A Princess Worth Saving: The Second Dimension

[SavingPrincess]

At some point, though it's difficult to clarify the exact moment, the entire world of video game developers collectively went bat-excrement insane and decided that all games must have a z-axis in order to be considered... umm... "deep" (which I guess is true from a technical standpoint... but not quite what I was referring to). Right around this time, a few established franchises were permanently thrust into the third dimension kicking and screaming; some for better, some for worse. Dev's treated this new plane of existence like they were a doggy with a new bacon flavored chew toy and growled at anyone who dare try and take it away from them and I fear if it weren't for portable systems and their lack of graphical prowess, we'd have never looked back.

Final Fantasy VII, Sonic Adventure, Mario 64 (which I'm not quite certain isn't actually the 64th Mario title in existence, and not just a moniker of the system it was made for), Street Fighter EX, Mega Man Legends; so many titles making the leap, some soaring, some falling flat on their pretty little polygonal faces... it's hard to argue whether or not the paradigm shift was a good thing for gaming or not. In so many cases, the games change so drastically when moved from 2D to 3D that you can't really draw comparisons between them.

One thing that can be said is that in some genres, the leap made it so talented script writers had to learn to render models in order to keep a steady job in the industry. Production staffs swelled to unprecedented levels and often times it was too expensive to hire talented writers... besides, anyone can write story dialogue, everyone has access to a keyboard... but not everyone has the knowledge to make hair more realistic, especially if it's wet... or if there's a slight breeze... while on fire.

Meanwhile, back in reality-land, games slowly began to get shorter than this sentence. If it weren't for jRPG's and their undying will to be anything less than 30-40 hours worth of gameplay (read: grinding) and mammoth scripts (read: annoying worthless NPC dialogue), the average game length would be just a bit longer than your average Peter Jackson movie. Somehow, it got into everyone's brain that making more expensive, shorter games with less that zero replay value was the way to go. The catchphrase of the day was (is) "cinematic gaming" in an ever enduring quest for games to be taken seriously as an art form by... umm... mimicking another art form.

Let's have a little self-awareness party here shall we? Gaming, has been, and always will be entirely gimmick-based. Game developers are as prone to faddism as their clientele and will nearly always hop on the next "Me-Too" bus because the consumer base is largely consistent of attention-deficient "impress-me-now's" that unless you have bump-mapping, force-feedback-ing, moral-choice-metering, downloadable-content-ing, online-multiplayer-ing goodness in your title, consider you yesterday's news. We're a bunch of gameplay mechanic fashionistas that demand the newest available technology be injected into everything we open our wallet for... which is how you get fantastic games like Duke Nukem Forever.

The reason why the second dimension is one of the most important Princesses to save in my mind is much akin to the reason a haiku exists: Creativity bred from limitations. When you have to make a compelling experience in a technically limited space, the creative mind taps into a different part of the right side of the brain and forces the creator to be a different kind of creative than they would be with seemingly limitless possibilities. Imagine if you had to create a game like God of War in only two dimensions. Immediately your brain starts tapping into a different type of thinking; the kind that makes us figure out ways to fit square pegs into round holes. This is what made the SNES/Genesis days give us some of the most memorable experiences in gaming to this day, and why some of the best games on the first-gen 3D consoles were still brilliantly rendered in two dimensions (read: Castlevania: Symphony of the Night).

This PWS is the picture of the girl you'll never get to be with hanging up on your wall, or on your desktop wallpaper, she's the anime girl that you're in love with that will never be real, she's the Victoria's Secret catalog that you keep hidden from your wife and the picture of your ex-girlfriend you can never get back. The second dimension embodies fantasy simply because nothing in the real world can only exist in two dimensions. To lose the two-dimensional canvas in gaming is to pull it closer and closer to reality, which is exactly what we all try and escape when we play games.

-SP

 

[SavingPrincess]

Take Natal for example. Sure, it's going to provide an interesting layer of what developers can do with interactivity, but it's going to be at the expense of long play times, as it's difficult to play for a long time waggling your arms around like a moron.

