As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

3D remakes of 2D games on TINY SCREENS

CygnusZCygnusZ Registered User regular
edited July 2008 in Games and Technology
When I was in 3rd grade I got an SNES. It was simply the right present at the right time for me. Because my parents were kind of strict I could only play it for a few hours every weekend, but it was still a great time for me. And I had some great luck picking up classic games. I had Zelda, Actraisier, Street Fighter II and a little gem called Final Fantasy II. Time passed, and when I was about in 7th grade (1995ish?) I found myself becoming disinterested in console gaming (alas, I fear my love of Civilization, Alpha Centauri ... and 4X games in general may never die). When I was a freshman in High School I saw a display at the local blockbuster for Mario 64. It looked horrible in my eyes. I could actually see the individual polygons that the models were made up of, and the actual gameplay was nothing like a real mario game. Playstation was just as bad. It was only in 2001 that I actually started to play console games again. Mainly, because the graphics finally became tolerable.

I often have to take LONG flights across the ocean, so I decided to pick up a DS a few years ago. And don't get me wrong, there are some great games on DS. The World Ends with You, Puzzle Quest, New Super Mario Bros.. there's even a new Rhythm Tengoku game coming out. But what's the appeal with 3D graphics? They're all pixelated, and the screens are simply way too tiny to create anything vaguely resembling a cinematic experience (which, if I understand correctly, is one of the big points of going 3D). It's sometimes hard for me to read Japanese kanji because of how itty-bitty the screen is.

This especially hits me hard with the FFIV. I can sort of understand DQIV and DQV, but I think any "upgrade" to DQVI would be a serious downgrade. Why do so many people want to play games with horrible 3D graphics(I'd say intolerable graphics) rather than games with reasonably well done 2D art? Why is there such a push to have 3D games anyway? Is 3D just "better" than 2D?

CygnusZ on

Posts

  • DehumanizedDehumanized Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    A stylized 3D look on a DS game is fine by me. The DS is actually capable of slightly better 3D than the Nintendo 64.

    Would I like another FFIV with the same old sprites that I know and love from back in 1992 when I first played it? Yeah, sure. I already have 3 copies of the game with those graphics. I wouldn't mind playing it with things slightly different.

    Dehumanized on
  • RainbowDespairRainbowDespair Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    From the look of DQ4 DS, they're using a mixture of 2D & 3D:

    dq4.jpg

    I admit, I wouldn't mind a straight port of DQ6 since it was one of the better looking 16-bit games out there, but judging from the DQ4 remake screenshots, the remake of DQ6 should look pretty good.

    RainbowDespair on
  • CherrnCherrn Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    There's nothing inherently wrong with doing 3D games on the DS, but you have to do it well. The 3D Final Fantasies, I will agree, look like terrible first gen PS1 games to me, and I'm incredibly happy that they aren't doing the same thing to Chrono Trigger.

    Other games, however, fare much better, despite the low tech. Hotel Dusk, for instance, still has primitive graphics, but uses them appropriately. The upcoming Nanashi no Game looks pretty great as well. And, well, Mario 64/Kart/NSMB/etc. all look fantastic.

    Cherrn on
    All creature will die and all the things will be broken. That's the law of samurai.
  • slash000slash000 Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    I disagree that the "point" (or necessarily a big point) of 3D graphics is to be more "cinematic." The point is to just provide another avenue for gameplay experiences, particularly ones that could not be achieved with 2D engines. Whether that experience is actually cinematic or not is up to the designer and the type of game..

    So why is there a push to have 3D graphics? Do you mean in general? In general, because the modern consoles have enough power to produce great 3D graphics and provide opportunities for gameplay that is simply not possible in 2D. That doesn't mean that 2D games should cease to exist; they should still exist and many genres are still awesome that began in 2D. It's just that many of those gameplay styles are possible and even look great when represented in 3D despite keeping their 2D nature. Gradius V comes to mind. Even so, I still love 2D and many people do. Great games have come out on the NDS that are strictly 2D in graphics and nature and look gorgeous. The same can be said of some games on the console. Odin Sphere and Guilty Gear come to mind. And even more so than that, KOFXII looks to be absolutely stunning.

    One of the problems, I think, is that strictly 2D gaming is becoming rather niche these days. Niche games by definition don't have as large an audience to sell to. Therefore, developers/publishers have to keep their costs and their risks down. It becomes impractical to release a full fledged retail release for the PS3 or 360 when you're risking a large budget with a niche audience and a not-ps2-level install base. That's why the PS2 and to a lesser degree the Wii have recieved some 2D games, but mostly the handhelds, particularly the NDS. It's a good 2D system and has a huge install base, and it doesn't cost much to develop for, so there's not much risk, and fewer sales can turn a profit.



    Why do people want remakes or rereleases of class games on the NDS, or the GBA before it?


    It's not so simple as "we want 3d remake on small screen yah!"

    Part of it is that many of these games need to reach a larger audience. Especially Square enix's stuff. The NDS is the top of the town for Square Enix releases right now in Japan, and they sell their remakes by the bucketloads on that system.


