Edge article on G.Rev, MileStone, Triangle Service

[sethsez]

Funny he alludes to the own [Japanese] vision and style to develop [games] and he forgets how important are bitmap-based graphics in it.

Not at all?

Western and eastern games both relied almost entirely on bitmap graphics for an extremely long time. Then, around the same time, they both switched over to polygons, with certain genres remaining with sprites for a while longer. There's nothing inherantly Japanese about bitmap graphics, and there's nothing inherant in Japanese game design that requires bitmap graphics.

[Turrican]

Not at all?

Western and eastern games both relied almost entirely on bitmap graphics for an extremely long time. Then, around the same time, they both switched over to polygons, with certain genres remaining with sprites for a while longer. There's nothing inherantly Japanese about bitmap graphics, and there's nothing inherant in Japanese game design that requires bitmap graphics.

Heh, you're the man, sethsez

[Recap]

Not at all?

Western and eastern games both relied almost entirely on bitmap graphics for an extremely long time. Then, around the same time, they both switched over to polygons, with certain genres remaining with sprites for a while longer. There's nothing inherantly Japanese about bitmap graphics, and there's nothing inherant in Japanese game design that requires bitmap graphics.

Well, actually, there is. Visually, Japanese game art is based strongly on illustrations and 2D design, so, traditionally, bitmap graphics are much more suitable for the way they understand visual game art. When 3D appeared, the West immediately "ceased any 2D activity", while you still can see pure 2D games coming from Japan. Of course, there are exceptions and of course, today, most of the Japanese games have real-time 3D graphics, but that's just the result of this globalization shit.

[raiden]

isn´t the graphical dimension rather determined by genre? There used to be 2d racing games when 3d was not an option, but once it was, going back to 2d didn´t make sense because 3d enables more gameplay opportunities for racing games. Same goes for FPS games: once hardware is able to render 3d enemies, going back to sprites doesn´t make sense.
When it comes to 3d backgrounds in shmups, reasons change: they don´t do it because 3d backgrounds suit the genre better, but because they are cheaper to produce nowadays. But this is done in western-made PC shmups just as well as Japanese arcade and doujin shmups. If you think the need to cut costs can be summed up under "this globalization shit", you may have a point, but one could argue that in this case, it´s rather to do with the genre losing popularity than with anything remotely connected to the issue of globalization.

[Recap]

isn´t the graphical dimension rather determined by genre? There used to be 2d racing games when 3d was not an option, but once it was, going back to 2d didn´t make sense because 3d enables more gameplay opportunities for racing games. Same goes for FPS games: once hardware is able to render 3d enemies, going back to sprites doesn´t make sense.

That supports my thesis, indeed. You're speaking about very specific genres, one of them, only known in the West and the other, almost adopted by Westerners as theirs. Why? They're 3D.

When it comes to 3d backgrounds in shmups, reasons change: they don´t do it because 3d backgrounds suit the genre better, but because they are cheaper to produce nowadays. But this is done in western-made PC shmups just as well as Japanese arcade and doujin shmups. If you think the need to cut costs can be summed up under "this globalization shit", you may have a point, but one could argue that in this case, it´s rather to do with the genre losing popularity than with anything remotely connected to the issue of globalization.

To cut costs is obviously part of this, but indeed it's connected to the "globalization" thing. How couldn't it. 3D invaded the industry and created a new 3D-only gamers generation. So you needed to satisfy them all, in a worldwide dimension. Newer Japanese gamers are part of the 3D generation now since they almost ignore what a sprite is, so it doesn't really matter if the game is going to be released only for the Japanese public - a huge part of it wants 3D graphics now. Due to the globalization shit.

[Turrican]

3D invaded the industry and created a new 3D-only gamers generation. So you needed to satisfy them all, in a worldwide dimension. Newer Japanese gamers are part of the 3D generation now since they almost ignore what a sprite is, so it doesn't really matter if the game is going to be released only for the Japanese public - a huge part of it wants 3D graphics now. Due to the globalization shit.

Best example of misleaded "2D good, 3D bad" theory I've ever read. Now 3D would be an effect of globalization (as opposed as wonderful bitmap illustration, an ancient art that has been practiced in medieval Japan since the Sengoku period). Not too mention that pile of american trash that invaded the world with the bad playstation: yes, Tekken, Ridge Racer, Sould Edge... Damn, I can't stand those namco yankees.

[TGK]

3D invaded the industry and created a new 3D-only gamers generation...

