Are there any gameplayin benefits with 3D?

[eobet]

There isn't a gaming PC out today, nor will there probably be one next year, which will be able to reproduce the SC4 level of detail in 3D (the year after that, however, maybe... but it will cost you an arm and a leg).

I guess you could try to fake it, like in SC4, by loading a completely different set of textures and models for each zoom level, but that kinda takes away the point of having it in 3D, I guess.

Can anyone think of a purely gameplay improvement in this genre which 3D would bring, and which you can't do in 2D? I bet some of you will say removing the grid, but that CAN be done in 2D (unless you count one pixel as a grid).

Tilted Mill's games so far, imo, have had none.

Games like Anno 1701 didn't even try. The gameplay is 100% the same as the previous one in 2D.

(Yes, yes, I bloody realize that you can't sell a pure 2D game to big publishers these days, unless it's bloody innovative, just look at Loco Roco, or a remake, because many of those are still 2D... hmm... a remake...)

[Almir]

It depends on what they are trying to do with SCS exactly. Maybe some things are easier to do with real time 3d rendering.

Personally id like to see a more realistic 2D game with a 3D photo mode.

But they are already long into developement apparently. To long to change it to 2D. And sooner or later it was bound to happen so lets hope for the best.

[Rubicon]

I have to agree with you for the most part. The 3D aspect is "cool" and makes for some spectacular screenshots, but IMO doesn't contribute to the gameplay. Had I been given a choice between a 2D, "souped up" version of Caesar III and the current Caesar IV game, I would have chosen the former.

That doesn't mean C4 isn't a great, enjoyable game - I think it is. But your point is well-taken. I think this genre (I'm lumping together city-building and city-simulating) in particular has less gameplay impact from 3D than, say, a first person shooter. We've had these discussions before on the TM forum (before the release of C4), and I know there is a large contingent of dissenting opinions on this.

My observation has been that most city builders fall into either the engineer or architect category (my terminology). The engineer is more drawn to the detailed design process and acheivement of goals, where the architect is more drawn to the "functional beauty" of the creation process. Seems to me that most SC4 fans fall into the engineer category.

[Almir]

Rubicon:

I think that most players would like to optimise both the "engineering" and "architerchture" parts of the game, as you call it :)

[LisaMockingbird]

Currently my opinion is that 3d art development is sucking resources away from actual game play development. We are in an awkward "OOOOOOO pretty" stage. Games are short, game play features are cut left and right, and major games take (too) many years to develop. I would guess that if SCS is actually planning a Nov. '07 release the game must be pretty well set by now. The last several months are usually for fixing bugs and cutting stuff they just don't have time to finish :( No way do I believe there is room for any major changes, if that is their timeline.

Over the last 5 years the models have substantially increased in poly count and look better all the time - but games still use several models at different zooms (LOD - level of detail - low poly far out, med poly, midzoom, and highpoly up close) and textures as well. Bump maps, normal maps - have taken over from shaded textures - and still have a way to go. Some normal mapped stuff looks bad up close.

It’s cartoon-ier than 2d was since that is bluntly – much easier to create than ultra realism. I think we will see the 3d realism develop in the coming years and I’m hopeful once we get past the awkward stage here that game play itself will re-emerge as the prime focus. One thing 3d does offer is the ability to interact up close with the world and gives you the chance to allow freedom of camera movement/angle. Playing a game that doesn’t let me rotate the camera angle freely in all directions along all 3 axes and zoom in on the “personal” level, has become hard to play.

