3D Graphics

3d is not a trend. In a lot of genres, like the space RTS and FPS, 3d is pretty much needed. However, in some normal RTSs it is also needed, as terrain can give a tactical advantage.

--------------------------------------------
Democracy may only be a few steps removed from anarchy, but at least it isn''t as loud.

Of course, I don''t mean to do away with 3d. FPS is the ''trademark'' 3d game, much like puzzle games are the ''trademark'' 2d game. Terrain height fields have been represented in 2d for years. Even modern games like Age of * still use 2d terrain that implements height.

When I say 3d I mean true 3d. As in Warcraft 3. The terrain was truly 3d. There was free camera rotation, etc..

Well, for example, there are a lot of people who think that 2D isometric is better than 3D isometric. Yes, 2d looks better, because everything is prerendered. It is also faster. But it is kind of annoying when you can''t turn the camera around. Also, the units look nicer in 3d, since you can have very smooth transitions, as opposed to 2D, where you can''t have a frame for every half degree ship turning left while firing.

Height Map Editor | Eternal Lands | Fast User Directory

quote:

---

Original post by haro
I think the advent of stereo vision will be the killer of ''traditional'' 3d. Of course it will take a while before everybody is willing to wear some damn goofy glasses each time they want to play a game, but its almost definately the next thing to happen.

---

Why would that be a killer ? Actually, stereo system require a full 3D environment ! So instead of killing it, it will even push it further into other game genres. If people want stereo-RTS games (even if that might be silly), the entire game environment needs to be full 3D for it to work. In fact, a stereo-engine equals a traditional 3D engine to 99.999%.

quote:

---

Its just pretty damn boring to run around shooting evil aliens for hours, no matter how nicely done they are done.

---

Fully agreed. The industry needs new ideas. Well at least, we''re trying to do better with our game

I thought I was the only one who wasn''t very thrilled about Doom 3 (except for the graphics)...

---

For crying out loud, she has fishes coming out of her head on either side. How can you find this hot?!

quote:

---

Original post by Yann L

quote:

---

Original post by haro
I think the advent of stereo vision will be the killer of ''traditional'' 3d.

---

Why would that be a killer ? Actually, stereo system require a full 3D environment ! So instead of killing it, it will even push it further into other game genres.

---

By killer I mean that traditional (non-stereo support) 3d games will cease to be viable. I always felt that as 3d development gained momentum it would help further games as a whole. 3d could become just another possibility in development. Instead 3d has overtaken game development. If you want to publish a title, a publisher is not going to take you very seriously if you''re pushing for 2d. In their eyes the "2d thing" has been "done". Its time to move on (source- gamasutra article on getting published).

I think Stereo vision will act similiarly. It will devour all genres of games. One of the most recent stereo vision demonstrations was for a CHESS GAME. Of all the games in the world, they chose chess (kasparov vs karpov new york 2002). People don''t seem to be concerned about what technology could be used to improve what type of game. They are just concerned about the technology itself. This is what I mean when I say that the technology is "killing" other technologies. 3d has essentially killed 2d. Stereo may likely kill 3d.

Take Windows Longhorn as another example. The recent video clips show options such as the ability to set certain styles where "windows" will appear as sheets of paper. So when you move the windows they would ''flop'' through the air. Sure its novel, but why else? It just seems like people are implementing technologies in their software just for the sake of implementing those technologies.

its also easier to create a 3d game these days. you dont have to pain stakingly hand animate every possible movement of a character. then go and redoit 100 times becuase he/she happens to be wearing 5 differnt armor tunics and 10 different guns.

Stereo vision is usually lower resolution than a monitor, and, from what I heard, it puts soem strain on the eyes. Plus, you can''t see the enviroment around you (real life) when you play such a game, which is not very good.

Anyway, the best sold game, The Sims, is mainly 2D, so 3D is not teh rulez and 2D is teh sucks!

Height Map Editor | Eternal Lands | Fast User Directory

Haro, that is unfortunately the nature of mass market products: quantity instead of quality. There will always be good games, but they will be the minority. It just takes a lot more time and resources, than just another 'shoot on everything that moves' FPS.

quote:

---

By killer I mean that traditional (non-stereo support) 3d games will cease to be viable.

