In an earlier blog post, I mentioned an upcoming 2D fighting game, Skull Girls, on which I'm definitely keeping an eye. You can find the official website here. Three new exhibition videos were recently posted, and the webmaster of The Fighters Generation has compiled them into a handy one-page gallery. If you're at all interested in fighting games, you should check out these videos. I can honestly say I've never seen a 2D fighter with graphics that look quite as good as this, not just in terms of fluid animation but in terms of style. The character sprites are based on the artwork of Alex Ahad, who apparently worked on the Scott Pilgrim comics (guest comics, it seems, from the Wikipedia page), and it shows. The style is brilliant and unique (at least in fighting games); the characters really come "alive" on the screen and the movesets of each character are quite varied and creative.
This goes back a bit to my discussion of 2D vs. 3D fighting games, but I really do feel that one of the strengths of true 2D fighters (not the grey area of 3D models fighting on a flat plane) is the amount of care and character that can be put into each character's motion. I'm not saying that 3D models can't be expressive – certainly the outstanding 3D fighting games have memorable moves and characters with their own idiosyncrasies – but because 2D fighting game sprites are hand-drawn, frame by frame (despite the claims of my friend who favors 3D fighters that they "only animate the key poses and use the computer to do the in-betweens"), there is just so much more opportunity for artists to put in personal touches that bring the characters to life. I'm not saying that all 2D games do this (or do it well), but the outstanding 2D fighters are known and loved for it.
I think what impresses me most about Skull Girls is that it just flat-out doesn't look like every other fighting game out there. For one, it's North American-born, which is always refreshing to see. For another, even though it's possible to see a definite anime/manga influence on the character design, it is very decidedly not another manga fighter (cf. Arcana Heart, BlazBlue, Guilty Gear, etc.). For a third, it is clear that the designers are heavily leveraging the computing power of current-gen systems to make the multi-pane 2D worlds fit together and look smooth (I didn't notice any jagged edges, although that could just be the video quality), without relying on 3D-model backdrops (e.g. BlazBlue, Capcom vs. SNK 2). The whole composition is really attractive, and the only thing that currently disappoints is the background music, which I really do hope they improve. Really looking forward to this game.
In other news, I plan to claim my Jill/Shuma-Gorath DLC for Marvel vs. Capcom 3 soon, as well as picking up the demo of the upcoming Mortal Kombat game...all while working my way through Atlas Shrugged again and considering other books for filling my Kindle. Oh yeah...and the job thing...being a ninja is tough work.
EDIT: Renamed the blog slightly today...keeping it simple.
Peace,
JT
Showing posts with label 2D vs 3D. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 2D vs 3D. Show all posts
16 March 2011
11 March 2011
Thursdays, Tekken, and Coincidental Languages...[]
Well, I've just finished One of Our Thursdays Is Missing. I can say confidently that fans of the series will be thoroughly pleased all the way through, except possibly at the end, for two reasons: (1) it means that the book is over and a new waiting cycle has begun, and (2) there is a slight feeling of being rushed, although given some of the plot concepts it does sort of work in the book's favour. Don't want to spoil anything, so I'll leave it at that. Series highly recommended, but best to start at the beginning with The Eyre Affair, and to beware of misleading titles (Thursday Next: First Among Sequels is not the second book, but the fifth).
So more on fighting games. I was speaking with a friend of mine who prefers 3D games and — to put it mildly — disprefers 2D games. Again, he makes some compelling arguments, and his personal preference is his own, but one of his points did strike me as interesting. I noted that while there are still more traditional 2D fighters with hand-drawn sprites being made, and as I mentioned in a recent post, Street Fighter 4 revitalized the subgenre of 2D fighting games with 3D models. His retort was that the same thing could be found in Tekken 2 and earlier (Tekken 3 was the iteration of the series that introduced the sidestep, and more realistic jumping height).
That's a good point. While Tekken 3 (1997)was not the first 3D fighter with a sidestep — Battle Arena Toshinden (1994), Soul Edge, Virtua Fighter 3, and even Tobal No. 1 (all 1996) preceded it — there was still a considerable span where the typical "3D" fighter still only allowed 2D movement. This, I think, makes one wonder what the definition of "3D" vs. "2D" is. It's not a trivial question; one can simply redefine "3D" as any game with the ability to sidestep or side-walk, but then you can no longer point to Virtua Fighter as the first 3D fighting game. Do we really want that honor to go to Battle Arena Toshinden? </sarcasm> The other option is to keep the definition the way it is, but then do we have to redefine the likes of Street Fighter IV and Marvel vs. Capcom 3?
