[Franklinstein]

Recently, I showed my friend my YouTube account channel. When he saw that there were videos stacked with these 2D adventure games, he said "omg, those are rubbish games - 2D!" with "graphics are worse than runescape!" He's always been the ignorant one, but today really shows it.

Why is it that people just take one look at an adventure game and decide that it's bad right away cause it has 2D graphics? I'd much rather set my xbox 360 controller down and play a game that requires wits and logic, not stupid frag 'em ups!

For all those who want to see my channel, it's stuffed with cool adventure games:

http://youtube.com/user/princeofeve1

[JKR]

You forgot to put a title to your thread.

Anyway, I agree. Too many people judge a game on a few screen shots or the style, without knowing if the game will be fun at all. Last gen there was a Gamecube game called Chibi Robo. It looked like crap, but it was one of the most fun experiences I've had in a while. Same for Katamari Damacy on the PS2.

I guess that's just a bias some people have. If it isn't shiny and 3D, they don't want it. What's really sad is it's THEM who are really missing out.

[LuigiHann]

The bias against 2D games has nothing to do with genre. It's mostly about age and experience, I suppose. If you were brought up playing 2D games, you'll like them, and if you were brought up on 3D games, you'll probably have trouble seeing the appeal of 2D.
I know some of the old Sam & Max fans wish that the new Telltale episodes were 2-D. That's the same closed-mindedness, but with the opposite bias.

[Melanie68]

I changed the thread title so the thread could be found at a future date if someone wanted to look for it.

[cwapitm]

Your friend doesn't know what he's missing. Most of my favorite games are 2D. Horray for 2D graphics!

[tsa]

To each his/her own of course, but one of the games I enjoyed most in recent years is Pleurghburg: Dark Ages. Hurray for horrible graphics!

[ShadeJackrabbit]

Pleurghburg, That game was amazing...

I don't actually care either way. You see, as long as a game has its own proper style that relates to the content, it's good. I mean, if Day of the Tentacle was rendered in 3D, it wouldn't look so much like a saturday-morning cartoon, which was one of the big good things about it.

Now, the issue with those new Sam and Max games is very similar, but they managed to avoid problems by making everything in very obvious and easy-to-tell colors, like a cartoon. Yet it also got you more into it, as opposed to feeling like you're just controlling it.

Whatever works really.

[JKR]

Originally Posted by LuigiHann

The bias against 2D games has nothing to do with genre. It's mostly about age and experience, I suppose. If you were brought up playing 2D games, you'll like them, and if you were brought up on 3D games, you'll probably have trouble seeing the appeal of 2D.
I know some of the old Sam & Max fans wish that the new Telltale episodes were 2-D. That's the same closed-mindedness, but with the opposite bias.

I'd disagree a little. I would rather then new Sam and Max games be 2D, but that's far from "That looks like garbage cause it's in 3D and I won't play it". I'm not going to badmouth Sam and Max for it, but I WOULD rather it was 2D like the old days. Not because I'm biased against 3D, but I simply like the look of them in 2D.

[Catbert]

I would like to see more 3d adventures with a first person perspective, but where you can actually control the character's every step by yourself and not with an arrow pointing to the left or to the right. Think Deus Ex. Loved that game

[LuigiHann]

Originally Posted by JKR

I'd disagree a little. I would rather then new Sam and Max games be 2D, but that's far from "That looks like garbage cause it's in 3D and I won't play it".

Yeah, but there are people who genuinely expressed opinions like the one in your exaggerated quote, especially when the first trailer appeared. I'm talking more about them than about you

[a|A]

Your friend falls into the same category of people who think that Goldeneye and Perfect Dark are rubbish games because the graphics are horrible ( by todays standards ). They need to realise that the games are revolutionary in design, they basically *invented* console gaming, and the gameplay mechanics are some of the best in the FPS console industry. It's the same with adventure games, it's now how the game looks but how it plays and controls. It's frustrating however that so many people rate a game simply on how it looks, and not how it performs.

[nrvllrgrs]

I think the question of 2D or 3D in adventure games is an absurd question. On a whole, neither is better or worse. When developing a game, the questions I would hope developers ask themselves is "which works best for this specific game and story?"

In Sam and Max: Hit the Road and Season 1, regardless of the graphically dimension of the game, the experience of the game was still entirely 2D.

[mart]

I can't understand a person can seriously assert that adventure games with 3D "look" better than 2D games. Even compared with older examples as mentioned (Discworld, Sam and Max). But certainly not with more recent 2D games with pre-rendered graphics. I thoroughly enjoyed for instance a recent "3D game" (rendered in 3D) like Culpa Innata, or 3D games like the last Broken Sword games and Sherlock Holmes games, but as far as the artwork is concerned they can't compete with games with pre-rendered graphics such as Still Life, Tunguska, or Undercover: Operation Wintersun. I recently replayed Black Mirror and every scene was a treat. When one is able to compare sometimes the concept art of 3D adventure games with the final result, one can only feel very sorry for the artists.

[Endow]

Originally Posted by Franklinstein

Why is it that people just take one look at an adventure game and decide that it's bad right away cause it has 2D graphics? I'd much rather set my xbox 360 controller down and play a game that requires wits and logic, not stupid frag 'em ups!