    Why are they going 3D though? I dunno. Maybe they want to sell something more than a simple re-release or port. They've already re-released or ported many of these games. Maybe they feel that many people have already re-purchased the game in the same style and format as before, and want something fresh? Not sure.


    But most importantly, why release these games on handheld?



    Because it's portable.



    That's right. Finally people can take some of their classic games anywhere they go. If they want to play at home, they can play these games on the original systems or ported consoles. But finally these games are getting releases in portable format.

    I know I'm looking forward to Chrono Trigger DS personally.



    I should add that not every game is getting the 3D overhaul.

    S-E does "enhanced ports" sometimes. FF I and II, Dawn of Souls, those are enhanced ports on the GB/DS and PSP. Completely 2D art, but enhanced in various ways with various improvements to these games. Completely 2D.

    Chrono Trigger? The rumor is that it'll be completely 2D as well.

    slash000 on
  • GyralGyral Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    I was under the impression that most developers went with 3d models because it was fuck-ton easier, quicker and cheaper to make than 2d sprites.

    Gyral on
    25t9pjnmqicf.jpg
  • GlalGlal AiredaleRegistered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Fighting games, yes. Other formats, could go either way. It's not like top-down Zelda type games require shitloads of animation frames for their "walking/standing/stabbing/getting hit' animations. The Square remakes benefit from 3d models in that it gives them actual camera control besides panning around, they can tilt the view or zoom at a character, or even have perspective without resorting to crummy Mode7 tricks.

    Glal on
  • LockeColeLockeCole Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Glal wrote: »
    Fighting games, yes. Other formats, could go either way. It's not like top-down Zelda type games require shitloads of animation frames for their "walking/standing/stabbing/getting hit' animations. The Square remakes benefit from 3d models in that it gives them actual camera control besides panning around, they can tilt the view or zoom at a character, or even have perspective without resorting to crummy Mode7 tricks.

    Ugh Mode7... final fantasy 6 railcar segment, I'm looking at you.

    LockeCole on
  • slash000slash000 Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Gyral wrote: »
    I was under the impression that most developers went with 3d models because it was fuck-ton easier, quicker and cheaper to make than 2d sprites.

    It's like Glal said.

    It depends.


    Doing sprites for fighting games is a hell of a lot more expensive and time consuming than 3d model work.


    But for other games, it depends. A typical platformer? Probably cheaper to do 2D work.

    It all depends on the number of frames and level of detail.


    With 2D fighters, you have to have tons of frames and lots of detail for lots of characters, and it all has to be very consistent. Because that's the nature of fighting games; they move fast, and you need many intermediate frames to see at what point a character's move is at, because a lot of mechanics rely on "cancels" and other moves that must occur within a tiny frame of opportunity. You also have to have consistent sprites, too, not just for looks but also for expecting the impact of a move; very crucial in many fighting games. Also crucial for hit boxes. Finally, there are tons of moves and varieties of moves for characters, and usually tons of characters. It all adds up.


    A cheap 2d platformer is going to have far fewer frames for even the main character. Enemy characters usually have even far fewer frames of animations, due to fewer types of movement/action.



    So it really depends. But fighting games? Definitely time consuming and expensive to go 2D.

    slash000 on
  • TaminTamin Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Cherrn wrote: »
    There's nothing inherently wrong with doing 3D games on the DS, but you have to do it well. The 3D Final Fantasies, I will agree, look like terrible first gen PS1 games to me, and I'm incredibly happy that they aren't doing the same thing to Chrono Trigger.

    Other games, however, fare much better, despite the low tech. Hotel Dusk, for instance, still has primitive graphics, but uses them appropriately. The upcoming Nanashi no Game looks pretty great as well. And, well, Mario 64/Kart/NSMB/etc. all look fantastic.

    Well, at least I'm only a day late learning this.

    Tamin on
  • AmericanTransvestiteAmericanTransvestite Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Cherrn wrote: »
    The upcoming Nanashi no Game looks pretty great as well.
    This game just looks great in every way, it better get a nice American release.

    I think one of my favourite DS games, for visuals, is Contact. It's got nice 3D graphics and mixes them with 2D ones. It may not be the deepest game on the DS but at the very least it's fun to look at.

    AmericanTransvestite on
  • CygnusZCygnusZ Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Cherrn wrote: »
    There's nothing inherently wrong with doing 3D games on the DS, but you have to do it well. The 3D Final Fantasies, I will agree, look like terrible first gen PS1 games to me, and I'm incredibly happy that they aren't doing the same thing to Chrono Trigger.

    Other games, however, fare much better, despite the low tech. Hotel Dusk, for instance, still has primitive graphics, but uses them appropriately. The upcoming Nanashi no Game looks pretty great as well. And, well, Mario 64/Kart/NSMB/etc. all look fantastic.

