successful formula on a new system without seeming derivative, so you end up with a lot of "gimmicks" like player controlled cameras, "special help" commands and the like to mask the fact that this just isnt the same anymore. Not that it SHOULD always be, but me? I would have LOVED a 2-d Mario64 using that systems graphic potential, I think it could have been MUCH better than Mario 64, beautiful, while still giving you the same formula you've loved and come to trust over the years.

[Segataritensoftii]

I think the difference is, when the 3d was good, you had a decent camera, and when it was bad, you didn't.

 

 

How many times did you die in Mario64 because you...didn't turn the fucking camera? YOU, the player should not be required to control the camera. That would be like going to the Matrix and looking at Keanu's ear for three hours because you didn't push the right buttons. Other times, like Zelda64, it wasn't so bad, because you could easily "snap" the focus back to exactly where you wanted it with one button press.

 

It isn't always the camera...sometimes, they take a game and completely change the essence of what the character normally does, like (yes I hated these too...) Mega Man legends, which had almost NONE of the fast paced action that made the originals so fun to play. I don't see it as nostalgia, per se, I see it more of "It wasn't broke....why'd they fix it?" I think these companies can't figure out how to do the successful formula on a new system without seeming derivative, so you end up with a lot of "gimmicks" like player controlled cameras, "special help" commands and the like to mask the fact that this just isnt the same anymore. Not that it SHOULD always be, but me? I would have LOVED a 2-d Mario64 using that systems graphic potential, I think it could have been MUCH better than Mario 64, beautiful, while still giving you the same formula you've loved and come to trust over the years.

This is exactly the problem with Lemmings 3D. The camera doesn't follow the characters automatically, so you're stuck using either the troublesome camera controls or virtual lemming mode, which doesn't work much better. And it doesn't help that the camera goes back to the same position it was in when you went into virtual lemming when you go out of it, which is sometimes very far away from where your lemmings actually are.

 

I believe that Exact will always and forever be the kings of the 3D camera, first and third person. Ghost In The Shell did the third person camera so incredibly well. Despite the lack of fisheye, the camera just WORKED. I could find no fault with it at all.

Edited May 16, 2007 by Segataritensoftii

[Video]

Lemmings.. Well, games that use 3D (polies) but are still technically 2D are useually pretty cool. Lemmings Revolutions comes to mind.

 

I don't think there's such a thing as a 2D FPS.

Don't be so sure. A few have talked about doing it, so you never know. Basically a 2D FPS is a Wolf3D style game where the view is 2D from the first person. A line, basically. With other lines that would grow or shrink as they moved closer or further away from you. Weird, huh?

 

Actually...a lot of people consider Doom and Wolf to be 2D games, as as far as the computer is concerned, it's keeping track of 2D data (I don't count it as 2D cause it's clearly intended as a 3D perspective) But I hear what your saying. Pi\ck up a Game.com sometime and Play Duke Nukem on there, I think that would be a good view of a 2D FPS game. It's actually quiet good (one of the best games on this poor system IMO) You get the first person look, but it's a 2D game even in gameplay. The Island was another good one, but I can't remember what system it was on, I think C64, but eh...

[AMG]

For me the biggest disappointment would be Metroid going to 3D. Next up would be CastleVania.

 

Best transitions into 3D would be Mario and Zelda.

[Pengwin]

For me the biggest disappointment would be Metroid going to 3D. Next up would be CastleVania.

 

Best transitions into 3D would be Mario and Zelda.

 

I've never seen the 2D Metroid, but I do have Metroid Prime Hunters on DS, and I think it's a great game. I didn't imagine a FPS could work on the DS, but it uses the DS's features really well.

[zeropolis79]

I'd have to say my fav 2D to 3D games are Mario and Zelda. Ocarina of Time is one of my all time favourite games.. I'd love to see a DS port of it - if Mario64 can make it to the DS, surly Ocarina of Time can as well.

[AMG]

I've never seen the 2D Metroid

 

 

Definitely look into Super Metroid. It's one of the greatest games ever in my book.

[Segataritensoftii]

Ok... Now I'm starting to find out that The Incredible Machine doesn't work in 3D. I played Ars Physica, and it was totally bizzare. I couldn't figure out where to put the parts. Worst of all, there were no shadow effects! I think one of the problems with this game is in the level design. They make the levels too much like the ones in the 2D Incredible Machine games instead of like actual Rube Goldberg machines you would build at home. This makes depth perception a chore, and ultimately drags down the whole experience.

[Inky]

Im surprised that nobody did Marble Madness or Crystal Castles using true 3-D hardware...

 

Has anyone played the 3-D update of combat? I thought it was a pretty decent game.