Best example of misleaded "2D good, 3D bad" theory I've ever read. Now 3D would be an effect of globalization (as opposed as wonderful bitmap illustration, an ancient art that has been practiced in medieval Japan since the Sengoku period)...

I welcome 3D in shmups though. I think it is neither a set back nor a radical departure from the root. It may just be a necessity.

Development for 3D takes less artist resource, can be potentially a lot quicker, and is much more flexible.

Plus a 3D art style, mixed with some cinematic elements like panning camera angle, makes for a more updated look. The gameplay is still intact if coded well, but the shmup might stand a chance to attract one of those newer gamers who got introduced into gaming with 3D.

[Recap]

Best example of misleaded "2D good, 3D bad" theory I've ever read.

Cool, 'cause there's not a single post by me here implying that "2D good, 3D bad" per se. Learn to "read" properly.

Now 3D would be an effect of globalization (as opposed as wonderful bitmap illustration, an ancient art that has been practiced in medieval Japan since the Sengoku period). Not too mention that pile of american trash that invaded the world with the bad playstation: yes, Tekken, Ridge Racer, Sould Edge... Damn, I can't stand those namco yankees.

Is that all you have? Namco, of course, is one of the best examples of those worried about satisfying the Western public, which only cared already about how many polygons per second could be moved. While in Japan, Tekken or Soul Edge were even less popular than, say, Vampire Hunter or King of Fighters '95, in the Western countries you only could find the 3D iterations, both, in the arcades and in the home market.

[Recap]

The gameplay is still intact if coded well,

Not agreed, there. Even the best coded 2D games with 3D graphics and effects (Ikaruga, Gradius V) can't mimic perfectly the genuine "sprite-based gameplay". It's hard to explain with my poor English, but it's a matter of visual precision and feeling. To understand it, think about any 2D fighting game with 3D graphics (SFEX, Maximum Impact, Slap Happy...); it just isn't the same. It can't be. Even the fake low-res 2D fighting games (CVS, Neo Wave...) feel differently when you play them due to the filters, unclear hitboxes and stupid light effects.

but the shmup might stand a chance to attract one of those newer gamers who got introduced into gaming with 3D.

Thanks to that policy, 2D art is over. Wait till Cave and the other two which still make 2D RPG's die or take the 3D route.

[Turrican]

Best example of misleaded "2D good, 3D bad" theory I've ever read.

Cool, 'cause there's not a single post by me here implying that "2D good, 3D bad" per se. Learn to "read" properly.

Of course, there are exceptions and of course, today, most of the Japanese games have real-time 3D graphics, but that's just the result of this globalization shit.

Is that all you have? Namco, of course, is one of the best examples of those worried about satisfying the Western public, which only cared already about how many polygons per second could be moved. While in Japan, Tekken or Soul Edge were even less popular than, say, Vampire Hunter or King of Fighters '95, in the Western countries you only could find the 3D iterations, both, in the arcades and in the home market.

Tell me, how is that the West was so quick to embrace 3D as opposed (in your vision) to Japan? Maybe because we didn't have traditional bitmap games?

And who would be the herald of 2D that opposes namco? Capcom? it sold more biohazards than Vampires.

No, no... let me guess... you're thinking to Cave, right?

Sweet Dreams my friend. Anyone who doesn't see King of Fighters for what it is, a product aimed to an hardcore niche of fans, doesn't have the least grasp of reality.

http://www.wired.com/news/games/0,2101, ... _tophead_2

Let me quote the master:

"What's happening with video games is the same thing that happens with anything new and interesting. At the beginning, everybody wants to see what it is. They gather around and check it out. But gradually, people start to lose interest.

The people who don't lose interest become more and more involved. And the medium starts to be influenced by only those people. It becomes something exclusive to the people who've stuck with it for a long time. And when the people who were interested in it at first look back at it, it's no longer the thing that interested them."

[Turrican]

Even the best coded 2D games with 3D graphics and effects (Ikaruga, Gradius V) can't mimic perfectly the genuine "sprite-based gameplay". It's hard to explain with my poor English, but it's a matter of visual precision and feeling. To understand it, think about any 2D fighting game with 3D graphics (SFEX, Maximum Impact, Slap Happy...); it just isn't the same. It can't be.

It seems more an issue of being obsessed than an matter of good English.

[Acid King]

To cut costs is obviously part of this, but indeed it's connected to the "globalization" thing. How couldn't it. 3D invaded the industry and created a new 3D-only gamers generation. So you needed to satisfy them all, in a worldwide dimension. Newer Japanese gamers are part of the 3D generation now since they almost ignore what a sprite is, so it doesn't really matter if the game is going to be released only for the Japanese public - a huge part of it wants 3D graphics now. Due to the globalization shit.

