I happen to think 3d is the only way to go for strategy games, but for RPG''s, I think you can do it either way. Why 3d for strategy?

Probably the most crucial aspect of fighting a battle is the enivironment, virtually everything hinges on what kind of environment you will be fighting in. It determines what units you will fight with, what units you develop, and more importantly, forces you to think about manuever. A 2d system can accomplish, but not with the same degree of finesse or level of depth. I remember playing Dark Reign which had a a 2.5d perspective in that the 2d field had "height maps". But the trouble is, you often couldn''t tell since you couldn''t rotate the field of view. Therefore I think the argument of having an isometric point of view is moot, since the good commander will try to find every nook and cranny to manuever his troops to...only possible through 3d.

Actually, I have been thinking alot about camera view and perspective. I want a system where you the player are not necessarily privy to everything that your units see...not at least until they communicate it to you. I''ve been conjuring up an almost 1st person perspective of the battle, but I think while realistic, would be highly confusing for the player, and would require quite a few clicks to get to the proper area that you wish to maintain. So for the time being, I''m thinking a movable 3rd person 3d system is the way to go for RTS.

In RPG''s (if you mean the Diable style of games) then I think you are right. Since you are only controlling one unit instead of many, the importance of maneuvering is diminished. And you are right, 3d models aren''t as detailed this way. However, 3d would have its advantage (ever play Soul Reaver?).

to Zaptrudr:
First off i dont think using 3d always improves the visual quality. It might do so for terrain, but 3d models viewed from a distant viewpoint will almost always look pretty horrible.
Animation might be more smooth, but that doesnt really help when the thing that is moving doesnt look like whats its supposed to look like.
And just changing the texture in order to change clothes/armor in RPG might be easy, but it also looks pretty stupid since a plate armor doesnt have the same shape as a t-shirt

As for all the free effects, im all for them, but they dont really relate to this debate, since we all agree that we should use 3d to make the 2d engine, and so a 2d engine also benefits from these effets.

to Lizard:
I remember Battlezone well, it was a good game, but sometimes i just couldnt help wishing that i could see everything from above, simply because that the best way to view an ongoing battle(not from the point of realism, but from a strictly efficiency point of view).

quote: Original post by Dauntless

Actually, I have been thinking alot about camera view and perspective. I want a system where you the player are not necessarily privy to everything that your units see...not at least until they communicate it to you. I''ve been conjuring up an almost 1st person perspective of the battle, but I think while realistic, would be highly confusing for the player, and would require quite a few clicks to get to the proper area that you wish to maintain. So for the time being, I''m thinking a movable 3rd person 3d system is the way to go for RTS.

Have you tried Sacrifice? It is a RTS based around a third person view. The main character is controlled directly by the player through the standard ASWD config and the mouse for looking around. I found the game enjoyable but very hard to control a large number of units. I am not sure what opinion the majority of the gaming community had about the camera solution but it might be worth checking out.

Personally I think that for a 3D RTS to work properly figuring out a great camera system is "the" most important issue.

Grimjack




::aggression is the result of fear::

I totally agree with Grimjack that the camera is the most important thing to get right in 3D


- Captain_RB

You know why I think 3D is the only way now? It boils down to
this:
I think in the future (5-10 years) some or most of us will be
using 3D Monitors. I''ve seen very promising technological
breakthroughs in this field (on TV), and I think that it soon
will be our staple. And you know what else? I think we''ll be
able to program for them using the same libraries we use now.
People will not want to see a 2D image on a 3D monitor.
Dont get me wrong, I love 2D games. Especially anything Mario,
Keen, or Street Fighteresque. Some of the most beautiful game
scenes I think were done in 2D...(mostly from Monkey Island)
Of course a lush painted 2D backdrop doesnt cut it in 3D...
Thats what kinda stinks...but I''d say our current 3D artwork
is also kinda nice. (RTCW, or DOA II anyone? )
The bad thing is that when you make a nicer looking 3D image,
you make a nice looking footprint on all your other resources,
(HD, CPU, RAM) but that''s just life. Unfortunately I dont
think we can get away with 2D anymore...

-=Lohrno