I''m making a 2D game engine and game right now, and I''d like to know if people even play 2D games that much anymore. It seems that almost all of the gamers are tied up in 3D madness and have gone crazy wanting it. Would gamers now just reject the idea of a 2D game even if it had cool story and awesome gameplay? I''m making an overhead (not isometric, the other person working on this thinks that overhead would be better, I tend to agree on some points of that) game that supports multiple players. I would explain further to see if people would play, but I''m thinking someone would steal my idea and develop it before I could, which would really suck for me. I really think the idea I have is great and I could see myself playing it all the time. The only thing I''m not sure of would be it''s popularity (if it turns out the way I want it) because it''s 2d overhead, and not 3D or isometric. Also, since I''m somewhat getting mixed up between the game idea and the game engine, what would be some things to add in a game engine that arn''t specific game related? I don''t want to make a game engine that I accidentally tie into my game which makes it only usable for that game. Thanx for any input you have.

IMFO, 3D is for professional games and such. 2D is for kiddie games. In vary rare cases does 2D actually sell. Small game packages sell though. Like 200 games of solitare in 1! 2D is also good for games like Elmo''s something something house! You know what I mean.

---------------------------
"Don't die for your country, make some other dumb bastard die for his" -General George S. Patton

I like 2D games more than 3D. 3D gives realism to a game and sucks you into it, but not all people like 3D because it gives another level of complication.. not only for the developer, but the player as well.

Here''s an example..

In a typical 3D shooter....you are walking down a dark hallway with your pistol at hand.. you stop because you hear some foot steps behind you and WHAM you get hit from above and from the front.. I get sick of constantly turning around 360 degrees.

2D games give more of a bird''s eye view on things and make great side scrollers. You can simulate some 3D stuff without worrying about bogging down the system.

Well it depends on you.. 2d is great and 3d adds more depth into a game.

Whatever you do just have fun with developing it.

Good luck

nes8bit: Go look at a game called Abuse (http://www.crack.com) and I know you remember Mortal Kombat games (not saying they''re good, I''m just saying they''re not "kiddie" games).

I personally think it''s more game theme and gameplay that sells a game more than it''s dimensions does. But, everyone has a different opinion.

/me slaps nes8bit

ARGH!!

Castlevania Symphony of the Night, nuff said!

Honestly, I think a well produced 2d game can still do well. The console market is much more open to 2d and has good size following. I still love good side scrolling shooters.

Btw- What about Diablo2, plenty of non-kiddies bought that, right?

I dunno, I generally like 2-D. Of course, good graphics always help. I wouldn''t worry too much about people stealing your idea, though, most people have ideas of their own which they''re much too busy worrying about.

Um what about games like Diablo2?

It is 2D (yes i KNOW it can run in glide or d3d, but all the game data is 2D)

Or Age of Empires 2?

Hardly kiddies games I am sure....

Cel

Even though it has been said I MUST wade in here...... 2D games SELL! and they sell by the crateload. Sure lots of people have Quake III, but how many people bought Age Of Empires II? That game is still full price aeons after release, and the initial production run of its expansion pack was 100,000 units. Rollercoaster tycoon and SimCity 3000 sold by the shedload, and they are 2D games. bottom line is that 2D is good!
However, many people think that only 3D games will be taken up by publishers. I have spoken to a lot of publishers about my games, from budget publishers to the biggies. Some have even taken the time to list the good/bad points in my games, and I have NEVER been told my game isnt acceptable because it is 2D.
Unless you have a team of 10 or more people coding full time, and considerable industry experience, I am not sure how viable it is to think you can put together a decent 3D game these days anyway. In 3D, people expect all kinds of amazing effects, lighting, perfect collision detection etc. 2D games can be coded in much less time, and also can run on geriatric hardware, widening your potential market.
Long live 2D, thats what I say, I don''t even vaguely plan to make a 3D game in the near future.

http://www.positech.co.uk

quote:
nes8bit wrote:
IMFO, 3D is for professional games and such. 2D is for kiddie games. In vary rare cases does 2D actually sell. Small game packages sell though.

Actually, the top selling games this year have all been in 2d, the Sims, Alpha Centuri and Diablo 2.

Or maybe my figures are wrong =)

But 2d is not dead, and since 3d is _relatively_ new, the concepts behind it are also relatively new, so a lot of the time, developement time is wasted sorting out things like camera angles and stuff when it could be used on gameplay. Of course, some games need 3d, like imaging a FPS in 2d. Ugh =)

Yeah

"I'm going to live for ever. Even if I die trying"
Benjamin Franklin (I think)

Even if you are forced to do something in 3d, there is no reason why you can''t learn from the gameplay dynamics of the 2d past. There is no law that says that you _must_ look at the character''s ass the whole game.

-R