2D vs 3D Platformers

[Xero]

I am starting to realize how much I don't like 3D platformers. I don't know why. Maybe I feel they over-complicate things or something, but I just don't enjoy the feel of them.

Sure, I loved Mario 64, but it pales in comparison to pretty much all the 2D Mario games. I just don't find them as fun as the 2D games. And, honestly, I feel it's the peak of 3D platformers. Probably because it was one of the first major forays into 3D platforming and they were using 2D concepts more.

I wasn't too fond of Mario Sunshine (more the mechanics than anything else) and I just hate Galaxy. I think Galaxy is more the control scheme than the game itself. If it were played with a traditional controller I think I would have actually finished it and enjoyed it. On the other hand, I've beaten both NSMB games and am going to be playing NSMBWii again soon.

I just used the Mario franchise because it's on my mind, but obviously there are other examples.

So yeah, what's your take on 2D vs 3D platformers?

[RoXer]

I don't understand the sig. I'm a pretty big L4D fan but that's just over my head.

[Xero]

Wrestling reference.

[Rammsteinmad]

Whilst modern platformers tend to have amazing graphics etc, sometimes controls and other things become too complicated. Old school platformers have a huge nostalgic advantage here, but easy controls usually made for quick and easy gameplay.

I like both to be honest though. I guess it depends really on what kind of game it is.

[Emperor Smeat]

I think Miyamoto once said two huge problem with 3D platforms involve creating a good camera view that won't ruin the game or experience and people having problem with depth of a jump or platform due to the 3D-ness of the image.

A lot of early 3D platform games had horrible cameras or level design that pushed a lot of people away from the genre unless it was a Mario or Nintendo made platform.

[Extreme Angle]

Crash Bandicoot is win...
Well, the first 3...

[Mooияakeя™]

It depends. If it's done well, it can work well.

Like Pandemonium on the PSX, that was a 3D sonic. You could only go L/R and Up/Down. Stuck to an area. Whereas on the DC it was like Sonic Adventure had gone all mad and Sonic was no longer a platformer.

I think 2D was best. So many of 'em too. I think there is a market for 3D ones, just needs to be done right.

[Rammsteinmad]

I think there was a game on the Playstation where you could switch between third person view and the side-scrolling retro platform view.

Dunno what it was though.

[Xero]

It depends. If it's done well, it can work well.

Like Pandemonium on the PSX, that was a 3D sonic. You could only go L/R and Up/Down. Stuck to an area. Whereas on the DC it was like Sonic Adventure had gone all mad and Sonic was no longer a platformer.

I think 2D was best. So many of 'em too. I think there is a market for 3D ones, just needs to be done right.

Pandemonium I don't consider 3D. It's TECHNICALLY 3D, but it's 3D in the sense NSMB is 3D. I was talking more in terms of the plane.

[Fignuts]

Can't believe you even presented this as debatable. 2D, by as wide of a margin as you can get.

[Verbose Minch]

Can't believe you even presented this as debatable. 2D, by as wide of a margin as you can get.

I think that's a pretty silly claim.

[Fignuts]

Maybe in other genres, but not platformers.

[Verbose Minch]

So games like Banjo Kazooie/Tooie and Mario 64 aren't comparable to any 2D platformers?

I agree that generally 2D platformers are better, but you're making it seem like they blow it out of the park.

[V]

The problem is there aren't many good 3D platformers. infact the only ones I can think of off the top of my head right now are Mario Galaxy 1/2, Banjo Kazooie/Tooie, Donkey Kong 64, Mario 64.

However, the 2D market consists of Mario classics, donkey kong country games, megaman games, Sonic, Kirby, etc.

I think the 3D games I listed above are better than most 2D platformers in my opinion, but the 2D market wins due to sheer number of games. I wish there were more good 3D platformers because they are my preference. I don't find them complicated at all, and they last so much longer.

[Funky Fly]

So games like Banjo Kazooie/Tooie and Mario 64 aren't comparable to any 2D platformers?

I agree that generally 2D platformers are better, but you're making it seem like they blow it out of the park.

Mario 64 is great, but it's full of flaws, one the biggest being camera issues (like pretty much 99% of 3D platformers).

The Banjo games gave me diabetes. :| Despite how technically sound they may have been (except for the endless collecting, that was terrible), those games were just too god damn sweet.

There are far more good 2D platformers than there are 3D ones. Not even by a small margin either.

[Fignuts]

So games like Banjo Kazooie/Tooie and Mario 64 aren't comparable to any 2D platformers?

I agree that generally 2D platformers are better, but you're making it seem like they blow it out of the park.

Yeah what funky said. Never claimed there weren't any good 3d platformers.

[Kapoutman]

2D platformers are better in general. That doesn't mean 3D platformers all suck. Super Mario 64 is one of my favorite game ever, and Super Mario Galaxy was pretty awesome too. But as Funky and Fignuts said, they all have camera problems of some sort, which I may forget about after a couple of hours playing, but still make them less enjoyable than their 2D counterpart.

But that will never stop me from playing 3D platformers anyway. I love platformers.

[RoXer]

Wrestling reference.

What is the reference? So I know in the future.

[Xero]

Michael Cole says "Vintage" a lot and is a bad announcer.

That's pretty much it.

[Lord-Of-Darkness]

Thing is, when 2D platformers were around, they were everywhere. Every other game was a 2D platform game. That was the game type of that era. Nowadays, games have moved on, and they just don't make them as much anymore.

