2d or 3d strategy games?

[Kyriakos]

Which do you prefer?

Here is an example from civ3 and civ4.

Civ3

Civ4

Personally i dislike 3d strategy games. I just love isometric graphics, and think they are potentially a lot better than 3d ones, since the latter tend to be simpler, with way less polygons, and rely on skins rather than detailed modelling.

 

[Till]

A 3D engine doesn't restrict you to one perspective, which is nice. Since 2D games don't use models, it's nonsense to compare "polygon counts", but this has been pointed out to you already, i believe.

Anyway, Civ4 is pretty enough for me:

 

[Krill]

I like both...but there is a part of me that will always love the Civ 3 graphics. If I had the choice, I'd say stick with 2D graphics as those are easier to mod.

 

[Kyriakos]

Nice pics, i will include the first in my op

As for polygon counts, it is not nonsense at all, since the point is that the models for both games were made by 3d producing programs, and so are comparable

 

[Heretic_Cata]

As for polygon counts, it is not nonsense at all, since the point is that the models for both games were made by 3d producing programs, and so are comparable

I thought this thread was about 2D vs 3D, not pseudo-2D vs 3D.

 

[Kyriakos]

Don't try too much to think, its not for you

Moderator Action: Trolling
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Heretic_Cata]

Don't try too much to think, its not for you

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2.5D

You're welcome.

 

[Kyriakos]

Nice article, but you are wrong.

Lets see what it says is 2,5d:

graphical projections and techniques which cause a series of images or scenes to fake or appear to be three-dimensional (3D) when in fact they are not, or
gameplay in an otherwise 3D game that is restricted to a two-dimensional plane.

My graphics, or other people's ones made with 3d programs are neither. They are 3d graphics placed in a 2d game, making them either 2d, or 3d if you want to focus on how they were made

edit: from what i understand, the first wiki point is about graphics drawn, ie that are entirely 2d, but have projections which make them appear 3d. Something like the cities in the europa universalis games for example

edit2: Here is an example of real 2,5d art. Redalert's gfx are entirely 2d, but they appear to be 3d (minus the first, which is not by him, and is 3d) :

 

[GoodGame]

Techincally this is a false dichotomy, since Civ3 is made with animated 3D models as is Civ4. And, they're both essentially 2D games since there's no Z-axis (they just happen to employ 3D animated units). The only difference is that Civ4 has more control over the perspective, which gives the illusion of a Z-axis thanks to the zoom-out feature and the ability to change the perspective. But it's still essentially the same old 2D with an isometric look, same as the old school RPGs like the later Ultima games.

SMAC was closer to true 3D than Civ4.

And true 2D would be all tiles and units are pixelated, like Civ1. Civ3 surpasses that.

2.5D would be like Doom 1. Basically 2D with the illusion of a Z-axis.

 

[Maniacal]

Both the pics Till posted look awful as they clearly are suffering from fuzzy pixel stuff from the .jpg format.

I like 2D games just fine, indeed they are often more pretty than 3D games (although thankfully and finally 3D games are getting a lot nicer AND better optimized!).

3D games are also nice, if done properly and properly optimized.

 

[Kyriakos]

Here is probably my favourite graphic style, that in Seven Kingdoms 2.

An excellent use of 3d models in fixed isometric. Looks incredibly better than any real 3d graphic