I do think that things are in an transition phase right now. I play lots of games to see what is being brought to the table. I guess maybe I have a short attention span too and like to try new things. It’s rare that I love a game so much that I play it for many years (I can think of 3 out of 100’s that I’ve played - or replayed in the last 15 years that I still keep playing)

Ok well – this was just my opinion - but I've been modding 3d games for 5 years now (mostly as an amateur but I had some of my stuff patched into a professional game and was lead artist on a team that released our first professional add-on pack last year.) A lot of my friends are working as 3d artists and game coders full time now (however I have a "day job" I'm perfectly happy keeping - I don't think I'm thick skinned enough to handle the rabid fan-trolls LOL) I believe this – you can’t work on games or for a game developer unless you are an avid gamer yourself. These peeps love going to work and doing what they are doing. They do have feelings tho – and some just have to stay off the forums totally because some of the spoiled childish brats demanding it their way in the nastiest ways possible – really do tend to spoil the joy. OTOH I know a few code guys who actually like to bait, catch, fry up, and eat for lunch the forum brats LOL. Not me of course so be nice cause I cry easy ;)

[eobet]

The point I was trying to make, was that if you compare the SC4 screenshot thread to... well, ANY 3D game out there or in development, 3D doesn't stand a chance in the OOOOOOOH pretty department.

And that includes Crysis, imo.

You can't reproduce a Rembrandt in 3D.

(But ******... 3D always gets my back up... this thead was supposed to be about GAMEPLAY!) :)

[AdrianWerner]

it looks better in motion than 2D, it allows more view options for player, easier modding. Plus with 3D you can change the assets in real-time, break things with physics, modify them in real-time etc, in 2D you only can do the combinations that devs though up earlier. Simply put 3D allows more free-form gameplay. We just need a city builder that would use those possibilities. For now devs use 3D mostly for looks and sales (because 2D big budgeted game is suicide in 2007-8).

[Rubicon]

I think that most players would like to optimise both the "engineering" and "architerchture" parts of the game, as you call it :)
Agreed - ideally I'd also love to have my cake and eat it too!

[Rubicon]

And that includes Crysis, imo.

You can't reproduce a Rembrandt in 3D.

(But ******... 3D always gets my back up... this thead was supposed to be about GAMEPLAY!) :)

Crysis!?!?! Wow, you have some high standards. I have Far Cry and think it's absolutely mind-altering. I can't wait for Crysis. Of course, I have a machine that can play Far Cry with the video settings almost maxed out. :o

Agree 100% - you can't reproduce Rembrandt in 3D... at least not with today's (affordable) home PC. Maybe tomorrow.

I think the thread is still on-topic, though. The question was are there any gameplay benefits with 3D? What everyone seems to be saying is that there is a tradeoff that actually hurts gameplay in favor of 3D.

[AdrianWerner]

Agree 100% - you can't reproduce Rembrandt in 3D... at least not with today's (affordable) home PC. Maybe tomorrow.
On the other hand you will never be able to produce handpainted photorealistic animation, while 3D one is getting there :)

[Romaq]

Unfortunately, marketing is the priority for a game that has to sell on the shelf. I'm quite surprised that 'Lin City' (http://lincity.sourceforge.net/) appears stuck in the original SimCity mindset, and an Open Source version of SC4 isn't anywhere on the radar.

While I'm curious about a true 3d version of SimCity, I could actually enjoy continuing to play SC4 for quite some time. My problems with SC4 are not solved with a full 3d environment. And honestly, I can't think of anything 3D really adds to game-play itself.

But marketing gets priority on a game that has to bring in revenue. It's still possible for a group to work on 'Lin City 4'.

--Romaq

[Corinthian]

3D adds a greater possibility for immersion. The ability to follow a simulated character through a 3D environment brings that environment to life as the character interacts with it. In turn, the player develops a greater sense for 'what it's like' to be there, and decides to put more effort into improving said environment, and plays for a couple more hours. :)

Also, being able to rotate the camera around a focal point adds a layer of functionality and efficiency to the game, in that we can more clearly see how the building we're about to place fits into the environment. Sometimes seeing it from another angle will help us determine that it might not be the best fit there.

I don't really see a direct relationship between a multi-dimensional graphical presentation and the mechanics of a game, only what 3D adds to the possibility of the gaming experience (indirect relationship).