I'm just going to leave it as a puzzle for now, as I'm still sorting it out in my own head.
Anyway, I put "Coincidental Languages" up there in the title because I had an interesting idea creep into my mind during lunch. The best place to start would be a confession: I'm a conlanger. I like creating languages, and I make no apologies for it. My second major in college was Linguistics, largely for that reason (but also because linguistics is fascinating). Several of my favourite linguistics classes (primarily 76-457 Historical Linguistics, taught by Dr. Paul Hopper) focused on the development of languages over time, which has always struck me as the most intriguing part of the study of linguistics. I like to get into the workings of things and see how they fit together, how they came about ("How It's Made" marathons make me lose whole days).
So anyway, back to "Coincidental Languages." I had the vague notion of creating two parallel language family trees, completely unrelated to each other, that nonetheless produced two great-great-granddaughter languages who would be close enough in morphology and syntax to be mutually intelligible. Yes, inspired by a Simpsons episode (which oddly enough, I've only read about and never seen...but that's another story), but still...would like to try or see done sometime in the near future.
So, in other news, I have a black belt recertification test tomorrow at 4:00pm. Not too pleased that they moved it from the typical morning time to the afternoon/evening, but I'll survive.
Peace,
JT
So more on fighting games. I was speaking with a friend of mine who prefers 3D games and — to put it mildly — disprefers 2D games. Again, he makes some compelling arguments, and his personal preference is his own, but one of his points did strike me as interesting. I noted that while there are still more traditional 2D fighters with hand-drawn sprites being made, and as I mentioned in a recent post, Street Fighter 4 revitalized the subgenre of 2D fighting games with 3D models. His retort was that the same thing could be found in Tekken 2 and earlier (Tekken 3 was the iteration of the series that introduced the sidestep, and more realistic jumping height).
That's a good point. While Tekken 3 (1997)was not the first 3D fighter with a sidestep — Battle Arena Toshinden (1994), Soul Edge, Virtua Fighter 3, and even Tobal No. 1 (all 1996) preceded it — there was still a considerable span where the typical "3D" fighter still only allowed 2D movement. This, I think, makes one wonder what the definition of "3D" vs. "2D" is. It's not a trivial question; one can simply redefine "3D" as any game with the ability to sidestep or side-walk, but then you can no longer point to Virtua Fighter as the first 3D fighting game. Do we really want that honor to go to Battle Arena Toshinden? </sarcasm> The other option is to keep the definition the way it is, but then do we have to redefine the likes of Street Fighter IV and Marvel vs. Capcom 3?
I'm just going to leave it as a puzzle for now, as I'm still sorting it out in my own head.
Anyway, I put "Coincidental Languages" up there in the title because I had an interesting idea creep into my mind during lunch. The best place to start would be a confession: I'm a conlanger. I like creating languages, and I make no apologies for it. My second major in college was Linguistics, largely for that reason (but also because linguistics is fascinating). Several of my favourite linguistics classes (primarily 76-457 Historical Linguistics, taught by Dr. Paul Hopper) focused on the development of languages over time, which has always struck me as the most intriguing part of the study of linguistics. I like to get into the workings of things and see how they fit together, how they came about ("How It's Made" marathons make me lose whole days).
So anyway, back to "Coincidental Languages." I had the vague notion of creating two parallel language family trees, completely unrelated to each other, that nonetheless produced two great-great-granddaughter languages who would be close enough in morphology and syntax to be mutually intelligible. Yes, inspired by a Simpsons episode (which oddly enough, I've only read about and never seen...but that's another story), but still...would like to try or see done sometime in the near future.
So, in other news, I have a black belt recertification test tomorrow at 4:00pm. Not too pleased that they moved it from the typical morning time to the afternoon/evening, but I'll survive.
Peace,
JT
09 March 2011
2D vs 3D...[]
So I'm the type of fighting gamer who splits the 2D-3D divide. I'll play Street Fighter or King of Fighters as soon as Tekken or Soul Calibur. There are those who only play one or the other, and I respect their opinions. However, I find enough depth in either style to satisfy me (pun severely intended).
