A conversation on 2D, as discussed by Kangaroo, DoomRater, and Dacapo.

: I really think that when 3D appeared, 2D was ushered out prematurely. I think developers, publishers, big game companies have gotten themselves into an arms race with technology where the graphics and physics and online community features have seized the attention of these companies. I think it’s created a growing divide between video games and cinematic video games, with the cinematic games approaching interactive movies. Cinematic games can make money through a short-lived, impressive presentation, but they’re they’re really not made in the spirit of a game, one whose goal is replay value.

While graphics, physics, and online communities are important, I don’t need to remind anybody that these don’t necessarily make a game fun, and also, these don’t feed the interests of all types of gamers. I mean in this age, 2D games might suggest simplicity, but only because they’ve been phased out by the 3D generation on purpose. It’s like those games are supposed to be overlooked because they’re not cutting-edge. When a new 2D game appears, it’s considered retro. Why? There’s no reason a game with two dimensions of movement has to be simple, especially when noticing that most modern 2D games are, technically, 3D. So 2D is merely a design choice, nothing else. The features and possibilities of a game in 2D, I don’t think, have really been explored deeply.

As game companies grow their budgets grow, and their inclination for risk diminishes, that’s something already happening. The interesting question this brings up is whether we’ll see a deviation in game design. On one hand there’s the path of cutting-edge technology (taken by the major game companies) and then there’s the experimental or esoteric path, which would be furthered by independent developers. A major game company will engineer and sell a game for success (to make money). Independent developers will makes games so that they can play them.

But to use 2D as a motif, I mean just in the sense that it’s part of a game’s art direction, I think that’s an idea that should be commonly understood, but why isn’t it? Like years ago when somebody would describe a game and we’d ask, “What kind of view is it? Is it overhead? Isometric? First-person? Sidescrolling?” None of those was any better than another, but so many players today refuse to look at anything that looks like it came out before PSX. The truth is that yeah, games were simpler “back then” and the hardware limited them to 2D, so I can understand why simplicity is associated with older games, but like I said, there have been so many things learned and invented in game design since then. For anybody who remembers playing games for the fun of them (which isn’t everybody), they have to realize that these newer inventions – courtesy of  modern hardware — can be applied to older games, to take the fun of old gameplay concepts and make them more complex or at least better looking, if nothing else.

: Sure, while the 3D realm had always been looked upon as ‘cutting edge’, I have to admit it was done on systems as old as the C64. Don’t get me wrong, it almost had no business being on such an old system, with its slideshow framerates, but at least it let us dream of more advanced simulators.

But then Playstation had to act all big and bad with its 3D attitude. “We have more memory and space, so we’ll throw in cutscenes to make up for our paltry polygon abilities!” they thought. The result was not only a mishmash of poor quality graphics with impressive footage, but also the SNES attempting to play catchup in a technology it simply could not deliver. I don’t even KNOW how many polygons the original Arwing was made out of, but it couldn’t have been many.

Even the N64 had some 2D game designs… and interestingly enough, some of them DID use polygon technology. Unfortunately, one that I know of was a disaster- MK Mythologies, anyone? Just watch Sub Zero try to tackle some of the larger bosses in this game and Sub Zero instantly looks CHOPPY next to them. I can see why mixing 2D with 3D was a bad idea, and the reason for a lot of riff between gamer types.

(to be continued…)

Like this post? Subscribe to our RSS feed! Hate this post and want to write a better one? Join us!