2D Sprites or 3D Models? [poll added]

[krellen]

As far as I'm concerned, graphics never needed to evolve past Fallout; those graphics are still fine today (though a bit more resolution is probably in order, given the resolution of monitors these days.)

[Aradael]

Could be they are sprites, and if so they work for me.

[geezer]

Whatever your artists are most comfortable with. If your artists are more comfortable and experienced with 2D sprites then go that way. If they think they can do a better job with 3D models then do that. Either way I hope when you refer to "top down" you mean isometric top down not a perfectly straight down view of the tops of characters' heads. It also might depend on the engine. If you find a great engine for your purposes but it requires 3D models then go with that. Well unless your artists aren't good at 3D modeling. I think 3D art and 2D art require very different artistic skills. If you find a great 3D engine but your artists are more inclined toward 2D then that could be a problem.

[Tuco]

As far as I'm concerned, graphics never needed to evolve past Fallout; those graphics are still fine today (though a bit more resolution is probably in order, given the resolution of monitors these days.)

To be honest, Fallout graphics weren't that good in the first place, not even for their times.

Beside, as I said that game has the worst of both worlds. Don't get me wrong, I loved it, but Fallout characters were 3D renders ported as 2D sprites, so they had that plastic feeling that old 3D renders used to have, plus the lack of flexibility typical of bitmap graphics.

If they aren't going with cool and nicely animated hand-drawn sprites (which can be quite expensive and time consuming in large amounts) then they shouldn't bother with 2D at all, and use 3D models instead.
They are easier to animate, easier to rotate in any given direction, they can show off what the characters are actually equipping and they can scale nicely at any resolution.

As i already stated in few threads at this point, personally, as far as I'm concerned, I would love to see simple and stylized 3D characters with very cool animations (which to me are like the 90% of visual appeal in a game, if done properly); something at mid way between Temple of Elemental Evil and Another World.
Another option with a better budget and some talented artist, would be to look at neat looking RTS like Dawn Of War/Starcraft/COmpany of Heroes as inspiration.

[burrahobbit]

Well, as stated before, 2D tends to age way better than 3D.

2D backgrounds combined with 3D rendered models turned into 2D sprites (to be able to use a high amount of polys and high res texturing without asking for excesive resources, and while at the time saving the time needed if one where to do by hand each of the faces of a sprite) is the best way to go in my opinion.

[enderandrew]

Well, as stated before, 2D tends to age way better than 3D.

2D backgrounds combined with 3D rendered models turned into 2D sprites (to be able to use a high amount of polys and high res texturing without asking for excesive resources, and while at the time saving the time needed if one where to do by hand each of the faces of a sprite) is the best way to go in my opinion.

The best 2D sprites look decent compared to bad 3D graphics. But I wouldn't say all sprites have aged well, or that decent 3D graphics today won't age well, when we're already so close to photo-realism.

[Wonderboy2402]

Well, as stated before, 2D tends to age way better than 3D.

2D backgrounds combined with 3D rendered models turned into 2D sprites (to be able to use a high amount of polys and high res texturing without asking for excesive resources, and while at the time saving the time needed if one where to do by hand each of the faces of a sprite) is the best way to go in my opinion.

The best 2D sprites look decent compared to bad 3D graphics. But I wouldn't say all sprites have aged well, or that decent 3D graphics today won't age well, when we're already so close to photo-realism.

3D models with 2D backgrounds would be great imo. I have always loved the hand drawn detail in the maps and levels of the infinity engine games.

[Tuco]

Well, as stated before, 2D tends to age way better than 3D.

Maybe a decade ago. Now things are shifted quite a bit.
A talented modeler/animator can easily render and texture a 3D model to be absolutely comparable with a 2D sprite as generic appeal, and way easier to animate.
And on top of that, 3D is way more handy and cost-effective for the reasons I already pointed in the previous posts.
3D models turned in 2D sprites, I'm going to say it again, offer the worst of both worlds.

Just to take a recent example you can look at Xenonauts: they went for a 2D engine cause that's what the coder was more confident with, and they never stopped cursing their decision since then, as it made their lives way more complicated with all the problems rendering those sprites in different fashions (they don't have female soldiers cause they can't afford to re-draw all the sprites for female models, for instance).

[xbogx]

It seems a lot of the discussion here is between real-time 3d and pre-rendered 3d which to me is mostly the same. I don't find much value in photorealism in games. I'd much rather have the artist work in a more expressive medium, like Arne did:



Of course, if it's more cost effective to do decent 3d graphics, i''l be ok with that as well

[Sub-Human]

I have a difficult time deciding. After all, 3D models are easy to go around with. So I think that'd be the way to go. But if you want to have a more of a 90s RPG feel... I dunno.

[Gizmo]

3D models with 2D backgrounds would be great imo. I have always loved the hand drawn detail in the maps and levels of the infinity engine games.

Me too... except, that while it was 2D, it wasn't exactly all hand drawn...

[geezer]

What do you mean by 'pre-rendered'? Is that like an illustration in a book? I've often thought a text based game with well drawn illustrations could be a cheap way of creating an interesting game. I remember the first time I played Tomb of Horrors or the Hidden Shrine of Tomoachan. I loved those illustrations. With a fixed illustration the artist can put in so much detail to make the image come alive. Your imagination can supply the rest.

[Tuco]

I have a difficult time deciding. After all, 3D models are easy to go around with. So I think that'd be the way to go. But if you want to have a more of a 90s RPG feel... I dunno.

