Anyone else think this guy is crazy?

[PGchris]

The stigma that comes with a 2d game is that its a graphical downgrade when really its just a different kind of gameplay, but try convincing that too the mass market. I doubt we will ever see another 2d game for a non handheld console ever be considered a national "hit."

[RCBH928]

Personally I would like to see 2D gameplay or graphics coming back, but how will it work.
I am not saying 2D looks bad, I think it can look better than 3D somtimes, but can nit be realistic in graphics?
That is what is selling now, different era.
Portable games don't count they are like psx in power, and psx was out when 2D was still popular.

You say LostWinds is a good 2D. Yes, but I also said 2D can be like a downloadable game from WiiWare , or like a bonus but not a full commercial game. Here is a quick example, if you had $60-50 that you can pay for a game on a weekend that those two games was released, which will you pick:
Lost Winds vs Mario Galaxy/Oblivion/Fallout

There is so much more value in 3D games now days.

I think 2d & 3d can co-exist, it did when bonus levels were 3D I believe in Sonic.

I also like to note that I hated when developers thought they would turn anything 2D to 3D and it will make money like MegaMan on 64.

[MrPopo]

I am not saying 2D looks bad, I think it can look better than 3D somtimes, but can nit be realistic in graphics?
That is what is selling now, different era.

It is starting to wrap around, though. Cel shaded graphics have become popular, which are definately not realistic. Realism is a technical marvel, but at the same time the most important thing is a coherent style. World of Warcraft has never been slammed by reviewers for it's graphics (I use reviewers since there are always the people on the internet who won't accept anything below Crysis). They are quite cartoony, but the overall art direction is very well done. That ends up making the graphics "good".

You say LostWinds is a good 2D. Yes, but I also said 2D can be like a downloadable game from WiiWare , or like a bonus but not a full commercial game. Here is a quick example, if you had $60-50 that you can pay for a game on a weekend that those two games was released, which will you pick:
Lost Winds vs Mario Galaxy/Oblivion/Fallout

Let's take another example. Muramasa: The Demon Blade, which is possibly the most anticipated 2D game in quite some time. Would you consider it to be like a downloadable WiiWare game? And I personally am looking forward to it far more than basically every 3D game that I've preordered on Amazon outside of Metroid (because Metroid is god, and the same would be true if Metroid was a 2D game, probably moreso of it was 2D).

There is so much more value in 3D games now days.

The question is whether this is due to the things 3D has that 2D doesn't or that devs are only devoting their full effort to 3D games.

[RemyC]

I am not saying 2D looks bad, I think it can look better than 3D somtimes, but can nit be realistic in graphics?

What do photo realistic graphics have to do with a good videogame?

There is so much more value in 3D games now days

How do you justify this?

[Jrecee]

Honestly I'd like to see another attempt at a 3D megaman game. We've come a long way with 3D since the megaman legends games and I don't think anyone could actually complain that there's not enough 2D megaman games.

On the other hand I would want a new 2D sonic game.

And a new 3D vectorman game.

And a new 2D gunstar heroes.

I think the fact that a lot of 2D or sidescrolling games sell well on xbox live or ps3 network is proof that people will buy them. Maybe not for $60. But if they were to start throwing these games in a box and putting them on the shelf for $19.99 they'd sell. It costs what, $1-$2 to produce a dvd and a case?

[jfrost]

I am not saying 2D looks bad, I think it can look better than 3D somtimes, but can nit be realistic in graphics?
That is what is selling now, different era.

Realism is a two-edged sword. On the one hand, it can deliver more realistic graphics and thus create a more immersive experience. On the other, photorealistic characters can fall in the uncanny valley. It all depends on how you look at it.

[Jrecee]

The problem with attempting to make games photorealistic is that as soon as the next generation of systems comes out, the graphics look cheesy. The characters in 16 bit games still hold up, whereas the blockheaded creatures from goldeneye don't.

[MrPopo]

I am not saying 2D looks bad, I think it can look better than 3D somtimes, but can nit be realistic in graphics?
That is what is selling now, different era.

Realism is a two-edged sword. On the one hand, it can deliver more realistic graphics and thus create a more immersive experience. On the other, photorealistic characters can fall in the uncanny valley. It all depends on how you look at it.

Hell, take Crysis. There are a lot of shots where the scenery is put side-by-side with some photos of the real world, and it's hard to tell the difference. But getting all the various movements and tics that real people do is so much harder. Especially getting to occur real-time.

[RCBH928]

I like fantasy cartoon style better, but I learned that what I like is not how things should be. Kids today and most people are talking and buying what looks more real, I don't even have to argue about this you all already know it .

I can justify that 3D has more value , by the following statement:
Today people are buying RE5, Fallout, Call Of Duty, Mario Galaxy for $50
if you can make same games in 2D for $51 and people buy them, you can prove me wrong.

am not saying a 3D game is better than 2D game. I am saying a 3D game today done right, is much more worth than a 2D game done right. People are not in the 2D any more, I am talking about the vast majority . Fighters and platformers are not the greatest thing out there, so is 2D.

[RemyC]

can justify that 3D has more value , by the following statement:
Today people are buying RE5, Fallout, Call Of Duty, Mario Galaxy for $50
if you can make same games in 2D for $51 and people buy them, you can prove me wrong.

Street Fighter IV is going in the same price range...I'm pretty sure that the new King of Fighters will be up there too.
You also need to factor in that when a game hits the market, a High price tag is the norm, regardless of what the manufacturing costs actually were...They are robbing you blind. So when you argue that a game has more value, because of its price tag, you are buying into capitalist propaganda.
I snagged up the megaman collection, and Metal Slug 4 & 5 for like $9.99 each on my Xbox...they aren't cheap games. I'm calling that a tonne more bang for my buck, then Mario Galaxy for $50

am not saying a 3D game is better than 2D game. I am saying a 3D game today done right, is much more worth than a 2D game done right.

I am trying to understand WHY you are saying this. If you don't believe that 3D is entirely better than 2D, than WHY do you believe that their is more value in 3D?

People are not in the 2D any more, I am talking about the vast majority

These are the same people that are calling Lil Wayne the best rapper ever, and have Hannah Montana shattering The Beatles sales records.

Fighters and platformers are not the greatest thing out there

Please don't make this claim unless you are looking for another, "Story is the most important part of a videogame" debate