[A Sprite]

Okay, I need to calm down.

 

Breathe deep.

 

It's just a game. No use making a scene.

 

Wait, I'm on the internets?

 

And anonymous?

 

And I've been asked for my opinion, too.

 

Cool, it's all legal now.

 

When i think of 3D ruining things, i immediately focus in on Castlevania.

 

Making Castlevania into a 3D game is the biggest mistake Konami ever did

 

Castlevania causes cancer.

 

WTF?

 

What am I missing? I played Legacy of Darkness, and it's like Strider meets Resident Evil. It's visuals are steaming dogbricks (until you decide to play your copy on emulator instead), but it has something none of the other Castlevanias do -

 

It has heart. Whose, I have no idea, but it's still beating. Every character has a story, from Rosa's struggle against her vampiric curse, to the deals with the devil made when you shop for power-ups.

 

What I hear in every complaint against the game is that it's not Symphony of the Night.

 

Well, neither is Rotundo of Blood, Super Castlevania IV, or believe it or not, Castlevania.

 

This game was cursed twice, first by bad timing, and second by Konami's decision to release it unfinished, then release it's bug patch as a seperate game.

 

I beg everyone here to give it a chance, with an open mind.

 

Yes, you may have to adjust the camera sometimes, but not nearly as often as you do in Metroid Prime.

 

The accused deserves it's day in court.

Edited June 11, 2007 by A Sprite

[Segataritensoftii]

Im surprised that nobody did Marble Madness or Crystal Castles using true 3-D hardware...

I can think of a few games that did Marble Madness like that. I don't know where they are at the moment, though.

 

Has anyone played the 3-D update of combat? I thought it was a pretty decent game.

A 3D Combat? Never heard of it.

[jbanes]

I can't believe that anyone can consider Duke Nuk'em 3D to be better than its side-scrolling predecessors. It really wasn't *that* great of a game. (IMHO, of course.) I much preferred the heroic (though annoyingly egotistical as of #2) Duke of the previous games rather than the potty-mouthed pervert they turned him into.

 

As for Wolf3D and Doom, these are usually referred to as 2.5D. They're basically 3D projections of a top-down 2D space. Wolf3D is a simple extrusion, while Doom literally "shakes things up" by shifting game sectors up and down in relation to one another.

[SINGLE TOOTH]

I do agree that zelda makes for good 3-d action, but thats because the world is vast and exporable. With other games are are more linear, like 3-d platformers, the fun is decreased.

 

The early 3d 3rd person games were bad becuase the camera was complete shit. Often your player would go out of your sight, and you could not safely navigate him. They remedied this somewhat by making the player able to control the camera, but this often led to further frustration having to constantly manipulate the camera.

 

 

BTW, Duke nukem 3d is by far the best 2d to 3d translation.

[Segataritensoftii]

So, How did I do? Please tell me you're ROFLing right now.

I see someone was influenced by my writing! That's a pretty funny (and for me, somewhat embarassing ) signature.

I do agree that zelda makes for good 3-d action, but thats because the world is vast and exporable. With other games are are more linear, like 3-d platformers, the fun is decreased.

 

The early 3d 3rd person games were bad becuase the camera was complete shit. Often your player would go out of your sight, and you could not safely navigate him. They remedied this somewhat by making the player able to control the camera, but this often led to further frustration having to constantly manipulate the camera.

I've played Alpha Waves, a very early polygonal 3D platformer (I think it was the first) by Infogrames. I don't seem to remember having many problems with the camera. I, Robot, a third person 3D arcade game that came earlier and was probably the first third person 3D game period,, also handled the camera rather well. It seems to be the ones that had automatic camera switching and/or huge levels that have problems. Take Avara, for example. It's good in the first person, but when you switch to third person, you get a camera that swings around the whole F*cking level trying to find your character in the jungle of barren, flat shaded polygons. It keeps swinging until you throw up. and when the stupid camera actually DOES find your position, you're often stuck looking at your character's ass. Sure, it was the first camera of it's kind, but there had to be a better way than this! And shockingly enough, Blocks 2001, made many years after Avara, has this same problem! And most of the levels in that game are minuscule compared to Avara's! Alpha waves, on the other hand, has a good, steady camera that doesn't move except for the purpose of following your player. Camera controls are intuitive, and the non-slippery, responsive control coupled with your shadow makes it easy to track where you are going to land. I, Robot further reduces the need for a controllable camera even more by giving you a bird's eye view of the levels. Personally, I think they threw out most of the lessons learned from trying to perfect a 3D camera around the time Super Mario 64 came out. Edited June 21, 2007 by Segataritensoftii