Well, I can't speak for others but what I want is a old school gameplay with old school depth in the mechanics.
Not really "old school graphics" or tech limits.
And yes, graphics aren't the main point of this kind of game (of any kind of game, actually, as far as I'm concerned) but that doesn't mean that I don't want this project to look at least appealing to some extent; "pretty", so to say.

And I'm absolutely in love with good 2d graphics (have you guys played Rayman Origin? Wonderful stuff); I just don't think it suits very well an isometric, tactical, party based RPG, especially considering the low budget.

[Tuco]

What do you mean by 'pre-rendered'? Is that like an illustration in a book?

No, a "pre-rendered" thing is factually a 3D model, sometime ported in static 2D frames and turned into a bitmap image/animation (a solution useful years ago when 3D was relatively more demanding on the hardware, absolutely pointless and impractical today).

[geezer]

I have to agree with Tuco. I want to feel like I'm really there in the Wasteland. Detailed graphics can do that. Although good text descriptions can do an even better job. But if you are going to have graphics at all they should be as good as you can afford to make them. Games from the 90s did the best they could. Some of my favorite games were made in the 90s, but it wasn't the graphics that made them great. I loved Ultima Underworld for instance, but I was happy when Ultima Underworld II slightly improved the graphics. Both games just look silly now. More fitting for something you might play on an Ipad.

One of my favorite games from the early 80s was Crush, Crumble and Chomp, but when I tried to go back and play it with an emulator, I couldn't do it. The graphics were so primitive that they ruined the game for me. Nostalgia is nice, but it's not something to base a game on. I hope inXile makes the best looking game that they can with the most beautiful art assets. Graphics are not my priority, but I don't see any compelling reason to make a worse looking game than Fallout 1 or Age of Decadence. GemRB is free. There is just no compelling reason to have graphics that are any worse than Baldur's Gate 1.

[Citronvand]

I have to agree with Tuco. I want to feel like I'm really there in the Wasteland. Detailed graphics can do that. Although good text descriptions can do an even better job. But if you are going to have graphics at all they should be as good as you can afford to make them. Games from the 90s did the best they could. Some of my favorite games were made in the 90s, but it wasn't the graphics that made them great. I loved Ultima Underworld for instance, but I was happy when Ultima Underworld II slightly improved the graphics. Both games just look silly now. More fitting for something you might play on an Ipad.

One of my favorite games from the early 80s was Crush, Crumble and Chomp, but when I tried to go back and play it with an emulator, I couldn't do it. The graphics were so primitive that they ruined the game for me. Nostalgia is nice, but it's not something to base a game on. I hope inXile makes the best looking game that they can with the most beautiful art assets. Graphics are not my priority, but I don't see any compelling reason to make a worse looking game than Fallout 1 or Age of Decadence. GemRB is free. There is just no compelling reason to have graphics that are any worse than Baldur's Gate 1.

I agree, which is why I want the game to be made in 2D. Or at least make the world in 2D if they're going to have 3D models for characters.

[enderandrew]

3D models and 3D engine really is the way to go. A good 3D engine can evoke 2D art styles quite well, especially from fixed camera angles. A 2D engine however needs sprites for everything and can't fake 3D effects well.

[Alaseur]

Even a 2d isometric game can utilize any art assets made in 3D. As with pre-rendered 3D assets a 2D hand drawn sprite still inhabits the same pixel space on any scale. The models would only need to be rendered from different angles which show all sides of a model. Even with a fixed camera angle you can utilize these types of assets again and again because no two sides should look the same.

If sprites and their animations are a sequence of images then even explosions or gun fire could be made for a 2D isometric game world. It is my understanding that any 2D isometric game world is a tile based grid where objects, event's, and triggers occupy any number of these tiles.

Let's take a boulder or rock formation for example. Even with a 2D isometric game world the developers could deliver a realistic visual experience with pre-rendered assets.

Boulder angle 1:...............................................................Boulder angle 2:


Boulder angle 3:...............................................................Boulder angle 4:


With pre-rendered 3D assets you also have the ability to include diffuse, normal, and ambient occlusion maps with asset's being textured at any resolution. Since these objects and maps wouldn't be rendered in real time with 1024 or 4096 resolution textures, real time dynamic shadows, or any amount of polygons you can include as much detail as you desire. Just those that exist inside the production of those assets. These are all 2D images that could be scaled to fit any space on a tile based grid.

You also have a limitless allowance of customization when it comes to working with 3D models. You can modify any number of pre-made clothes, armor, weapons, objects, buildings, plants, and environments with ease.

[Tuco]

3D models and 3D engine really is the way to go. A good 3D engine can evoke 2D art styles quite well, especially from fixed camera angles. A 2D engine however needs sprites for everything and can't fake 3D effects well.

Exactly. Let's take the recent DOTA 2 beta as example: it has a 3D scenario with a (mostly) fixed camera angle that can actually compare with best 2D art, both in smoothness and detail.
Of course, it should be pointed that Valve isn't exactly composed from a bunch of amateurs.

Even a 2d isometric game can utilize any art assets made in 3D. As with pre-rendered 3D assets a 2D hand drawn sprite...

Yeah, but as your very post proves, it's a quite annoying, costly and time consuming thing, compared to just using the same 3D asset in a 3D engine.

[Alaseur]

I'd love to see the game made in a 3D engine. Let's say it isn't made in one though. I'd rather see the same content in a 2d isometric game engine instead of hand drawn sprites.