The move to 3d has absolutely nothing to do with globalization and everything to do with technology and a change in peoples tastes. Even if you confined the video game market to one location, the increase in graphics power would cause a shift to 3d design and gameplay, which would cause a shift in peoples tastes to 3d.

[Recap]

Tell me, how is that the West was so quick to embrace 3D as opposed (in your vision) to Japan? Maybe because we didn't have traditional bitmap games?

Because Westerners just couldn't compete with the Japanese 2D game art.

And who would be the herald of 2D that opposes namco? Capcom? it sold more biohazards than Vampires.

No, no... let me guess... you're thinking to Cave, right?

Sweet Dreams my friend. Anyone who doesn't see King of Fighters for what it is, a product aimed to an hardcore niche of fans, doesn't have the least grasp of reality.

Your vision is partial and limited to your small side of the world. KOF is still an institution in Japan (it was the most played arcade game once, but hey), and one of the most popular franchises in Asia and Latin America. Documentation before asseverations, please.

[TGK]

The gameplay is still intact if coded well,

Not agreed, there. Even the best coded 2D games with 3D graphics and effects (Ikaruga, Gradius V) can't mimic perfectly the genuine "sprite-based gameplay".

Well, I don't understand why you'd think so. Since hitbox collision detection code is exactly the same, regardless of the graphic style.

Granted, it is tough in 3D to orientate a model so that you can always count on the hitbox to be exactly where it should be. (partly because there isn't much of a rule for 3D artist to develop models with a fixed point of reference, which is more natural to sprites).

But I've always thought that making a company-wide policy that "the origin coordinate should always correspond to the center of bottom surface of the model bounding box" wouldn't be too hard. (similar to the "origin should always corresponds to the lower left corner of a sprite" convention).

I admit that 3D style in 2D games isn't perfect yet. But I don't see why it can't be done.

[Turrican]

Because Westerners just couldn't compete with the Japanese 2D game art.

Your vision is partial and limited to your small side of the world.

Huh, huh. My vision is partial, I get it.

[Recap]

Well, I don't understand why you'd think so. Since hitbox collision detection code is exactly the same, regardless of the graphic style.

I mentioned the collision detection/hitbox issue refering to scaled-up, filtered 2D games. It doesn't have to be there, and it's not the only problem, but it's part of what makes the game gameplay-wise less comfortable. Let me insist, just compare CP-S II/SS Street Fighter Zero 3 and Naomi/DC Capcom vs. SNK 2, for instance.

I admit that 3D style in 2D games isn't perfect yet. But I don't see why it can't be done.

My answer: 'Cause a polygon model and a sprite are totally different things when you put them on screen. It's a matter of the hardware itself and how it handles and presents graphics. I know, vague, probably useless, explanation, but I said it was not easy with my English. Additionally, think about the animation itself - you are limited to the own model with 3D graphics, while you aren't with pure 2D.

[TGK]

I admit that 3D style in 2D games isn't perfect yet. But I don't see why it can't be done.

My answer: 'Cause a polygon model and a sprite are totally different things when you put them on screen. It's a matter of the hardware itself and how it handles and presents graphics.

They should be the same. The only case where they are not is when the model is blocky and thus feels unnatural to the eyes. That is being fixed every year with better hardware and graphic libraries.

The other case where they are not the same is when the perspective is different. With 3D graphics you can have very creative perspective. Sometimes something displayed "close" to a 2D perspective, but not exactly, will throw you off if you are expecting exact 90 degree projection (this is what happens with the 3D fighting games, they are not exactly sideview in perspective)

But I welcome that constantly shifting perspective as a breath of fresh air. Ikaruga achieves its epic atmosphere better partly because the graphic was 3D, IMHO. It's hard to slap a serious story on a shmup with Dodonpachi graphics, don't you think?

Edit: I just realize that Battle Garrega has a serious style, so my Dodonpachi remarks is unfound. But I do think Ikaruga was enhanced by its 3D gfx.

[Turrican]

But I welcome that constantly shifting perspective as a breath of fresh air. Ikaruga achieves its epic atmosphere better partly because the graphic was 3D, IMHO. It's hard to slap a serious story on a shmup with Dodonpachi graphics, don't you think?.

Err, no. I thought DDP was pretty epic by the way. Now, R-Type Final...

[TGK]

but the shmup might stand a chance to attract one of those newer gamers who got introduced into gaming with 3D.

