Printable View
I can respond to negativity in two or three sentences. Responding to the good posts takes more time, which I haven't had yet.Quote:
By responding only to the negativity and ignoring the good comments that people have posted, you are validating (and spreading) Ray's opinion of you.
Plus, I'm rarely mocked, so it is a bit jarring and catches my attention when it happens.
Like a number adventure. Next step from text adventure.Quote:
Originally Posted by Al Capwn
If you draw it, it'll have a height of 1 pixel so it's not 1 dimensional anymore
It's amazing what some people can do. Next time I feel like *****ing about how hard this 3D thing is, I'll think how freaking hard it must've been for Carmack to pioneer all that stuff with hardly a computer. We have the internet and books and tutorials and modern programming languages.Quote:
Originally Posted by .hooligan
what about a 1d FPS?.Quote:
Like a number adventure. Next step from text adventure.
If you draw it, it'll have a height of 1 pixel so it's not 1 dimensional anymore
So, like a flat unshaded wall that just gets closer and further away. but you cant move or look left or right.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0828120312.htm
I noticed this while I was reading sciencedaily earlier. (Summary: Two eyes facing the same way is good because it allows us to "see through" things in font of us like pens and leaves and whatnot. They are also good because they give us depth perception and allow us to see in 3d. However, having two eyes on opposite sides of our heads would be good in that it would allow us to see everything that is happening around us.) This is one of my complaints when it comes to 3d, both in games and in reality. I want to see what's happening behind me (ideally above and below as well), but I can't because both of my eyes are facing forward. Not only is this same deficiency programmed in to 3d games, but the benefits of forward facing eyes are made irrelevant, so we get the worst of both worlds.
Turning around and manuvering the player so that he is looking in the right direction becomes such a large part of the game that it distracts from the content, regardless of how good it is. I suspect that this might be changed a bit in some future 3d games, so that the screen wraps around and you can actually see the whole 3d environment at once (although at least parts of it would obviously have to be distorted in some way).
This wouldn't be entirely conducive to most current 3d games, because 1) a big part of the atmosphere comes from the constant need to check behind you to see if someone is sneaking up to stab your guts out, and 2) most of the 3d environment is meaningless. A huge percentage of it would just be sky, and an equal percentage would just be ground. This is one of my other complaints about 3d games, which I mentioned a bit earlier. There's just so much space, that most of it has to be empty.
This is just a matter of level design. have you played any 3D games after Quake I?Quote:
Originally Posted by WesIsGood
Do you know the large open outdoor areas in Halo games? Those would be really boring and silly in 2D games
sorry I didn't read all the post,
I love 3D games, you can see that LittleBIGPlanet looks pretty awesome.
By the other hand...
Noone can blame me for not being an open mind
Yeah, 3d in flash is crap compared to other stuff, but what is that other stuff?
First i have to say that i would love to use unity forever, BUT
where are the good unity games before that pucca game?I Mean, good commercial ones?As much as i would love to stay with unity forever, if the masses dont use it too they will bankrupt, and untill now i havent see the great unity revolution.(To make it clear, im intereste in web games only.Why is topic for another thread)
And theres also director, but noone uses director today, even director users...so its not trusteable
So, maybe 3d in flash would be the most realistic way to have some 3d on the web.
And that 'users will think thats crap', well, i used to think that too, but if you see that, its more than 640.000 plays...wich to me means that even that some of the players know its crap, they will not care IF the gameplay is good, and if it doenst try to be what it cant be
if you think its all crap then make something YOURSELF that is not crap. Its not essentially about technology but also content and if you can make booth or at least 1 of them very good then it doesn't matter which technology or method you used.
Dude, i think you misunderstand me...its not a matter of who does what, or that the efforts of making 3d in flash are crap...i was saying that i USED to think that players would compare the best possible in flash with the possible in other things and say: crap
But the numbers seems to show they dont care
641568 play with 15 monthsQuote:
Originally Posted by Incrue
42771 plays per month
1425 plays per day
Its not that much.
Overall, quality of game has very little to do with how popular it is. I am sure first Flash games successfully implementing 3D features from F10 will get some attention just because they are "3D Flash games". Then the wow factor decreases over time.
And if you can hit loyal fanbase, like 3D driving game fans, they will probably play every 3D driving game no matter how bad it is.
But they dont ignore it either.The point is, they dont ignore it just because of the racing games made with other stuffQuote:
Originally Posted by tonypa
Quality is a subjective matter, popularity at least can be measuredQuote:
Originally Posted by tonypa
Thats the same i was saying beforeQuote:
And if you can hit loyal fanbase, like 3D driving game fans, they will probably play every 3D driving game no matter how bad it is.
@Wesisgood (original post ;))
I agree with your judgement on the lack of creativity in 3D games. Of course there are exceptions (Katamari, Shadow of Colossus, Ecochrome, Mario Galaxy, ...), but I feel there is a kind of Hollywood-style approach in 3D games, or in the market where those games are competing, that makes innovation more difficult than it could be.
Now we have internet, free expression of independent game designers, the boom of casual gaming, etc.., but my belief is that interactive 3D has always needed a simple and accessible (eg. low price, simple, expressive) tool for making fun stuff. There was some attempts, but with poor result compared to what Flash achieved in vector animation.(IMO, I think it's because these tools where not accessible enough )
As a result, I think that 3D in Flash (specially in flash 10 (1)) may give birth to very fresh and original concepts :) (like katamari or ecochrome) as long as it's not thought in the terms of the "industry" (I mean: 3D engines, chips, performance, polygons, physics engine, "awesomeness", "immersion", "realism", etc..).
Such a feat is possible in the flash community, because:
- simple 3D features will be available to non-programmers in flash 10
- this community has already experienced and proved that fun and addictive 2D games can be developped without super sophisticated graphics.
(1) I'm not saying that Flash is accessible today :mad: but at least it has a huge community, which helps a lot.
Amen.Quote:
Originally Posted by dnalogic
But it is not always just about getting bored. It's getting frustrated most of times.
For quick example, just yesterday I took cortes/doob voxel head and tried to put in sandy starfield to make something like doom's lost soul. This means, of course, removing all of optimizations and precomputations; the price for that is having to go from 300k voxels to at least 10 times less, which makes this specific head to look much less fitting to the purpose (those funny holes around mouth are almost no longer visible, etc)... so I scrapped the project.
Same goes to quake-style environments, once you get right lighting, clipping, sorting and texture animation, your render starts to crawl already, and even if you find a way to add moving models without further slowdown, you just cant match good old quake itself... speaking of quake, I remember that adobe quake demo made with cpp compiler, I wonder where did that ended up?
I am in favor of 2d games.
They usually focus more on gameplay and well thought out levels. 3d games focus more on realism than actual FUN gameplay.
My 2 cents.