On Fri, 5 Sep 1997, Greg Miller wrote:
> I disagree... What does the 2D/3D thing have to do with it at all? Are you
> really saying that 3D graphics are a game genre and the gameplay and premise
> are just a tack-on? It looks to me like the reasoning went something like
> "Think we could do a 3D version of Castle Wolfenstein? Probably, let's give it
> a try."
My point is that a 3D version of any game is going to be different from a
top down perspective, mostly due to the way you used to be able to see all
around you but with a 1st person perspective, it's like having blinders
on. Sometimes turning a game into 1st person 3D destroys the gameplay,
which is why Robotron X became isometric instead. The result of turning
Robotron into a 1st person game would have been quick deaths from getting
shot in the back without even realizing it, let alone having a playfield
so cluttered that you can't see past the mass of garbage to find out
where the humans are!
If there ever is a 3D "Dactyl Joust" you can bet that the narrow forward
1st person perspective and the open 3 dimensions will result in very
different gameplay.
There are plenty of games which people consider to be original but if they
had the same name, you'd say "oh, this is a 3D whatever", so I don't think
that just because the original Wolfenstein and Wolf3D share the same name
and story setup that they should invariably be considered similar as far
as gameplay.
Starfox could be considered a truer 3D version of Zaxxon, for instance.
The original Wolfenstein has much more in common with Berzerk than Wolf3D
or Doom.
--
Archives updated once/day at http://www.biglist.com/lists/stella/archives/
Unsubscribing and other info at http://www.biglist.com/lists/stella/stella.html
