29% (7)
58% (14)
12% (3)So, I am making an isometric game, and before I get to far into the graphics, I am wondering how people feel about isometric. I am questioning if I am taking the right road graphical wise.
Basically: Do you prefer Isometric or do you prefer full 2D graphics.
ID:705843
 Apr 25 2012, 5:50 pm
|
|
|
Apr 25 2012, 6:00 pm
|
|
LordAndrew
   |
I've yet to actually see an isometric game be published on BYOND. It's hard to really judge how those games play since they're extremely rare.
|
I would prefer isometric, but BYOND has some bizarre layering and visibility problems with isometric and large atoms (bigger than one tile in size).
Until these problems are resolved, I'm going to have to go with traditional 2d rather than isometric. | |
Interesting thoughts. I agree with LordAndrew that this would be, if I were to continue with Isometric, one of the first published isometric games. This is one of the reasons I began with isometric in the first place, so I could have another unique aspect to my game. However, like K4RK3 54B3R said, Isometric layering has many bugs, which I have encountered.
I guess I will just judge on what I feel would be more fun, and versatile. Thanks for your input. | |
D4RK3 54B3R wrote:
I would prefer isometric, but BYOND has some bizarre layering and visibility problems with isometric and large atoms (bigger than one tile in size). Would help if these issues had good methods of testing and duplicating so they could be resolved. I know you've helped with some of these issues in the past, so you've gotta keep on giving solid reports of them with good test cases so they can be resolved. | |
Isometric would be good its just no one EVER releases one that I have known about, all they do is talk about how good its gonna be and one day they just disappear..Pointless huh? :|
| |
Isometric can be fun but it requires far more work. If people make great games in either 2D or Isometric, I don't honestly mind.
| |
I'm making an isometric game. It's Naruto Shippuden Ultimate Ninja Storm 2 Byond.
Mapping works the same but turned 45 degrees and programming seems harder, but all of that is rewarded with what it is now, an epic demo that is hopefully going to be released! Also @Zecronious, Isometric is 2D. If it uses sprites, it's 2D, if it uses 3D models (or stereoscopic), it's 3D. | |
Nadrew wrote:
D4RK3 54B3R wrote: Hazordhu recently switched to a full pixel-movement and SIDE_MAP setting. Layering glitches have become pretty apparent over time. | |
Kaiochao wrote:
Nadrew wrote: Then we need to just modify layers of different things using stuff like EFFECTS_LAYER, MOB_LAYER, etc. It's more work, but not by much and it's really worth it. | |
The only layering issues I've seen that couldn't be fixed were with atoms on the same tile. If you want to use objs to create a bridge that players can walk over and under, the layering can be screwy. I've never really tried to fix this so I'm not sure if it's possible. I've also noticed some problems with overlays. If their layer is set to match their mob's layer, sometimes the layering will change (even if the overlays aren't changing) and it'll cause them to flicker. Adjusting the layers should fix it (ex: make the overlay's layer be the mob's layer + 0.1).
With SIDE_MAP or isometric maps you can have layering problems when objects have pixel offsets, but these can almost always be fixed, by editing the icon or adjusting the object's location and pixel offset. Iobject wrote: Also @Zecronious, Isometric is 2D. If it uses sprites, it's 2D, if it uses 3D models (or stereoscopic), it's 3D. The isometric and side-map displays let you represent three dimensions using 2D graphics. Isometric better lends itself to represent three dimensions because the X, Y, and Z axes are distinct. With a side-map view, the Y and Z axes both point up on the screen, which can sometimes be confusing (jumping and walking north look similar). | |
I liked a lot of the unfinished games that i played in the past that were isometric. I really enjoyed coding Pac man Isometric but sadly never finished.
I am suprised to come back after all this time and see barely any new games or any isometric games. I made Slice a few years back.. http://www.byond.com/games/Kylemark/Slice | |
http://www.byond.com/games/Iobject/ NarutoShippudenUltimateNinjaStorm2Byond
There's one I made that's incomplete. Also I think byond will go back in style because so far I saw 5 people recently going online that have quit byond a long time ago and show some interest in it again, but this is just speculation at the moment. I'm teaching 2 people how to DM code and so far they got tons of things on 3 lessons through Teamviewer and they keep a video of it so they can review it whenever they want. Only thing we can do at this point is hang in there and get as many people we can to DM code original games that can be listed! :) | |
I am actually planning an isometric RTS game, but it will be a while before I have anything close to a core for the game.
I think the developement of DM actually revolves around what the developers are making. That makes sense in order for BYOND to support itself. So, I think that if people start developing isometric games, then more work will be done in DM to improve the compatibility and support for that mode. As far as the question of this topic, which style I prefer actually depends on the gameplay style. For RPGs or platformers I would say 2D, but for something like an RTS I would say isometric is better. This is because of how the controls work in the game. I don't much like RPGs where the Up and Down keys actually move your character diagonally. I think there were some notable exceptions though, like The Last Ninja for example. In RTS games though, there really isn't a reason that isometric would be bad to use, since you would generally control the game with a mouse, and the directions of movement wouldn't need to be odd. | |