Speaking of 2D shooters, for all you nostalgic types, have a look for RefleX. It's only a 2-stage demo and it's in japanese but, wow, I've never seen such an awesome game. The graphic effects are top-notch and the soundtrack is totally out of this world.

Review
Homepage (scroll down a little to RefleX).

There's one major gripe I have with 3D: it has killed some genres. You just don't see 3D puzzlers (save for a few failiures... Tetrisphere, anyone? ) anymore. And a lot of 2D->3D conversions really suck. Fighting games, for instance. Though that last one is personal opinion.

Meh, to each their own. I'll stick with 2D, thank you.

[edited by - RuneLancer on November 7, 2003 12:27:41 PM]

Actually, NeoShaman... I think 3D games have become easier/cheaper to produce then 2D games, because 2D requires a lot more work from the artists to create decent-looking animations.

[edited by - Tisephone on November 7, 2003 2:14:08 PM]

RuneLancer, personal preference is right. I think MK: Dark Alliance is the finest fighter to date.

quote: Original post by Iron Chef Carnage
RuneLancer, personal preference is right. I think MK: Dark Alliance is the finest fighter to date.

Blasphemy! None shall ever rise above Samurai Shodown III! Except maybe 2, because it has Cham Cham and good god is she ever cute!

(Yes, yes, still personal preferences there. But daaaamn, if I could take one fighting game with me to heaven, it''d be SS3. )

3D fighting has just own their own game style
their is dead or alive, tobal 2, virtua fighter, bloody roar primal fury (not really the previous)
they taste simply different , and they rock in their style

dead or alive, great balance of technique and simplcity think twice before a opponent, read in him, just like in true martial art

tobal 2, great with a lot of innova&tion , but it''s required a lot of technic to master

virtua fighter, the true martial art game, but require a lot of skill and training because it''s the more technical

primal fury, "bourrin" and fun, less technic but still with the creation of the escape move which balance the game from is previous version, spectacular fast and furious battle, but noway for beginner they will be simply crush even only by tauntful move

i did not play the last MK but they says that it was surprisingly good

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
be good
be evil
but do it WELL
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

runelancer
with the 3D, the complexity had also raise that balance the artwork required, trust me it''s not "simpler"

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
be good
be evil
but do it WELL
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

yes 3d games are alot easier to make in every aspect but coding.
most of the except fps games also look horrible. but people buy them anyway because 3d is the fad
the publishers are happy with this of course since it lowers their costs, so getting funding for doing a 2d game today is all but impossible (unless its on a handheld or cellphone).
makes me angry to think about it.. >

what''s about 2D vectoriel??
flash game as ex, they rise to something when people care about it
i would love 3D easier to make because i have to do my game 2D ''cause i''ve face this fact, 2D is easier a lot more

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
be good
be evil
but do it WELL
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I agree to the fact that 2D means a lot more graphic design and work while 3D means more complex coding. In term of gameplay, both can have it good or bad. And i think some game types are still better in 2D and others in 3D. For example, side scroller beat''em''up is, in my opinion, way better in 2D if we take for example, the metal slug series, final fight, guardian heroes.

so i guess the choice of 2D or 3D comes with the type and content that one want to do.

Some games are meant to be 3D, some games are meant to be 2D.

You definitely need 3D if you make FPS games.
RTS can be 2D or 3D.
Fighting is 2D. 3D fighting games aren''t intense enough. Those characters look ''fragile.''
Sport games are best in 3D.

C''mon folks, graphics are visual representations only. They are not the game itself. I wouldn''t bother 3D because I know I am not going to make FPS.