Re: 2.5d (from the other m speculation thread) [locked]

(user is banned)

2009-07-17 09:49:51 am

thats me

Quote from Opium:

The two styles I was referring to are full 3-D and sidescrolling.

Just look how the character is shooting in the third dimension in the sidescroller view. Shall be obvious everything is 3D. Just on my add physically there cannot be anything "2.5D". Either some elements use 3D-transformation or they do not. The rest is just another set of rules.

2009-07-17 10:18:47 am

Super Secret Area - Dead Ahead!

Quote from Opium:

The two styles I was referring to are full 3-D and sidescrolling.

I know that some games have had the two styles included, but whether there has been a game before Prime that used it constantly, as the main mode of play, I don't know.

2009-07-17 12:31:13 pm

red chamber dream

Quote from Opium:

I'm not that familiar with SSBB, but I always thought that games which had 3D looking characters and backgrounds but movement was only sidescrolling was referred to as 2.5D. Doesn't there have to be an X Y & Z axis for it to be 3D ?

guess you'd need to make the distinction between which definition of 3d and 2d you're talking about. super smash bros brawl and street fighter 4 have 3d graphics but are played in 2d, so they're 3d games in terms of graphics and 2.5d in terms of perspective.

Opium

2009-07-17 01:45:39 pm

I guess for me the distinction between 2D and 3D is not graphics but which directions the character can move in. There should be three axes in a 3D game environment. In Prime there are 3 axes when looking through the hud, but only 2 when in certain morph ball tunnels, like the one just before sheegoth/wave beam. So even though the latter environment looks 3D, I consider it 2D since it you can only move left-right or up-down (not forward-backward).

I realize there is no such thing as 2.5D, it's just a term used to describe a 2D environment whose graphics/shading give the look of 3D.

(user is banned)

2009-07-17 01:51:52 pm

thats me

Quote from arkarian:

so they're 3d games in terms of graphics and 2.5d in terms of perspective.

They're 3d games in terms of graphics and 3d in terms of perspective. It is only about "how to allow the player to walk". As opium said there is no such thing as 2.5d.

2009-07-17 05:08:54 pm

red chamber dream

if i'm not mistaken 2.5d is used for either games with 3d graphics that simulate a 2d environment (street fighter 4) or games with 2d graphics that simulate a 3d environment (simcity). '2.5d' certainly does exist, as a term used to describe such games.

(user is banned)

Edit history:

J-SNAKE: 2009-07-17 05:39:24 pm

2009-07-17 05:35:35 pm

thats me

"2.5D" is a horrible and surreal word.
Street fighter 4 graphics are 3D, as much as its perspective is. The game itself simulates only 2D-combat.
The early simcity is based on sprites/tiles taken and placed in an isometric view, but which are only translated in 2-dimensions, ignoring the perspective. 3D is about translation and then perspective-correct transformation based on known intercept theorems. So they are faking a little the impression to be 3D while they are treated purely 2D. There can only be a mixed set of objects or behaviours being either 3D or 2D. But calling a game 2.5D doesnt tell you really much.

I am actually develloping my own 3D-software-engine from scratch. All I am given is only a fast way to allocate pixels on screen. The rest is pure math and algorithms.

2009-07-17 05:56:25 pm

Super Secret Area - Dead Ahead!

I think you're missing the whole 2.5D thing, J-SNAKE.

In the geometric world, you are correct, as 2.5D doesn't exist, but as a phrase created to label the things Ark mentioned above, it categorically DOES exist. It's basically easier than explaining one of the two in full.

(user is banned)

Edit history:

J-SNAKE: 2009-07-17 06:27:09 pm

2009-07-17 06:07:38 pm

thats me

Quote from Quietus:

It's basically easier than explaining one of the two in full.

"2.5D" doesnt tell you pretty much. See how ark is confused with sf4, it does not simulate a 2d-environment, it is 3d and also simulates 3d environment. You will miss a lot if you just assume something "2.5"D.

Quote from Quietus:

it categorically DOES exist.

My solution: this word has to be erased, it provides nonsense illusions. "Faking 3D" is much more appropriate. Or simply call something a "3D-sidescroller" when 3d-impression is not faked. Here is a lot more and clear information in only 2 words.

kesvalk

2009-07-17 06:27:20 pm

Indie Lover

j-snake, is your hobby to start pointless discussions? do you know this is the same as trooling?

anyway... i really don't think this game have ANY sidescroller parts... if you guys are talking about the rios part... just because she dodged it in the same axis, don't mean the game is sidescroller...

if it was a sidecroller game, there would be no need to put team ninja on this... they have plenty of experience with sidescroller games...

2009-07-17 06:42:30 pm

Super Secret Area - Dead Ahead!

Quote from J-SNAKE:

"2.5D" doesnt tell you pretty much.

It doesn't need to. Anybody discussing things using the term would clearly understand what it means. If the person they were speaking with didn't understand what it meant, then it would be explained, just like anything else.

Quote from J-SNAKE:

You will miss a lot if you just assume something "2.5"D.

We're not assuming anything is 2.5D. It's just a word we use to describe the style, so that we don't have to explain...

Quote from arkarian:

2.5d is used for either games with 3d graphics that simulate a 2d environment (street fighter 4) or games with 2d graphics that simulate a 3d environment (simcity).

...every time we want to discuss it.

Quote from J-SNAKE:

My solution: this word has to be erased, it provides nonsense illusions.

It only seems to be you that doesn't understand the term. It's been around for years, at least since the days of Wolfenstein, so I don't think it's going anywhere any time soon.

[quote="J-SNAKE"]"2.5D" doesnt tell you pretty much.[/quote]

It doesn't need to.  Anybody discussing things using the term would clearly understand what it means.  If the person they were speaking with didn't understand what it meant, then it would be explained, just like anything else.