My friends who play solely 3D fighters are of the viewpoint that the extra dimension allows for a more in-depth, realistic experience. To a point, this is true; most people can't jump twice their body height, and linear footwork almost never happens in a real fight. However, anyone who's played Soul Calibur, for instance, knows that there can't really be any claim to realism, as characters who are hit by swords, axes, etc. don't even bleed, much less lose limbs. Even Tekken has its glaring moments of hypo-realism, as gameplay often revolves around juggling the opponent's body in mid-air, which can be accomplished with something as simple as a jab.
Come to think of it, that brings up another weakness of the 3D genre, which isn't so much a genre weakness but a market weakness. While the 2D fighting scene has several Capcom series (including the Vs. series with Marvel, SNK, and Tatsunoko), at least one currently-running SNK series (King of Fighters XIII will hopefully make it to console soon), and now even several Arcsys series running (Guilty Gear, BlazBlue), along with any number of other companies entering into the fray (I don't care what anyone says, Battle Fantasia was fun), the 3D fighting scene, at least here in the States, is Tekken, Soul Calibur, Virtua Fighter, and Dead or Alive. Half of that is from a single company, and the other two have only made lackluster appearances of late (DoA's Xbox exclusivity is a real drag, since the Xbox controller is just not made for fighting games, and Virtua Fighter 5 made the "bold" move of going to the then-new generation of consoles without an online multiplayer mode). Even Mortal Kombat has jumped the 3D ship and is returning to its 2D roots. Street Fighter 4's popularity has opened the door for 2D fighters with 3D character models to return (Street Fighter EX3 tried, but couldn't quite make it, and King of Fighters Maximum Impact/2006 didn't go far either) with a vengeance. So really, there's just a dearth of variety, compared to the 2D scene.
I also counter the argument that 2D fighters are lacking a dimension compared to 3D fighters, since they do have a "third" dimension which isn't used much by 3D fighters: height. In 3D fighters, characters move forward, backward, and to the side. In 2D fighters, characters move forward, backward...and upward. Jumping is vastly more important in 2D fighters than in 3D fighters, whose characters hardly ever jump more than a few feet from the ground (again, realism).
I guess my overall point is that I'm a fighting game fan, pure and simple. If it's a quality fighter, 2D or 3D, I'll play it.
Peace,
JT
My friends who play solely 3D fighters are of the viewpoint that the extra dimension allows for a more in-depth, realistic experience. To a point, this is true; most people can't jump twice their body height, and linear footwork almost never happens in a real fight. However, anyone who's played Soul Calibur, for instance, knows that there can't really be any claim to realism, as characters who are hit by swords, axes, etc. don't even bleed, much less lose limbs. Even Tekken has its glaring moments of hypo-realism, as gameplay often revolves around juggling the opponent's body in mid-air, which can be accomplished with something as simple as a jab.
Come to think of it, that brings up another weakness of the 3D genre, which isn't so much a genre weakness but a market weakness. While the 2D fighting scene has several Capcom series (including the Vs. series with Marvel, SNK, and Tatsunoko), at least one currently-running SNK series (King of Fighters XIII will hopefully make it to console soon), and now even several Arcsys series running (Guilty Gear, BlazBlue), along with any number of other companies entering into the fray (I don't care what anyone says, Battle Fantasia was fun), the 3D fighting scene, at least here in the States, is Tekken, Soul Calibur, Virtua Fighter, and Dead or Alive. Half of that is from a single company, and the other two have only made lackluster appearances of late (DoA's Xbox exclusivity is a real drag, since the Xbox controller is just not made for fighting games, and Virtua Fighter 5 made the "bold" move of going to the then-new generation of consoles without an online multiplayer mode). Even Mortal Kombat has jumped the 3D ship and is returning to its 2D roots. Street Fighter 4's popularity has opened the door for 2D fighters with 3D character models to return (Street Fighter EX3 tried, but couldn't quite make it, and King of Fighters Maximum Impact/2006 didn't go far either) with a vengeance. So really, there's just a dearth of variety, compared to the 2D scene.
I also counter the argument that 2D fighters are lacking a dimension compared to 3D fighters, since they do have a "third" dimension which isn't used much by 3D fighters: height. In 3D fighters, characters move forward, backward, and to the side. In 2D fighters, characters move forward, backward...and upward. Jumping is vastly more important in 2D fighters than in 3D fighters, whose characters hardly ever jump more than a few feet from the ground (again, realism).
I guess my overall point is that I'm a fighting game fan, pure and simple. If it's a quality fighter, 2D or 3D, I'll play it.
Peace,
JT
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)