Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Do Next-Gen Games Have to be 3D?

Posted by Cliff on from the good-game-play-does-not-need-a-z-axis dept.

sudnshok asks: "Last week, an article was posted where an EA executive discussed the high cost involved with next-gen game development. While I agree that sports games do benefit from a high-resolution 3D environment, do all games have to be developed that way? Why can't game companies develop 2D games for these systems? I would assume the development cost would be much lower. As a gamer who grew up on the NES, I'd love to see a new 2D side-scrolling installment of Castlevania or Zelda. I'm curious if other gamers would buy 2D games for next-gen systems."

7 of 211 comments (clear)

  1. Simple by TodMinuit · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Most people won't pay $60 for a 2D game.

    --
    I wonder if I use bold in my signature, people will notice my posts.
    1. Re:Simple by thc69 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It's hard to feel entertained when I feel motion-sick...so I guess I could say the 3d games aren't entertaining for me, either.

      --
      Procrastination -- because good things come to those who wait.
  2. Re:Sega Saturn by MemoryDragon · · Score: 2, Interesting

    On handhelds they are... some of the Nintendo DS games already have made it in the top 10 list of games with most sells ever...

  3. 2D more expensive? by cHALiTO · · Score: 2, Interesting

    As I learned in this discussion, apparently it's cheaper to do a game with 3d models than to actually do it in 2d with decent animation and artwork (at least for a graphic adventure.. but I guess It'd be the same for a platform game).

    A Shame, really. When Street Fighter 3 came out I was really happy to see it wasn't some 3d-shit like virtua fighter (which I dislike.. a lot), and the animations clearly take advantage of the updated hardware.

    Can any game developers confirm this?

    --
    "Luck is my middle name," said Rincewind, indistinctly. "Mind you, my first name is Bad." -- Terry Pratchett
  4. Better question... by AlXtreme · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Do games have to be 'next-gen' to be fun?

    The geek in me wants next-gen, 3D HDMI-enabled toys. However, yesterday the misses and I pulled out Super Mario 3 for an evening of retro-gaming, and it was a blast. Great graphics, 3D gaming on a HDTV are great to impress your friends, but this dinosaur craves for the simple fun games you can play together for a few hours and be done with them.

    Now get off my lawn!

    --
    This sig is intentionally left blank
    1. Re:Better question... by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Of course games don't have to be next-gen to be fun.

      My two favourite games of all time, both first time through and for replay value, are still the Baldurs Gate series and Total Annihilation. In the several years since these were released, I've encountered no RPG with better plot/characters, and no RTS that was better for all-out action combined with genuine strategy.

      My other half is a big fan of puzzle games. She has spent many hours enjoying the games from PopCap, and spent more money buying the full versions of her favourites from them than on any trendy 3D FPS.

      Sure, funky 3D graphics and a rocking soundtrack can make some games more atmospheric. It's not like there's much comparison between Gears of War and Wolfenstein 3D (or perhaps more fairly, Quake) in the presentation department. But much as I have enjoyed many FPS games over the years, the gameplay is still pretty close to the original Wolf3D/Doom/Quake model that popularised the genre all those years ago, even if I can now use different weapon types, lob grenades with my other hand, and drive vehicles.

      Where I personally find the gaming experience lacking is on-line competition/collaboration. Many games I've played are no doubt much more satisfying against real people, but IME pretty much all of the on-line services suck if you're not in the US (lag issues) or not willing to spend silly amounts of time waiting around for an opponent. The only games I've ever played on-line for long and truly enjoyed were Quake and Quake II in my university days, when there was an active student population and getting a good deathmatch game going was easy. For TA, it was too hard to find an opponent of a similar skill level and to set aside an hour or two for a good game. For Neverwinter Nights, I never even worked out what on-line facilities were available, as I'd lost interest because of poor single-player. Lots of people seem to enjoy things like World of Warcraft (and I notice they've been running ads for it on TV here in the UK in the run up to Christmas), but I also hear a lot about powergamers who can arbitrarily spoil it, which puts me off trying it given the cost involved.

      Of course, my system is a little long in the tooth now -- it's about time to build a new ueber-PC but I haven't got around to it yet -- so I'm not running much from within the last year or two. Do the latest "next gen" games have good player-matching for on-line competition as well as the snazzy graphics? If they do, then maybe next gen games are the future after all. :-)

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
  5. they don't have to be... by joe+155 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ...most people do expect it though. I would say that it is highly possible to make great 2D games, or more old-style games with some 3D elements. Take Ikiruga (I might have spelt that wrong), a great game with primarily a 2D action mode, or Paper Mario (if you can get hold of that I'd recomend it). These are "last gen" of course, but they do show well that even in a situation where people expect 3D you can still give 2 and have people happy.

    If they make it, and make it well, people will buy it. Sure some ass-hats might not buy it because they think "it doesn't look good so it can't be fun" - but sod 'em.

    --
    *''I can't believe it's not a hyperlink.''