---

There is a huge difference between the 2D/3D and the 3D/Stereo analogy: 2D and 3D games rely on a totally different technological approach. On the other hand, adding stereoscopic support to a 'traditional' 3D game is a matter of 10 minutes. Most likely, developers will not even have to manually add 3D stereo support to their titles, as 3D hardware will automatically take care of that. There will never be "stereo-only" games, as a stereo-game is a traditional 3D game, that renders two slightly displaced images per frame. If you connect a monitor to one channel, and drop the other one, you'll have a totally standard 3D game. It will most likely become a preference setting either in the game, or in the OS's graphics driver page.


[edited by - Yann L on June 1, 2003 5:27:06 PM]

quote:

---

Original post by haro
I also think 3d is horribly over used. For a great example check out the game "Warcraft 3". The developers of the game destroyed a vital aspect of RTS (ability to see/manuever large number of units without difficulty) in favor of full scale 3d environments and models. I don''t think Blizzard will make the same mistake in the future. When I returned the game to the store I bought it from, the employee mentioned he was suprised how many copies of the game he''d had returned in the last week alone. They ruined the game using graphics that it didn''t need.

---

Fuck you man, Warcraft 3 owns.

I had that feeling years ago when 3D first apeared in the home market via PS1 and Sega Saturn. I felt that it was being over used. Back then 2D was finaly getting to what should have been its hight point. Increases in bit depth, more memory, and all around other improvements realy improved upon what could be done. I used to go on at length boring my friends with my thoughts. The reality is everyone wanted to do 3D back then just because it could be done not because it should have been. Playing the old games that were good back then is rather painful now because 3D was in such a raw state at that time that after seeing todays graphics its just too painful to watch. Some games needed 3D just to be posible, other than that I was wishing more quality 2D games would come out but thats not the way the world wanted it. Now days however, things are differnt. 3D is way better looking that it used to be and I generaly dont mind. I like old 2D stuff but I dont feel that its as needed. I do think that games are stale these days. How many FPS do we realy need? How many have to be WW2 time based? Eveyones so hyped about Half-Life2. I never even made it through the first before getting sick of it. No matter how good it is, it can''t be that much better that the 6thousand others trying to be like it. I own skads, they are all the same damn game. They just get better looking and just good enough that you''d rather play the new one than the old. I have a friend that quit buying RTS games because, "if you''ve played one you''ve played them all." He just replays what he has.

Indeed @ Yann L

I have stereoscopic functionality on my graphics card.

And, if your system is fast enough, you can run at full resolution at 60Hz (120Hz over two images). Although, this was not the default setting (default setting was interlaced).

The effect is pretty good. It actualy made Thief really good to play and definatly improved suspention of disbelief, and was cool to watch the big brested Rynn in all her three dimentional glory in Drakon (appart from the fact the actual game sucked ass). It worked ok for Rollcage too, but because it was best multi-player and there was only one set of glases, it wasn't that great. Made Unreal look really good, but it lost a bit of playability and atmosphere - the action was too quick - unlike Thief.

Of course, these are games that actualy came with my (totaly custom) system (not all of them came with the graphics card - some with the sound card - 3D sound rox0rs > 3D vision). So the thing is, appart from being a pain in the neck to setup and to carefuly balance the glasses on your head (graphics card from ASUS - glasses were 8yearold sized) it didn't add enough to the game to be worth the effort. Basicly, after I got over the wow! stereo! factor, it wasn't worth getting the glasses out when you wanted to have a quick explosion session.

The other thing is - give me almost any full screen 3D application (although D3D seems to work better than OGL) and I can play it in stereoscopic mode.

It's cool, but it's not that cool.

As far as making a game, it dosn't require any extra effort on the programers at all, but it does on the user, not to mention the special hardware. So stereo-only games are not going to happen at all really - not to mention that there is no point - the difference between stereo and mono 3D is insignificant in terms of gameplay anyway.