Thanks to that policy, 2D art is over...

Not at all. 2D is still the most beautiful way to make backgrounds in some situations (especially shmups). There is also nothing to prevent sprites to be mixed with models. When you do an exact 90 degree projection, a model looks like a sprite.

It's just that 2D won't be the sole (or main) method to make game art anymore. I see no wrong in that, since it cut cost, allowing more resource to go into gameplay and other things (the day-to-day business cost included).

And yes, about introducing new gamers to shmups, I think it's necessary. I want to see a day when I would code a shmup in my day-job because shmup starts to sell again. Man, that is a bit farfetched, but a guy can dream.

[Recap]

My answer: 'Cause a polygon model and a sprite are totally different things when you put them on screen. It's a matter of the hardware itself and how it handles and presents graphics.

They should be the same. The only case where they are not is when the model is blocky and thus feels unnatural to the eyes. That is being fixed every year with better hardware and graphic libraries.

Well, I myself can't explain it any better. Sprites, tiles, true low res, absence of filters... it all opposes to the 3D presentation for a totally different sensation.

But I welcome that constantly shifting perspective as a breath of fresh air. Ikaruga achieves its epic atmosphere better partly because the graphic was 3D, IMHO. It's hard to slap a serious story on a shmup with Dodonpachi graphics, don't you think?

You also can do perspective changes with sprites, see Layer Section. And I don't find the "atmosphere" of Ikaruga more "epic" than the one of Radiant Silvergun, to be honest, a mainly 2D game.

[Recap]

Not at all. 2D is still the most beautiful way to make backgrounds in some situations (especially shmups). There is also nothing to prevent sprites to be mixed with models. When you do an exact 90 degree projection, a model looks like a sprite.

Most likely, it won't. Because of the filters and other 3D effects, you know.

It's just that 2D won't be the sole (or main) method to make game art anymore. I see no wrong in that, since it cut cost, allowing more resource to go into gameplay and other things (the day-to-day business cost included).

Seriously, have you counted how many 2D developers are still there? Even handhelds are now 3D. Pure 2D games are history, and that's exactly the problem.

[TGK]

But I welcome that constantly shifting perspective as a breath of fresh air. Ikaruga achieves its epic atmosphere better partly because the graphic was 3D, IMHO. It's hard to slap a serious story on a shmup with Dodonpachi graphics, don't you think?.

Err, no. I thought DDP was pretty epic by the way. Now, R-Type Final...

DDP has a "happy" feel to it.

[TGK]

Not at all. 2D is still the most beautiful way to make backgrounds in some situations (especially shmups). There is also nothing to prevent sprites to be mixed with models. When you do an exact 90 degree projection, a model looks like a sprite.

Most likely, it won't. Because of the filters and other 3D effects, you know.

...

I'm trying to find you an example where mixed 3D/2D works. It might take a while since I probably need to replay a bunch of things to find it.

[Recap]

I'm trying to find you an example where mixed 3D/2D works. It might take a while since I probably need to replay a bunch of things to find it.

What about this: Grandia for the SS. Backgrounds are fully polygonal. Why did it work? Because their textures were not scaled, nor filtered. It's a good example on how 3D may have a 2D treatment. It didn't really matter that behind the background textures were polygons, since it looked as a 2D game. I like to think about this game as a pure 2D one, indeed. But that way to conceive 3D graphics is also missing. Filters-based systems ruined it too.

[TGK]

I'm trying to find you an example where mixed 3D/2D works. It might take a while since I probably need to replay a bunch of things to find it.

What about this: Grandia for the SS. Backgrounds are fully polygonal. Why did it work? Because their textures were not scaled, nor filtered. It's a good example on how 3D may have a 2D treatment. It didn't really matter that behind the background textures were polygons, since it looked as a 2D game. I like to think about this game as a pure 2D one, indeed. But that way to conceive 3D graphics is also missing. Filters-based systems ruined it too.

Good example. I was trying to think of a shmup though.

On that note, I would offer my opinion on elements that would work in a 2D/3D hybrid:

1) Particle system for explosion & weapon
2) Mipmapped textures (so that it doesn't look blocky when close to you)
3) Lense flares
4) 3D models on 2d background
5) Use all polygons for scenes where there is camera panning, then add sprites whenever the game go back exact projection (either vert or hori or 3/4)

A wise design choice would be to limit sprite use for ships however, since animating them is more pain than meets the eyes.

[sethsez]

When 3D appeared, the West immediately "ceased any 2D activity"

Oh, oh, can I call bullshit on this?