    From what I've gathered so far, Nanashi no Game isn't really that great. The controls are kind of crappy, the alternate universe feels silly, and you're probably not really playing with the DS in an enviornment conducive to getting scared. Blind hype should take a backseat to healthy skepticism over whether the game is actually halfway decent or not. But yeah, looking at the trailers and stuff the graphics are way better than I would have thought. Those are just trailers though, I bet that the 3D sections of the game have really bad textures when you actually play it.

    It's also pretty funny that the DQ4 remake got a mention here, it's the game I'm actually currently playing on my PS2. The graphics really are horrible, and I for one would not be looking foward to the new "improved" 3D models for the enemies on DS over the beautiful animated sprites on PS version. I just can't stand the low-res textures and the sprites just look horrible. On the other hand, I think DQ5r is one of the single best looking games on the PS2.

    So, it seems like the reason from the developer side might be that it's cheaper to make 3D games. I can accept that. I still don't understand the demand. Why do I sense an air of dissapointment in the Chrono Trigger thread that it seems the game ISN'T going to be remade with horrible low-texture, undetailed 3D graphics?

    CygnusZ on
  • TeriferinTeriferin Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    LockeCole wrote: »
    Glal wrote: »
    Fighting games, yes. Other formats, could go either way. It's not like top-down Zelda type games require shitloads of animation frames for their "walking/standing/stabbing/getting hit' animations. The Square remakes benefit from 3d models in that it gives them actual camera control besides panning around, they can tilt the view or zoom at a character, or even have perspective without resorting to crummy Mode7 tricks.

    Ugh Mode7... final fantasy 6 railcar segment, I'm looking at you.

    What a coincidence, I just played through that segment last night. My house mates and I mock Mode 7 graphics whenever possible.

    Teriferin on
    teriferin#1625
  • Ragnar DragonfyreRagnar Dragonfyre Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    CygnusZ wrote: »
    Cherrn wrote: »
    There's nothing inherently wrong with doing 3D games on the DS, but you have to do it well. The 3D Final Fantasies, I will agree, look like terrible first gen PS1 games to me, and I'm incredibly happy that they aren't doing the same thing to Chrono Trigger.

    Other games, however, fare much better, despite the low tech. Hotel Dusk, for instance, still has primitive graphics, but uses them appropriately. The upcoming Nanashi no Game looks pretty great as well. And, well, Mario 64/Kart/NSMB/etc. all look fantastic.

    From what I've gathered so far, Nanashi no Game isn't really that great. The controls are kind of crappy, the alternate universe feels silly, and you're probably not really playing with the DS in an enviornment conducive to getting scared. Blind hype should take a backseat to healthy skepticism over whether the game is actually halfway decent or not. But yeah, looking at the trailers and stuff the graphics are way better than I would have thought. Those are just trailers though, I bet that the 3D sections of the game have really bad textures when you actually play it.

    It's also pretty funny that the DQ4 remake got a mention here, it's the game I'm actually currently playing on my PS2. The graphics really are horrible, and I for one would not be looking foward to the new "improved" 3D models for the enemies on DS over the beautiful animated sprites on PS version. I just can't stand the low-res textures and the sprites just look horrible. On the other hand, I think DQ5r is one of the single best looking games on the PS2.

    So, it seems like the reason from the developer side might be that it's cheaper to make 3D games. I can accept that. I still don't understand the demand. Why do I sense an air of dissapointment in the Chrono Trigger thread that it seems the game ISN'T going to be remade with horrible low-texture, undetailed 3D graphics?

    The only thing that's 3D are the game maps. Nothing else.

    In fact, the hand drawn sprites will probably be re-worked and be animated, rather than just flash when they attack ala the old Dragon Quest games.

    Take a look at DQVII. That's a pretty good indicator of how DQIV will look. The only difference I see is that the character sprites seem to be better quality.

    Ragnar Dragonfyre on
    steam_sig.png
  • TigTig Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Teriferin wrote: »
    LockeCole wrote: »
    Glal wrote: »
    Fighting games, yes. Other formats, could go either way. It's not like top-down Zelda type games require shitloads of animation frames for their "walking/standing/stabbing/getting hit' animations. The Square remakes benefit from 3d models in that it gives them actual camera control besides panning around, they can tilt the view or zoom at a character, or even have perspective without resorting to crummy Mode7 tricks.

    Ugh Mode7... final fantasy 6 railcar segment, I'm looking at you.

    What a coincidence, I just played through that segment last night. My house mates and I mock Mode 7 graphics whenever possible.

    Super Mario Kart would like a word with you outside.

    Tig on
  • TeriferinTeriferin Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    Tig wrote: »
    Super Mario Kart would like a word with you outside.

    I have to give you that one there. Super Mario Kart receives no mockery from us.

    Teriferin on
    teriferin#1625
  • FremFrem Registered User regular
    edited July 2008
    As someone who got my start in programming using QBasic, people talking about mode 7 on the SNES still initially confuse me. I'm like, "Wait, what? Everyone knows that all games run in mode 7!"

    Then I remember I'm probably the only person around who still thinks of mode 7 as a DOS video mode. :-(

    Frem on
Sign In or Register to comment.