Do not meddle in the affairs of moderators, for they are subtle and quick to anger.

---

ANDREW RUSSELL STUDIOS
Cool Links :: [ GD | TG | MS | NeHe | PA | SA | M&S | TA | LiT | H*R ]         Articles :: [ MUD Pies ]
Got Clue? :: [ Start Here | Google | MSDN | GDN Reference | OGL v D3D | Formats | Asking | Go FAQ yourself ]

[edited by - Andrew Russell on June 1, 2003 8:04:14 PM]

Your place lets you return games? The fucked up Best Buy around these parts don''t let you return a game, even if one of the employees don''t know what they''re talking about and they sell a game to you because they lie to you about what it is without even knowing it. Ex: I picked up a Deus Ex and 3 other games in one set after asking an employee if it was the full version. That imbecile said yes. Then I bought it. Then I tried to install it before realizing it said Preview Version. Then they wouldn''t let me return it. **Middle Finger towards Best Buy**

---

tcache
Contact Me
-----------
AH! MY BRAIN IS GOING TO SELF-DETONATE! -- Yours Truly (Jan, 2003)

quote:

---

Original post by Tazel
Your place lets you return games? The fucked up Best Buy around these parts don''t let you return a game, even if one of the employees don''t know what they''re talking about and they sell a game to you because they lie to you about what it is without even knowing it. Ex: I picked up a Deus Ex and 3 other games in one set after asking an employee if it was the full version. That imbecile said yes. Then I bought it. Then I tried to install it before realizing it said Preview Version. Then they wouldn''t let me return it. **Middle Finger towards Best Buy**

---

Isnt that illegal in the US?? I think it is illegal here too. They _have_ to take it back.

For as long as 2D overhead, Isometric, 3D, static picture screens or any other kind of display lends itself towards the style of entertainment that someone wants to develop, then those display styles will remain.

Even the 3D games have different styles. Some 3D games feature a camera removed from the player so you have a better chance to know what is behind you and off to the side. Some support the forward view only and leave it up to the player to check their sides and rear. Then there are games like Warcraft 3, which really didn't need perspective graphics for the terrain, but it made for some nice animation that didn't require a bunch of sprite graphics (Then again, Blizzard generates their sprite graphics off from 3D models now, anyway, don't they)?

...

I don't know about the legality of Best Buy being forced to take back games. I think the sign says that they will accept UNOPENED software as a return. Those notices are usually right there at the checkout counter for you to read. Most of the time, it's up to you to ask about the policies before you buy because they don't volunteer that information. I remember a few years back, they had signs right there in the game aisle that stated their return policy.


[edited by - Waverider on June 1, 2003 10:12:03 PM]

quote:

---

Original post by Andrew Russell
Isnt that illegal in the US?? I think it is illegal here too. They _have_ to take it back.

---

I didn''t know that.. I always open games with an exacto knife. If I decide I don''t like them a 1 inch piece of scotch tape cut into a 1/3rd horizontally makes the game look like its never been opened unless you take an extremely careful look and even then its tough to. I always just given the story that somebody else got the same game for my cousin''s birthday so he couldn''t use it.

As far as 2d - 3d - 3d Stereo Vision. It was admittedly a bad analogy, but I was just trying to use it as an illustration. There will be some ''major'' technological concept in the future that will once again overtake everything. If you look far enough ahead it would likely be holographic projections, but I wanted to stay within immediate reason.

It''s called evolution.
Otherwise, we would all play text games.

Height Map Editor | Eternal Lands | Fast User Directory

quote:

---

It''s called evolution.
Otherwise, we would all play text games

---

Exactly. And thank God we invented 3D, because 2D bores me to death There are good 2D games, no question, but from a technological point of view, 2D is just plain boring.

There''s confusion in this thread over what is 2D and what is 3D. A bunch of people talked about real-time vs pre-rendered graphics, but you can have real-time 2D graphics; polygons don''t have to be 3D. Out of This World was such a game. Others talked about orthogonal vs perspective view. And then there was talk about monoscopic vs stereoscopic rendering.

~CGameProgrammer( );