6th June 2007, 9:22 AM
Surprised I didn't see this before.
Hey EM, I'm not about to enter the "2d vs 3d" debate here but I'm forced to criticize your math.
Two directions, forwards and backwards and that's it is technically 1D, not 2D. 2D has 4 directions, up and down as well as forwards and backwards. 3D means 6 directions. As an added note, I'll say that 2D makes a lot more use of that up/down axis than 3D games tend to. I'd say it's an issue of personal taste myself. I've seen some pretty intense layers of depth in even Super Smash Brothers, and certainly Guilty Gear (what few games I have seen), and I've also seen some amazing strategy in Soul Calibur and Virtua Fighter. Of course it also takes a just plain good game. King of the Monsters, for example, lacks a LOT in depth.
Hey EM, I'm not about to enter the "2d vs 3d" debate here but I'm forced to criticize your math.
Two directions, forwards and backwards and that's it is technically 1D, not 2D. 2D has 4 directions, up and down as well as forwards and backwards. 3D means 6 directions. As an added note, I'll say that 2D makes a lot more use of that up/down axis than 3D games tend to. I'd say it's an issue of personal taste myself. I've seen some pretty intense layers of depth in even Super Smash Brothers, and certainly Guilty Gear (what few games I have seen), and I've also seen some amazing strategy in Soul Calibur and Virtua Fighter. Of course it also takes a just plain good game. King of the Monsters, for example, lacks a LOT in depth.
"On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." ~ Charles Babbage (1791-1871)