Path: chuka.playstation.co.uk!news From: Philip Gooch Newsgroups: scee.yaroze.freetalk.english Subject: Re: 3D sucks, sprites rule Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 11:06:38 +0100 Organization: PlayStation Net Yaroze (SCEE) Lines: 29 Message-ID: <3598B8AE.B023E782@easynet.co.uk> References: <35979427.1E01015C@easynet.co.uk> <35985C9D.9811922B@sinclair.net> <6n9qpo$5381@scea> NNTP-Posting-Host: 193.131.140.246 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) Steve Tolin wrote: > Well, well, well... Although SOTN is simply a phenominal game in 2D.. I > wouldn't diss Castlevania 64 in the least. That game will set a new > standard.. just remember everything that is being done for Metal Gear > Solid will be done better for Castlevania 64.. in beautilful 3D... > > Definitely a game that deserves a 3D incarnation.. I think this is the problem these days. Great 2D games are being given the 3D treatment but it adds nothing to the gameplay. Even Edge magazine, who are always bemoaning the lack of decent gameplay in 3D games, nonetheless continually argue for 'updating' classic 80s games for the 90s, which means take a great 2D game and ruin it by making it a 3D polygon affair. 3D sells because of the initial wow factor, and that's the problem because the gameplay can't usually live up to the promise of the graphics. The problem is because the graphics are almost always done first, and the game bolted on after - 'we've got this great graphics engine, now lets think of a game' or 'that's a cool/cute/sexy character - let's make a game where the player can make him/her run and jump all over the place'. But that's just my opinion. I'd just rather play Zork or The Hobbit than Tomb Raider! Phil