i wondered if there would be another jazz game to come out would you want it 2d like JJ2 or 3d? i just wanted to know if you would want it to be 2d i think thats kinda what makes jazz well jazz

3D graphics with a 2D playing field would be my choice.

The poll options are both rather extreme, but answering the poll based merely on 2d/3d, and not the qualifiers, I'd have to say 3d would be more likely to (A.) sell well and (B.) actually be made.

i don't like 3d,in 2d it is much easyer for everything.....well i like 2d cause i make cartoons in 2d so my choice is 2D.....

3D = More...

• Freedom
• Variety
• Map size
• Tactical gameplay
• Possibilities in general
• Dimensions 8)

Originally Posted by sers^^

3D = More...

• Map size

Actually, in most 3D games I've played, the maps are much smaller than their 2D pendants, since 3D maps have a greater filesize and take more time to make. That's why the only reason Super Mario 64 takes long to beat is not the length or amount of levels, but the fact that you have to solve tons of puzzles in the levels. Not exactly action-packed.

It depends on the game, ofcourse.

Having played Worms 3D and Worms Forts: Under Siege, I prefer 3D games entirely to 2D games. The only reasons for you to hate 3D games: Because your processor is too horrible to run them well, or you don't have enough memory.

Whatever is best for the game. I doubt that there'd be a 3D version of Solitare any time soon (3D rendering doesn't count).

Originally Posted by minmay

Having played Worms 3D and Worms Forts: Under Siege, I prefer 3D games entirely to 2D games. The only reasons for you to hate 3D games: Because your processor is too horrible to run them well, or you don't have enough memory.

I like Worms 3d, and the 2d installments way over Worms Forts.
There are alot more reasons to hate 3d games, mainly the GAMEPLAY. Any game can be downright hateable if the gameplay just plain sucks(Licensed games, anyone?)
Plus your reasons only apply to the computer, if I am playing a console game, I don't have to worry about memory or processor problems. Is that to say that every 3d console game and 3d computer game is Perfect?

Originally Posted by Monolith

3D graphics with a 2D playing field would be my choice.

Yes. Something like Duke Nukem Manhattan Project could be super, but I still prefer by-hand-painted graphic...

Originally Posted by Monolith

3D graphics with a 2D playing field would be my choice.

Agreed

It depends on the game, if it's supposed to be cartoony I like 3d but 2d, (like Paper Mario.) if it is supposed to have guns and dodging and stuff, go 3d. Yet if you have guns, jumping high, and cartooney graphics, yay for 2d!

As said previously in the thread, it depends on gameplay. 99% of 3D games suck, and .5% are ripoffs of other 3D games.

Originally Posted by Radium

As said previously in the thread, it depends on gameplay. 99% of 3D games suck, and .5% are ripoffs of other 3D games.

Exactly.

N00b, what I mean is that 3D games, when done right, are better than 2D games. I'm only speaking in general. I'm not saying that the best 2D game isn't as good as the worst 3D game or something. I'm just saying that I generally prefer 3D games to 2D games.

On a side note, what is it you have against Worms Forts?

Originally Posted by BoggyB

Whatever is best for the game. I doubt that there'd be a 3D version of Solitare any time soon (3D rendering doesn't count).

There will be when microsoft implements the 3d desktop they rumored to be in longhorn(it was taken out just like the new filesystem).

Originally Posted by minmay

N00b, what I mean is that 3D games, when done right, are better than 2D games.

So something like Doom 3 is better than Commander Keen?

Originally Posted by Odin

So something like Doom 3 is better than Commander Keen?

In some aspects they are both good.... in my oppinion neither is better....... I feel no game if well put together is better than anyother game....

Um...no comment.

Originally Posted by minmay

Um...no comment.

Your lack of comment produces no defense nor attack. My rebuttal does 100 direct damage. You're dead.

I win the argument.

Originally Posted by minmay

On a side note, what is it you have against Worms Forts?

I'm not really sure why I dislike it compared to the others, it just doesn't have the same feel as the others to me.

3D is much faster than 2D, so it gives much more power graphically. It's harder to learn but has a ton of potential. Of course, you could always make a 2D game using the 3D pipeline by making all of the objects flat 2-polygon planes and setting the field of view to 0.

Gameplay-wise, they are both good, but 2D is pretty limited in design. It would be kind of lame playing a game like Half-Life (2) in a 2D world. It just isn't cut up for the job.

3D graphics with a 2D playing field would be my choice.

Yeah, that worked very well for some games. Remember Kirby 64? The camera would rotate on some parts but for the most part, the gameplay remained 2D.