For instance, there's no getting around that claim DAatagnan made about Dungeon Master being a 3D game, when its not even a fully 2D game
Yeah, I don't think I've ever experienced being outsmarted quite like this before
I mean, it was amusing when Dungeon Master wasn't a 3D game because it doesn't use vector based graphics - but now that it's LESS than 2D (as in, what, 1.5D?) - it's something I can actually laugh out loud at.
That must have been why it was considered a revolution - because I'm pretty sure it's the only 1.5D game out there.
No offense, but that IS funny - you gotta admit!
@Morrandir
Well, semantics could have been part of it - in the beginning, as they usually are. But it's been made quite clear to me that CraigWB thinks that you need vector math to simulate the third dimension.
I mean, there's no doubt that vectors and polygons are extremely efficient for that purpose - and math helps to make it all very accurate and realistic in terms of proportion, distance and what not, which is why it's been used so much with computers.
But the third dimension is a concept that relates to reality as well as both physics and math. It's not something that can only be simulated with 3 coordinates. It can be done convincingly on paper with a pencil by any decent artist - and it can be done in a computer game using all kinds of tricks and clever manipulation of your sense of vision.
Dungeon Master is an excellent example of one of the first visually elaborate 3D games, done in the first person. I've made my own engine capable of displaying 3D environments using a very similar technique - and I can promise you I don't use vectors for that. But I do use math
However, it has become common to refer to "3D games" as games using vectors and polygons. That's because that's pretty much the only way it's done these days - as we have hardware specifically created just to do such calculations - and we have a ton of established engines that work with x,y,z as their basic representation of the game world.
So, it would be pretty easy to confuse the concept of 3D graphics with vector based 3D graphics.
But I don't confuse those two - and that's what I've made clear time and time again.
CraigWB insists that 3D graphics can only mean vector based 3D graphics - and he insists that you need vector based 3D graphics to represent or simulate 3D movement as well.
He's very wrong on both counts