*falls out of chair*

So true.

If you look at games like Braid, World of Goo, etc. It's wildly clear that 2D is still a viable means of creating an unforgettable experience and it's sad to see so many large dev's completely abandon it as a storytelling medium. I don't think 3D should be completely ditched, but when did it become the rule that 2D was for indie dev's only? Where's my SquareEnix 2D RPG for PS3? Where's Nintendo's next 2D Metroid? Can we please have a 2D Castlvania that I don't have to play holding the screen ten inches from my face? They have such vast technological resources, they could literally make 2D concept art come to life... and with games like Little Big Planet (and it's 3-on-2D type of graphics) garnishing so much attention, I don't understand why more dev's don't go back to making 2D a standard again.

 

[Superfly CJ]

Technology moves on, surely it's better to utilise what we've got now rather than what we had then? You remark on the SNES/Genesis days as being somewhat of a golden age for creativity. Do you honestly think that same creativity would have flourished had the designers decided to stick with text adventures? After all, they, too were restrictive enough to encourage great levels of inspiration in storytelling and interaction. (The leap from text to graphics also made it so that talented story-writers had to learn to draw in order to keep a steady job in the...I think you can see where i'm going there)

It's hardly a princess in need of saving, either- plenty of Indie developers are showcasing new and innovative ways to harbour 2D graphics, while big budget titles such as Castle Crashers prove that there's more than enough room for both dimensions to thrive.

Rose-tinted goggles can be a ***** to take off, I know, but 2D and 3D have both followed in similar fashion. It's easy to criticise the failings of early 3D in the same way it's easy to criticise early 2D (I can't think of a single Spectrum game that holds up today). It's just a case of associating the 2D timeline with that of 3D, which has only just entered maturity.

Just my thoughts on the matter, but 3D needs time to reach it's creative apex. Until that point, there'll always be a healthy supply of fresh 2D to complement it.

 

[SavingPrincess]

Technology moves on...

Sure, but don't people still paint? I mean, why use a paintbrush when you can go out and get Corel Painter with a bitchin' tablet and post on Deviant Art? Why do people still play the acoustic guitar since Leo Fender and Les Paul gave us fretboard with which to shred?

If games want to be considered a viable artistic medium, why are we so quick to drop our past in favor of a new wave of technology? While I'd hardly call Castle Crashers a "Big Budget Title" compared with the status quo (all the music was basically made by members of Newgrounds, talk about money saved), games like that are considered niche at best, and don't have the legs of a Gears of War or a God of War or a Halo Wars or a Something Something War Something. Again, why is 2D considered the "indie" technology? Nintendo releasing New Super Mario Bros. Wii has caused some to rejoice and some to blast them for unoriginality while Little Big Planet received nearly universal praise from the gaming world; even still both of those games are a sort of 3-on-2D type of visual styling (Same with Street Fighter IV).

Machines today have so much horsepower, why not making 2D games with ultra-high resolution sprites (I believe Guilty Gear was the only game to my knowledge that attempted this unless you count Super Street Fighter II HD Remix). Imagine an ultra-high resolution 2D Castlevania or Mega Man. To my knowledge, Super Metroid is still many people's favorite game of the series and the GBA titles carried that torch well; so why not on the TV in 1080p glory?

Again I'm not saying kill 3D entirely... I personally don't want to see a 2D Halo or a 2D Metal Gear Solid, those stories are best told in their respective stylings... but to say that we should "Move on" from 2D would be like saying that all movies from now on should be filmed in 3D as well, just because the technology exists.

I cannot say I disagree more, but I defend to the death your right to feel how you do! =D

I still think you're wrong though =)

 

[Brotherofwill]

Nice read. Man, I finally realised why you pre-titled all your threads, makes sense to me now. Good way of branding, that's for sure.

I agree on your general points but am rather surprised that you didn't explicately state something so obvious: The unmatched gameplay experience. When you convert Mega Man to 3D you might get a pretty good product. What you won't get is Megaman gameplay. I think there are types of gameplay that are just better when you play them in the second dimension, like most platformers.

