i find graphics and environment are actually much nicer in games with "no 3d engine".
they're not nearly as detailed, but they're just more artistic/pleasant, as if more time was spent in that direction to "compensate" for the lack of detail
they're not nearly as detailed, but they're just more artistic/pleasant, as if more time was spent in that direction to "compensate" for the lack of detail
I was thinking a long time about why I prefer 2D games to 3D ones, at least in terms of visuals. The conclusion I reached is that it's because technological limitations you get to see in graphics. Models are made from low-poly meshes, and you can (still) see the straight edges where you know they should be curved. Textures are too low-detail; stand next to a wall or close to any entity in a 3D game and you'll always see the texture upscaling, lack of detail.
Most of 3D games try to go for "realistic" visuals, but they never cross the uncanny valley. 2D games seem to look prettier to me because they don't set up expectations - so as long as they have consistent art style, the brain doesn't complain much. Moreover, in 2D productions artists usually have full control of every pixel displayed on screen, so the art can be (and usually is) very detailed. The limits that 2D environment places are more strict than limits of available technology, so your experience doesn't get ruined by jagged edges and texture upscaling.
That's why I still like the original StarCraft more than StarCraft 2 and think that introducing 3D graphics was a bad decision - the original art style looked serious, dark, had an atmosphere. SC2's style is dominated by clunky 3D models which look more like child's toys than serious hardware. But then again maybe this was made on purpose - the plot of SC2 seems about as serious as the graphics, which is not at all.
Starfox was a rail shooter that used 3D models rather than scaled sprites.
the more complicated stuff came with third person shooters and similar. Where you either had fixed cameras, thus having the controls shift between "cuts", or the camera on its own control (tap your head and rub your tummy style).
Most of the people who encountered the N64 did not know how to hold the controller at first glance. This was made worse by the fact that practically every game has a different idea about how the controller was to be used. Nintendo had to settle a court-case by distributing gloves to players complaining of friction injuries.[0] .
This was mostly because developers didn't know how to deal with the control schemes of 3D environments very well, and Nintendo was planning for what they considered to be needed in the future : more controls.
There's very likely a reason that the M shape was never used for controllers again, however it did leave a lasting legacy in the form of trigger buttons (not shoulder buttons), which are now practically a universal controller feature.
I'm pretty sure I saw someone being vapourised by one in an episode of Lexx, too.
Also analog sticks, which are even more important.
I'd imagine the friction lawsuit had something to do with that.
- Shovel Knight
- Dust: An Elysian Tail
- Hotline Miami
- Don't Starve
- Spelunky
- Braid
- Papers, Please
- Sunless Sea
It's been awhile since I've played a sidescroller that warranted multiple playthroughs, but I picked up Shantae: Risky's Revenge up in one of the HumbleBundles, and I loved the hell out of it.
One part Castlevania, one part Megaman, one part Metroid.
It was so good I went out and bought an XBox One controller to play it further, even though I don't own an XBox One. Side note: apparently its the best PC gamepad you can find that has a good D-Pad; the D-Pad is probably the best one I've used since my childhood.
Also, I don't need to put batteries in if I run it off wired USB, so theres also that.
I own a bunch of retro consoles and games, pretty much all by Nintendo and have always wondered if there's an interest in "let's play" of an original Legend of Zelda and so forth (I'd guess most are done via emulator but that just doesn't feel right to me :P). Would require buying a hardware capture device that's Linux compatible but those are 1in the 50-200 Euro range. I'm feeling like it would be something I'd have a blast with but not sure.
Is there a practical intro somewhere? One that allows me to actually play a game, even losing it badly, but not encounter half a dozen "huh, I have no idea what that means and what I should do now" situations every turn.
That's how people learn Dwarfortress, which is even less penetrable. Remember, losing is fun.
It's worth it, though...
Exactly, it's a good example of a game that uses 3D only for effect, without incorporating it at all in the gameplay.
The new content update 1.3 is boss.
- A Valley Without Wind (I like Valley 2): https://arcengames.com/a-valley-without-wind-1-2/
- Rimworld: http://rimworldgame.com/
- Starbound: http://playstarbound.com/
There are also games like Super Meat Boy and Binding of Isaac.