Top Down vs Isometric View [poll added]

[khomotso]

I don't really understand taking a preference for one kind of view in the abstract. It depends on the gameplay they're trying to encourage.

I think JA2 actually did this kind of thing rather badly by packing 3D tactical considerations into an isometric view. Rooftops and cover were handled very clumsily as a result, and it was often frustrating rather than rewarding to figure out line of sight. If you're going to do line-of-sight for a guy peeking over the edge of a roof, it's just frustrating to not have a 3D world that gives you appropriate feedback through your view. If you're going to go with top-down or isometric for reasons of project cost, then you're better off leaving out the 3D targeting complexities, even if you enjoy tactical depth.

tldr: figure out the fun in your gameplay, and then choose the view that best suits it. This basically sounds like the rationale behind the mention of top-down on the kickstarter page.

[geezer]

I find it almost funny that some of the "top down" advocates are really advocating what most of us think of us isometric. In some cases the scenery is true top down but the characters are isometric. OTOH, when Fargo described the game as "top down" I assumed he was referring to something like the infinity engine games, not like Driftmoon.

1. True top down perspective = Driftmoon. It is like standing directly above someone's head and looking straight down. I used to do technical drawing for a living and that is what I would call a 'top view'.

2. Isometric (or axonometric) perspective = Infinity Engine games like Fallout 1/2, Baldur's Gate 1/2, Icewind Dale, Planescape: Torment, and pretty much every other decent party based cRPG that I can think of. Isometric can be 2D or 3D. In a sufficiently good implementation of each the end result should be indistinguishable. You would only know the difference if you have the source code and model files in front of you.

3. First Person perspective. I like first person perspective just fine, but it is difficult or perhaps impossible to use that perspective for tactical party combat.

The true top down perspective of Driftmoon is difficult for me to watch for very long. And the graphics are actually pretty good. Anyone who really thinks they want true top down for Wasteland 2 should first play that game for a while to make sure. What some people here are calling top down is actually a hybrid of first person (front/side view) and top down. The character models are shown first person (or sometimes iso) but the scenery is shown top down. I find that to be artistically hideous. I'd prefer all text with occasional hand drawn illustrations to that.

If an existing engine could be adapted that would seem to be the cheapest way to go. That narrows down the choices quite a bit and true top down probably won't be possible. GemRB, Unity, Leadwerks, and Torque are some examples that come to mind. Who owns the rights to the actual Infinity Engine these days? I found the BG2 engine to be nearly perfect for strategic combat. Yes, that was RTwP, but maybe it could be adapted for true turn based play. The problem is writing your own engine could take a while. Time that could otherwise be spent on creating actual content.

[vorpal]

Isometric!

[Gizmo]

An interesting option (I think), is what we see in Earth 2160... That game can be 3d 'isometric' and first person ~at the same time; and it's kind of cool.

[Tuco]

I find it almost funny that some of the "top down" advocates are really advocating what most of us think of us isometric. In some cases the scenery is true top down but the characters are isometric. OTOH, when Fargo described the game as "top down" I assumed he was referring to something like the infinity engine games, not like Driftmoon.

Yeah, that's what I guessed as well.

First Person perspective. I like first person perspective just fine, but it is difficult or perhaps impossible to use that perspective for tactical party combat.

Well, there's that, and also the fact that a first person view requires a much higher detail and production value to look fine, as you watch at every single model/object/texture far more close and with an angle of view we experience constantly (which, in a way somehow similar to the concept of uncanny valley for humans, makes far more easy to spot when something does look "wrong").

[ghorahn]

I want whichever perspective the designers find looks/works best. I don't want to second-guess them, and I don't want them to second-guess themselves because of what some people on the forums said.

[benzei]

Im gonna say Isometric is the best. But i dont mind top down view either, whatever the devs feel works the best. As long as the final product is good.

[Wanderer]

I want whichever perspective the designers find looks/works best. I don't want to second-guess them, and I don't want them to second-guess themselves because of what some people on the forums said.

It's all about communication.

[Dustpan]

An option to switch between both at any given time would be ideal.

[apocraphyn]

Well, being a massive fan of the original Fallouts, Baldur's Gates, Icewind Dales, et al...I'm going with the isometric crowd.

[Karellen]

Hey there, someone who tends to prefer "top down", I just want to take a moment to explain what I think we're talking about here, and why the distinction matters at all, so sorry if this comes off as rambling.