Many RTS games still come out with sprite-based graphics. Some of the most popular and respected PC RPGs of the past decade were entirely 2D, including Planescape which is considered by many to be an absolute classic. Rollercoaster Tycoon sold millions upon millions of copies and got rave reviews from everyone, yet it only actually went 3D last year. Diablo inspired many, many clones, most of which were (and are) 2D.

The myth that the west gave up 2D gaming is just that: a myth. It's still quite easy to find sprite-based games on the PC, though they may not be your preferred genres. And yes, within the past few years development on 2D in general has gone downhill in these genres, but the same can be said for Japanese development as well, where even the biggest holdouts (shmups among them) have been becoming predominately 3D as well. Still, 2D games get developed and released in both parts of the world, so claiming otherwise is nothing more than ignorance, or willful twisting of the facts in order to make Japan look better and blame 3D on the west.

[Recap]

It's as easy as this, since you seem to like comparisons: Put here a list of all the pure 2D graphics-based, non fan-made games released during the last year made in Western countries and I'll list the Japanese titles. Let's see if the Western 2D is significative enough to "call bullshit on my arguments".

[Recap]

Good example. I was trying to think of a shmup though.

On that note, I would offer my opinion on elements that would work in a 2D/3D hybrid:

1) Particle system for explosion & weapon
2) Mipmapped textures (so that it doesn't look blocky when close to you)
3) Lense flares
4) 3D models on 2d background
5) Use all polygons for scenes where there is camera panning, then add sprites whenever the game go back exact projection (either vert or hori or 3/4)

A wise design choice would be to limit sprite use for ships however, since animating them is more pain than meets the eyes.

Definitely, we won't agree on this one. I can't see the genre benefiting from any 3D effect, like the ones you mention. A "hybrid" with real time 3D models instead of sprites just can't be the same for me. And, since ROM limitations are not an issue today, why 2D animation could be a problem? If they're too lazy to draw frames, they could even pre-render the models and create the sprites and frames from them. Giga Wing's ships are good examples of this.

[highlandcattle]

Good example. I was trying to think of a shmup though.

On that note, I would offer my opinion on elements that would work in a 2D/3D hybrid:

1) Particle system for explosion & weapon
2) Mipmapped textures (so that it doesn't look blocky when close to you)
3) Lense flares
4) 3D models on 2d background
5) Use all polygons for scenes where there is camera panning, then add sprites whenever the game go back exact projection (either vert or hori or 3/4)

A wise design choice would be to limit sprite use for ships however, since animating them is more pain than meets the eyes.

Definitely, we won't agree on this one. I can't see the genre benefiting from any 3D effect, like the ones you mention. A "hybrid" with real time 3D models instead of sprites just can't be the same for me. And, since ROM limitations are not an issue today, why 2D animation could be a problem? If they're too lazy to draw frames, they could even pre-render the models and create the sprites and frames from them. Giga Wing's ships are good examples of this.[/quote
King of fighters is another example all prerendered.
BTW The Behemoth's Alien Hominid is a good example of a great looking 2D game produced in the west.
Also your latin america point is mute,the reason they still use NG and Super Mario machines is because they are to poor to invest in new machines.In mexico city a game of supermariobros cost one peso, i don't thikn they could ask that price if it was the latest cabinet with Outrun 2 or Soul Calibur 3

[sethsez]

Ignoring portable games and compilations since that makes it too easy:

Alien Homonid
Cossacks 2
Supreme Ruler 2010
Hearts of Iron II
Blitzkrieg: Rolling Thunder
Port Royale 2
Chris Sawyer's Locomotion
Necromania
Yohoho! Puzzle Pirates (and the myriad of other puzzle games popularized by Popcap and co.)
Far too many Tycoon games to count

Mostly limited to a few genres, and it's less than it was in 2002-2003, but I already said as much. I'm also not counting games with sprite objects and polygonal backgrounds, nor am I counting the Myst style of adventure games which, while technically 2D, aren't what you had in mind. And these are taken entirely from memory and a quick search at Gamespot... I know there are ones I'm missing.

So yeah, your assertion that the west dropped 2D as soon as 3D came along (which is what I was arguing, so I'm not sure why you brought up this year because that has no relevance, but whatever) isn't true. Both the strategy genre and the RPG/action RPG genre relied heavily on 2D graphics long after FPS and its ilk had established that 3D was not only viable, but commercially preferrable. To say otherwise is to ignore some of the biggest and most popular PC games and companies of the last decade.