[Need_Help]

@ eobet (http://www.tiltedmill.com/forums/member.php?u=206)
Again, Anno 1701 is in full 3D. You can get some benefits when you are playing in 3D, you can zoom/scroll/rotate at whatever place you want and you can see the shadows of the sun from West to East, have more effects like snow/rain/sandstorm (with snow/water/sand on the roof). You can also have more small animations, and more special effects are available in 3D.

Thanks :)

[wodinoneeye]

The point I was trying to make, was that if you compare the SC4 screenshot thread to... well, ANY 3D game out there or in development, 3D doesn't stand a chance in the OOOOOOOH pretty department.

And that includes Crysis, imo.

You can't reproduce a Rembrandt in 3D.




But then again neither can you in 2D...

Its a matter of can you render large enough scenes of relatively high detailed 3D buildings, which the answer to is becoming -- 'yes' sooner than later.
Many of people who produce mods use 3D models and then boil them down into the 2D tiles used for the latest game. Another year goes by and the next tier of graphics cards move down in price into the ordinary gameplayers range.

It is yet to be seen if the new game will have changes to make it more like CotN.

[eobet]

3D adds a greater possibility for immersion. The ability to follow a simulated character through a 3D environment brings that environment to life as the character interacts with it. In turn, the player develops a greater sense for 'what it's like' to be there, and decides to put more effort into improving said environment, and plays for a couple more hours. :)

Congratulations! You just described the most disliked feature of SC4 (the Sims mode... you're supposed to decide the fate of thousands, not just one person. Otherwise its corruption and unfair treatment!). :) And you also managed to refer to, Sim Copter, and that sold really well. ;)

@ eobet (http://www.tiltedmill.com/forums/member.php?u=206)
Again, Anno 1701 is in full 3D. You can get some benefits when you are playing in 3D, you can zoom/scroll/rotate at whatever place you want and you can see the shadows of the sun from West to East, have more effects like snow/rain/sandstorm (with snow/water/sand on the roof). You can also have more small animations, and more special effects are available in 3D.

Thanks :)

Erm... read my post again, please. Yes, the game has full 3D graphics, but the gameplay is still EXACTLY the same as the old 2D version. They did not add one single thing to the gameplay which made use of the new, third dimension.

And it seems like Tilted Mill is continuing this trend in their third 3D games, which is still grid based, elevation probably doesn't matter (

[Need_Help]

@eobet (http://www.tiltedmill.com/forums/member.php?u=206) :
No, you changed that. I remember I saw the word 2D there, and you had just edited your post to correct that. I don't think you can 'discuss' about the gameplay here since everything here shouldbe related to 3D, not the gameplay (you said benefits with 3D, not the gameplay of the game). If you want to have the perspective view just like in SC4, you can set the camera angle and use that, but I think most people don't play like that since its in 3D. Caesar IV is gridless, so you shouldn't say ' And it seems like Tilted Mill is continuing this trend in their third 3D games, which is still grid based, elevation probably doesn't matter'.

Thanks :)

[eobet]

How can you possibly call C4 gridless? The game Medieval Lords is gridless, and so far, the only 3D game I know which does this in a strategic, building game environment. If there are others, please let me know!

Also, I didn't edit to correct some 2D to 3D error. If you look closely, I edited to try to change the title (compare the title of the first post to the title of the thread). I should probably edit my last post as well, since it seems to have been cut-off... if only I could remember what I wanted to say. :)

[Corinthian]

@eobet:
I also described one of the things that made playing C4 and CotN a more immersive experience. And in any case, I didn't like the Sims feature in SC4 either, and only used it once, just to see what it was like: pointless. Pointless, because it really didn't add to immersion (or gameplay), since the game was rendered in pixelated 2D at the closest zoom, and was ... 2D. Had it been in 3D, it could have been a much more interesting feature. Nonetheless, my point remains that 3D graphics leads to a possibility for greater immersion.