When the 3D craze was really kicking off with the Playstation and N64 I can remember being very impressed. Games like Mario 64 blew me away, yet they felt so different. Then all of a sudden: BOOM. I discovered Abe's Oddysey. A small, almost forgotten title in the launch line-up of the PS. It was 2D platforming at its best. I loved it and realised that 3D is only another step, and not the ultimate way to go. 2D games are still viable experiences today, it'd be good to see some more.

Meanwhile, back in reality-land, games slowly began to get shorter than this sentence. If it weren't for jRPG's and their undying will to be anything less than 30-40 hours worth of gameplay (read: grinding) and mammoth scripts (read: annoying worthless NPC dialogue), the average game length would be just a bit longer than your average Peter Jackson movie. Somehow, it got into everyone's brain that making more expensive, shorter games with less that zero replay value was the way to go. The catchphrase of the day was (is) "cinematic gaming" in an ever enduring quest for games to be taken seriously as an art form by... umm... mimicking another art form.

I might be in the minority here, but I really like short games. To me there is no real reason why every game should be a 10+ hour marathon, because most gameplay inovations or revisions just kind loose steam after some time. If you can make the same impact and statement with your game and have it 5 hours shorter, then better for you. There is so much artificial padding in most titles that I really think games would benefit from not trying to meet the 10 benchmark and just progress at their own pace. That isn't to say every game should be short. I love 50+ hour RPGs, but usually bore after 3 hours of modern shooters which try to meet 10 hour campaigns. If you can make a short game like Zeno Clash and market it for a cheaper price, then that's fine with me.

I do get what you mean though: Resources are shoddily spent in game development and I agree.

The reason why the second dimension is one of the most important Princesses to save in my mind is much akin to the reason a haiku exists: Creativity bred from limitations. When you have to make a compelling experience in a technically limited space, the creative mind taps into a different part of the right side of the brain and forces the creator to be a different kind of creative than they would be with seemingly limitless possibilities. Imagine if you had to create a game like God of War in only two dimensions. Immediately your brain starts tapping into a different type of thinking; the kind that makes us figure out ways to fit square pegs into round holes. This is what made the SNES/Genesis days give us some of the most memorable experiences in gaming to this day, and why some of the best games on the first-gen 3D consoles were still brilliantly rendered in two dimensions (read: Castlevania: Symphony of the Night).

Good point.

The second dimension embodies fantasy simply because nothing in the real world can only exist in two dimensions. To lose the two-dimensional canvas in gaming is to pull it closer and closer to reality, which is exactly what we all try and escape when we play games.

-SP

Haha, reminds me of the Modern Art movement. After centuries of trying to mimick reality and creating artifical depth and perception in their paintings, a group of artist just went: Fuck it. They created flat, abstract paintings and treated the canvas as what it truly is: A canvas and not an artificial reality. Games would benefit from a similar approach.

 

[Daemascus]

Quit living in the past... thing change and shit happens. Pinning for the old days when "everything was better" won't change a thing.

 

[SavingPrincess]

Quit living in the past... thing change and shit happens. Pinning for the old days when "everything was better" won't change a thing.

So do you believe that all movies should be made in 3D now?

 

[PunkRex]

Im only 21 (for about a week) so was not around for the older titles, but gamings still a massive part of my life. Im not a fan of realism and do find a lot of mordern games boring and gimmicky. I also work at a cinema and we have been buried under a tide of 3D movies lately. Most companys see new methods as a shallow excuse to churn out cheap crap, riding popularity. BUT give it time, we have seen great games over the last decade like Timesplitters, Pikmin and Kingdom Hearts. Time userly yeads results, you just got to keep bitching in the general direction of the things you want to see, sometimes it even surprises you, I love the old monster flicks and the new Clash of the Titans is looking better every time I see the ad, even if at first it looked like a desperate grasping for ideals.

 

[Darth Rahu]

agreed on a lot of things, which is why I can't wait for Metroid: Other M. Whoo!!