It probably would work if they put the time and thought into it and did it right, but I just think the platforming age is over, and nowadays every other game is a FPS or a sandbox game instead.


So yeah, 2D was better, because people gave more of a damn about them back then.

[Funky Fly]

True, but even now FPS games and sandbox games have platforming elements to them. Games as recent as God of War 3 and its army of clones use platforming.

Platforming in 3D is harder because it's a lot more to visualize, and it's done from an unnatural viewpoint. I'm not saying 2D is better, I'm saying the games are done better because there is no depth to conceptualize. There's height, there's distance, the end. Super fucking Mario.

3D platforming is so much harder to create, let alone do well. As such, the average games is going to be of lower quality compared to the average 2D game because of those extra factors involved. I'm not hating on 3D, it's just easier to make a good 2D game than a good 3D one.

[Lord-Of-Darkness]

I think, if anything, platform games should be made in the style of Pandemonium. All the perks of 2D gaming, but it looks 3D and modern.

[Jeritron]

I think Mario 64 and Banjo Kazooie are just as good/fun as any of the best 2D platformers, and those are my favorite type of games.
There's a whole other element to them too, with all of the exploring and the depth of the levels.
The challenges, like collecting certain items, are great.

I dunno. I guess I can see what you mean. There were a ton of 3D platformers on Nintendo 64 that were broken and boring, but they were mainly half-ass ripoffs of Mario and Banjo.
But there were piles of shitty Mario and Sonic ripoffs in the 2D era as well.

[Jeritron]

Jinjos

[Xero]

Now that I think about it, the Lego games are done well, and they're pretty much platformers. Really like those.

[Jeritron]

I love the Lego games

[Lord-Of-Darkness]

Now that I think about it, the Lego games are done well, and they're pretty much platformers. Really like those.

I came back in here after playing on Lego Harry Potter for the last hour and thinking of this thread. I come back and you already said it. Damn you Xero :lol:

[Fignuts]

Mario 64 and Banjo are both great games, no doubt, but they can't touch Megaman, Metroid, Contra, or Castlevania.

[Jeritron]

Shinobi

[Fignuts]

Oh yeah, forgot Ninja Gaiden.


Which shits all over Shinobi, btw.

[Jeritron]

Duck Tales

[Fignuts]

Rescue fucking Rangers

[Kane Knight]

I came back in here after playing on Lego Harry Potter for the last hour and thinking of this thread. I come back and you already said it. Damn you Xero :lol:
Lego Harry Potter is a pretty weak "platformer," and plagued by some of the worst problems of 3D platformers. The camera angles being a pretty major factor.

Lego Star Wars was decent, if still kind of flawed.

[4 knuckles up]

Lego Harry Potter is a pretty weak "platformer," and plagued by some of the worst problems of 3D platformers. The camera angles being a pretty major factor.

Lego Star Wars was decent, if still kind of flawed.

Lego Batman wasn't too shabby, either.

[Jeritron]

Another big reason why more quality 2D platformers exist than 3D platformers is the eras they were made in.
In the 8 and 16 bit eras, platformers dominated. The 2D gaming world had limitations and the platforming adventure games absolutely dominated the market.
When 3D came along, people still wanted platforming games, especially with their favorite characters, but there was a whole new world of possibilities. There were still 3D platformers, but so many other types of games exploiting 3D were "in."
The 2D platformers probably have a larger list of quality games simply because they were the best the era had to offer, and there were larger amounts of them being produced, so naturally there are going to be more classics by volume.

I'm not saying 3D is as good as 2D in platforming though. But I do think the handful of games that did it right are just as fun. It could just be because of how much I enjoyed them at that age.

[BigDaddyCool]

I would say the lego series is more of a 2.5D platformer...

[Funky Fly]

Another big reason why more quality 2D platformers exist than 3D platformers is the eras they were made in.
In the 8 and 16 bit eras, platformers dominated. The 2D gaming world had limitations and the platforming adventure games absolutely dominated the market.
When 3D came along, people still wanted platforming games, especially with their favorite characters, but there was a whole new world of possibilities. There were still 3D platformers, but so many other types of games exploiting 3D were "in."
The 2D platformers probably have a larger list of quality games simply because they were the best the era had to offer, and there were larger amounts of them being produced, so naturally there are going to be more classics by volume.

I'm not saying 3D is as good as 2D in platforming though. But I do think the handful of games that did it right are just as fun. It could just be because of how much I enjoyed them at that age.

Not to mention 2D platformers cost sweet fuck all to make, whereas a good 3D platformer will cost millions.

[Jeritron]

Oh yeah, forgot Ninja Gaiden.


Which shits all over Shinobi, btw.

Why do we have to compare them just because they both are about ninjas? huh?
Racist pig.

[Fignuts]

Because you mentioned shinobi before ninja gaiden, you round-eyed dog.

[Jeritron]

Revenge of Shinobi and Shinobi 3 are the ones that I love

[Lord-Of-Darkness]

Lego Harry Potter is a pretty weak "platformer," and plagued by some of the worst problems of 3D platformers. The camera angles being a pretty major factor.

Lego Star Wars was decent, if still kind of flawed.

I don't know man, the camera hasn't bothered me at all so far. Maybe its because the Lego games don't take themselves very seriously, so you don't get all pissed off because a camera can't decide where it needs to be.