The "true" top down, where you literally see people's heads and shoulders, is something I'm pretty sure no one here particularily wants. So, yes, what people mostly mean with isometric as opposed to top-down here is a perspective where the subject is mainly shown at a 3/4 perspective from the above. This is what you see in the likes of Diablo and Fallout, for instance (even if technically, it's usually more a type of oblique projection).

The thing is, I don't like the 3/4 top-down isometric very much, especially not in RPGs. I associate it with SimCity and management sims; it's a cold, clinical, superior, objective, unnatural perspective which is simply not very atmospheric, even though the sprites themselves are usually very detailed and well made. It doesn't help that in most cases, the world ends up looking very flat and square; it creates a sense of perfect orderliness even when there shouldn't be one. It resembles an architectural drawing, informative but sterile, and makes all locations look and feel the same.

In comparison, what people call "top-down" - actually, a type of oblique perspective which tends to view its subjects from the front and above - has some advantages. This is what you mainly see in JRPGs and some very old WRPGs, and it actually looks pretty different. There's actually a lot of tricks you can pull with this; maps that change direction so that sometimes you go sideways with parallax scrolling, cliffs and stairs that create an illusion of height (even if it's still all on the same plane), important rooms at the end of a tunnel suddenly shifting to a more 3D perspective. It's easy to give an impression of variety in locations, even when the system itself is the same thing. In addition, character sprites take a fairly large portion of the screen, and you often see them from the front, which makes them more life-like. This is really what makes SNES JPRGs still look pretty nice; the perspective is clearly unnatural, but it's also lively and atmospheric, even when the sprites are low-res.

Now, this is the 21st century, and Wasteland is a post-apocalytpic game, so it should shoot for a more realistic visual style. Still, I'd prefer if it didn't emulate the standard isometric perspective; good atmosphere and immersion is a huge part of the appeal of a sandbox RPG, especially with a distinctive setting like post-apocalyptic. I'd prefer a little bit of both, like you see in the Infinity Engine games, which at best are kind of like "best of both worlds". Planescape: Torment in particular looks very organic, simply because the gameworld isn't actually composed of squares, and different screens have different axial orientations. A visual style similar to that could be ideal for Wasteland, with large, atmospheric, handcrafted backgrounds with good variety that aren't obviously made of block sprites.

[Eich]

@ Karellen, here are some pics to enrich your argument

I really hope that we will get some clarification on this topic soon. If this is the top-down Brian is aiming for I would say 'let's do this!':



But if we are talking about this:



I would not be that happy. But if Brian thinks he can pull it off it's ok with me. Some concept arts would be great but I don't think that he will publish something before the 900 grand are achieved.

[Aarionn]

While I will be happy with either solution, I would prefer isometric view.

[Dazza_Bo]

Would much prefer isometric rather than top down but beggars can't be choosers. I'm just glad it's not going to be third person or first person.

[moomoos]

I'd like isometric since top down... well you just can't see anything if it's top down.

[Alaseur]

I'm guessing the game will be visually updated.

With potential visuals here are two examples I made with crappy rocks, and people.

Isometric as I understand it:


Top Down as I understand it:


If updated with detailed hand-drawn sprites, or with sprites saved from 3D renders there's a large area for potential in both isometric and top down perspectives. I think after experimenting a little I would be pleased with either. Granted there's a visual improvement.

[Gizmo]

One thing to notice is that a true top-down map requires more screen space to depict the same area as an 'isometric' one.

Edit:
The lower the angle, the farther out is the visible horizon ~at the same width of the view.
http://i271.photobucket.com/albums/jj12 ... -angle.jpg

[PeauDouce]

Well, I would be more in favor of the isometric view since I'm mostly a Fallout fan but I won't make it a position of principle.
The thing that makes me wonder about top down view is the possibility of having animations as good as they were in Fallout (god were they good). I mean could you have something as pleasant as the "human torch" in top down view ?

I understand that fancyness isn't the first objective here but the quality of the graphics were important for every aspect of the game, it let some space for imagination while being a frame for the world.
I also understand that it is hard to challenge perfection but, to be the closest, I would think that 2D isometric is the best choice.

OK, just kidding, well not kidding actually but anyways, just kidding.

[Alaseur]

@ Gizmo,

I see. You're correct.

[DNSDies]

I'd prefer Isometric.

If the budget allows, an isometric view could utilize low-poly models for things like buildings, terrain, obstacles, and set pieces, with the nice hand-drawn artwork pasted on as a texture.