Why do you take one look at Xbox 360 games and decide they are "frag 'em ups" and stupid?Maybe you are doing the exact same thing your friend did. You are dismissing an entire group of games on a whim.Not to mention there are other non-"frag em ups" that aren't adventure games either.


As for your actual preference, twitch gameplay isn't necessarily worse than puzzle gameplay.I'm a fan of both and it depends on my mood. Both can be great and for me the best games use both.

Anyways, concerning 2d/3d even though I'm perfectly ok with 2d games I do think 3d can be better not because of graphical beauty (comparisons are futile - it's subjective) but because it opens up a lot of gameplay possibilities. Stuff you simply can't do in 2d games.

[MoonBird]

Originally Posted by Franklinstein

Recently, I showed my friend my YouTube account channel. When he saw that there were videos stacked with these 2D adventure games, he said "omg, those are rubbish games - 2D!"

This is so sad. I've noticed that too and so many of my friends have fallen in the same way. Graphics, graphics, graphics and 3D, 3D, 3D, nothing else matters anymore. It makes me sometimes angry to say the least.

2D graphics require much less from computer, and you can play them with not-so-up-to-date machine too. Also, I think that 2D is more beautiful, because it doesn't include any blockness. No graphics calculation points to make a circle angular. Altough I have to say, that 3D models rendered in 2D grapgics are intelligent today.

Originally Posted by Franklinstein

Why is it that people just take one look at an adventure game and decide that it's bad right away cause it has 2D graphics? I'd much rather set my xbox 360 controller down and play a game that requires wits and logic, not stupid frag 'em ups!

A very, very good question! I, myself have turned the whole thing upside-down. I mean, if I see 3D graphics in games, I don't propably even bother playing with them (there are bunch of exceptions, of course) And that's just because the reason you mentioned.

Now I do not want to generalize, but the truth just is that many 3D games are dull and sensless shooting around and they don't have anything that requires thinking. I have come to conclusion, that today's people do not have the patience and nerves for logic puzzles and it seems to me, that they can't appreciate the story in games.

I have noticed, that most of the adventure Players are conciderating, thinking, and calm people. And many of those playing shoot'em ups and wargames seem to be aggressive, cold and hasty. These are my notifications, and not the absolute truth, because it cannot be generalized.

[tsa]

Originally Posted by MoonBird

This is so sad. I've noticed that too and so many of my friends have fallen in the same way. Graphics, graphics, graphics and 3D, 3D, 3D, nothing else matters anymore. It makes me sometimes angry to say the least.

8<

If I see 3D graphics in games, I don't propably even bother playing with them (there are bunch of exceptions, of course) And that's just because the reason you mentioned.

Now I do not want to generalize...

First you complain about your friends only wanting 3D, then you tell us that you dismiss 3D games most of the time, and then you say you don't want to generalize? Come on, you're just like your friends!

This thread shows that there are different people in the world. I find it a bit strange that some of you are so upset that there are people who look for other qualities in a game than puzzles and a story. When I tell random people that I like to play adventure games I see blank-looking faces nearly all the time. Almost all people are convinced that computer games are all about fast, and reflexes, and noise, and when you tell them there is a whole different type of games out there that they have never seen they have a hard time understanding or even believing that. We adventure gamers are an elitist bunch, and we'll just have to deal with that.

[MdaG]

I used to dislike 3D adventures, but today I really think it would be superior to the 2D approach as it opens up a whole dimension to tell a story and put puzzles in. Also the 3D games of today can look at least as good as the 2D games of yesterday.

[Terramax]

The problem I have with a lot of 3D adventures is they all look so spacious and sparse of detail. When you're indoors in locations with cramped corridors and offices with heaps of paper and other items all over the place it looks good.

But when it's in outdoor locations like Canterbury in BS3, it's just looks almost amateur.

[Endow]

Originally Posted by MoonBird

Now I do not want to generalize, but the truth just is that many 3D games are dull and sensless shooting around and they don't have anything that requires thinking. I have come to conclusion, that today's people do not have the patience and nerves for logic puzzles and it seems to me, that they can't appreciate the story in games.

Maybe you just haven't played enough games. The ARE 3d Adventure games you know?Good ones at that. Myst V, Indigo Prophecy, Shadow of the Colossus, Legacy of Kain etc etc....

And please don't treat good story as a propriety exclusive to adventure games.

I mean dismissing 3d games because they are 3d is in itself a sin. I mean if you defend 2d games alone you also have LOADS of violent games on your end. All current genres were born in the 2d era never forget.

3d is simply the logical evolution for all genres. Is realMyst any less "smart" because it's 3d and not 2d like the original?

[ShadeJackrabbit]

You do make a good point. There are tons of really violent games of the 2D variety. And besides, I haven't ever heard a really compelling reason for one side being better than the other. In the olden-days, 3D adventure games may have been worse cause they didn't look as good, but nowadays I think most people are stuck in either that mindset, or the mindset that the old tech should just die. Either way, it's not good.

How about we decided to drop this argument, and instead of dividing games based on 2D-3D, we divide them on things like story vs. no-story. I mean, was The Dig less superior cause it didn't render on the fly? No. Was Myst V a horrible game because of rendering on the fly? No. The reason they're good or bad is based on things like the story.

Besides, who are we? The "next-gen-console" fanboys who will talk trash about anything which doesn't involve the latest and greatest 3D rendering tech, or an elite group of gamers willing to look at this as another form of art?

I'd say we're the latter.