Saturday, 23 June 2007

3D vs 2D

There has been a lot of speculation on the GMC about why the public feel 3D games are better than 2D games. Taken from the topic, here's my view on it:


The huge advantage of 3D is, unsurprisingly, it's third dimension. Sure you can make a third dimension in platform or top-down games, or create something isometric. But they don't really cut it. When the chance of 3D is there, you darned well take it.

Take an FPS: You can hide behind things, on top of things, anywhere you like. That's what makes FPS's so good - that's why I play them. It's like being in a real combat situation. It simulates the real thing. 2D can't do that. It's not as real.

All said, 3D gives you realism and lets you feel like you're there. 2D gives you nice, pleasant, simple gameplay which keeps you entertained - mainly for a shorter time.

And before you say it, no I'm not getting too lazy that I just start copying and pasting my posts from the GMC =P

3 responses:

Phil said...

I will say it.
You are lazy.

the_muffin_man said...

To be honest I don't agree with that position, Grego. People don't play a game simply because it is 3D. Gameplay is what really drives someone to play a game.

Eyas said...

Well, gameplay is what SHOULD drive someone to play a game, but unfortunately, most people do what Grego said, imo.