|
Your continuous donations keep RPGWatch running!
RPGWatch Forums » Comments » News Comments » Larian Studios - Next Projects Update

Default Larian Studios - Next Projects Update

February 16th, 2011, 23:08
I'm not sure that isometric is 2.5D, isometric doesn't make stuff further look smaller, that's one of its major weakness.

At opposite 2.5D makes stuff that are further look smaller and is using isometric technicals merged with other specific trick to avoid use a pure 3D system that is too CPU intensive without the help of 3D cards. The typical 2.5D game is Doom, when Ultima Underworld is true 3D and Baldur's Gate pure Isometric.
Dasale is offline

Dasale

SasqWatch

#41

Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,096

Default 

February 17th, 2011, 09:38
For open world action RPGs I like first-person. It's best for immersion.

For tactical, turn-based or most other RPGs I think Dragon Age did it perfectly actually… let you zoom in to see the world and explore and then zoom out for combat.
DoctorNarrative is offline

DoctorNarrative

DoctorNarrative's Avatar
Patroling Written Words

#42

Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,825

Default 

February 17th, 2011, 10:43
Originally Posted by Dasale View Post
I'm not sure that isometric is 2.5D, isometric doesn't make stuff further look smaller, that's one of its major weakness.

At opposite 2.5D makes stuff that are further look smaller and is using isometric technicals merged with other specific trick to avoid use a pure 3D system that is too CPU intensive without the help of 3D cards. The typical 2.5D game is Doom, when Ultima Underworld is true 3D and Baldur's Gate pure Isometric.
It's not really about being sure - it's a common consensus.

The reason it's called 2.5D is because it gives the illusion of depth or "3D" to the visuals, without being based on actual 3D vector calculations.
DArtagnan is offline

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#43

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 14,212

Default 

February 17th, 2011, 17:41
Originally Posted by Dasale View Post
At opposite 2.5D makes stuff that are further look smaller and is using isometric technicals merged with other specific trick to avoid use a pure 3D system that is too CPU intensive without the help of 3D cards. The typical 2.5D game is Doom, when Ultima Underworld is true 3D and Baldur's Gate pure Isometric.
Why would you think that Ultima Underworld was true 3D?
JDR13 is offline

JDR13

JDR13's Avatar
SasqWatch

#44

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Florida, US
Posts: 17,710

Default 

February 17th, 2011, 22:24
Originally Posted by JDR13 View Post
Why would you think that Ultima Underworld was true 3D?
With an isometric point of view the camera angle is fixed and can't change, if it can it's not isometric anymore. The only attempt done to use pure isometric and camera change was to implement 4 isometric view and allow switch to any of them but that's it. You can't have a continuous rotation with such isometric approach, Ultima Underworld isn't isometric because it allows such continuous rotation.

The next step is 2.5D, it's based on isometric plus different tricks for managing a depth perspective ie further is smaller, and to allow rotation. With this approach you can't have pure 3D moving, you can't have true bridge where you continuously move above and under. Duke Nuken 3D pushed this 2.5D approach further by allowing look a bit up and down with a minimal distortion but still no slope and no bridge.

Ultima Underworld allows anything, look at any direction from top to bottom, to any direction. You can have true bridge and true slopes, ie true 3D levels. 2.5D games don't allow that.

It's possible that Ultima Underworld doesn't use the same 3D computing than is doing 3D graphic cards, and it has perhaps some 3D imperfection (I don't remember) but the game achieve full 3D unlike any 2.5D games and I won't even mention pure isometric games.

So even if a part of Ultima computing is using Isometric and 2.5D computing the point is unlike Isometric games or 2.5D games, it doesn't show any 3D limits in its levels.
Dasale is offline

Dasale

SasqWatch

#45

Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,096

Default 

February 17th, 2011, 23:56
Originally Posted by TheMadGamer View Post
I think Larian will produce two good games. Lars is really very vague about both of them. While the 'dragon' feature of Divinity 2 is something I could do without, it is entirely possible that they could implement a dragon feature that would be captivating and fun.

Just got to wait and see really.
This.

Larian has the chance (and the curse) of not depending on a big publisher. As such, they can still "experiment", and I am more than happy to support them doing so with my €, whatever project they pick, because they seem genuinely interested in making better games.

Also, unlike other editors, they actually care about fixing their broken stuff. People could bicker all they want, and attempt to ridicule the umptieth "expanded mega" version of TheWitcher or Dragon Knight Saga, but at least I can still play and enjoy them today.

I couldn't say the same for all the games I have purchased recently.

Two thumbs up to editors that still have some integrity left.
Karmapowered is offline

Karmapowered

Watcher

#46

Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 35
RPGWatch Forums » Comments » News Comments » Larian Studios - Next Projects Update
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT +2. The time now is 18:35.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright by RPGWatch