[quote="J-SNAKE"]You will miss a lot if you just assume something "2.5"D.[/quote]  We're not [i]assuming[/i] anything is 2.5D.  It's just a word we use to describe the style, so that we don't have to explain...

[quote="arkarian"]2.5d is used for either games with 3d graphics that simulate a 2d environment (street fighter 4) or games with 2d graphics that simulate a 3d environment (simcity).[/quote]

...every time we want to discuss it.

[quote="J-SNAKE"]My solution: this word has to be erased, it provides nonsense illusions.[/quote]

It only seems to be you that doesn't understand the term.  It's been around for years, at least since the days of Wolfenstein, so I don't think it's going anywhere any time soon.

(user is banned)

2009-07-17 06:57:40 pm

thats me

Quote from Quietus:

Anybody discussing things using the term would clearly understand what it means.

It is funny to read. Are you sure? I think most will be into wrong illusions. Why did ark confuse things and clearly didnt understand it then? Almost every 2d game tries to simulate 3d-graphics, secret of mana, platformers like SM, using parallax-scrolling,no need to call it 2.5D. And a 3D game like SF4 would only simulate 2D-style when the characters would only translate without perspective-correct transformation, but when you walk your character to the right, you actually see his back, do you clearly understand:) ?

2009-07-17 07:03:24 pm

Super Secret Area - Dead Ahead!

Yes, I understand exactly what you're saying. You think the phrase can cause confusion, but the only person appearing confused by it is you.

Ark wasn't confused over it. His description is pretty much bang-on. I don't understand why you keep insisting that he's confused.

(user is banned)

Edit history:

J-SNAKE: 2009-07-17 07:28:26 pm

2009-07-17 07:16:05 pm

thats me

Quote from Quietus:

Yes, I understand exactly what you're saying.

Even when ignorabale and 2d-contributable things like slight translation of your player is perspectively-correct transformed, it simulates 3D pretty hard, but not 2D. Probably you will figure out how funny it is claiming everything is that clear while being into illusions, what many are into when a talk about "2.5"D is going on. You clearly didnt put some effort in understanding what I have to share but some others probably will, so I think I brought it on the point enough now, you just need to read it. (do you even know what a perspectiv-correct transformation is?, or are you just ignoring it)

Quote from Quietus:

You think the phrase can cause confusion, but the only person appearing confused by it is you.

Is a platformer with a "3D"-zoom-feature "2.5"D or are you confused?

2009-07-17 07:38:15 pm

Super Secret Area - Dead Ahead!

You're still missing the point.

"2.5D" is just a word that's used to describe the way a game looks. This is regardless of all of the nonsensical techno-babble you keep trying to string together and throw at people.

You should understand that the word is going to be used whether you understand it or not, so trying to persuade everybody that you are right and they are wrong is completely pointless. We disagree with you. Accept it. And telling me that the accepted definition of the term "2.5D" is funny makes no sense. Are you saying that you think that's what I think it means? It's nothing to do with what I think - that's what it means, and that's all there is to it. Eh?

Also, on an unrelated note, I'd like to ask that you stop trying to call everybody stupid all the time - it's very rude. Constantly finishing what you say with 'do you understand' or 'don't you see' is akin to calling people stupid just for disagreeing with you. Quit it, please.

You're still missing the point.

"2.5D" is [u]just[/u] [u]a[/u] [u]word[/u] that's used to describe the way a game looks.  This is regardless of all of the nonsensical techno-babble you keep trying to string together and throw at people.

You should understand that the word is going to be used whether you understand it or not, so trying to persuade everybody that you are right and they are wrong is completely pointless.  We disagree with you. Accept it.  And telling [i]me[/i] that the [i]accepted definition[/i] of the term "2.5D" is funny makes no sense.  Are you saying that you think that's what [i]I[/i] think it means?  It's nothing to do with what I think - that's what it means, and that's all there is to it. :huh_orig:

Also, on an unrelated note, I'd like to ask that you stop trying to call everybody stupid all the time - it's very rude.  Constantly finishing what you say with 'do you understand' or 'don't you see' is akin to calling people stupid just for disagreeing with you.  Quit it, please.

2009-07-17 07:41:27 pm

red chamber dream

j-snake: i'm not confused about anything. perhaps saying sf4 "simulates a 2d environment" wasn't precisely the best choice of words, but i spent a lot of time thinking about how to word that and that's the best i could come up with.
i'll try again: sf4 has movement on a 2d plane but has 3d graphics. that's a situation '2.5d' is used to describe. it's a nonsense term when taken literally, but it's a fine phrase when you know what it means.

j-snake: i don't really care if you think otherwise; you can look up '2.5d' pretty much anywhere you want and that's the definition you'll get.

j-snake: please stop starting long, poorly-worded, messy, and grammatically incorrect arguments on this forum for no reason. any further posts of the aforementioned type will be deleted on-sight. if you want to disagree, clearly state your position in as few sentences as possible, then move on.

(user is banned)

Edit history:

J-SNAKE: 2009-07-17 07:50:01 pm

2009-07-17 07:43:05 pm

thats me

Quote from Quietus:

"2.5D" is just a word that's used to describe the way a game looks.

How does it look?
As much as: What is please a "3D-zoom" in a 2d game?

It is my last post to that concern, world is full of nonsense-words. I guess it is a word created by fans, not by graphics-scientists.

2009-07-17 07:45:46 pm

Super Secret Area - Dead Ahead!

2.5D - from Wikipedia.

2009-07-17 07:53:44 pm

red chamber dream

2.5d —

1. a game with three-dimensional graphics that's played on a two-dimensional plane (eg super smash bros brawl, littlebigplanet, r-type final)

or

2. a game with two-dimensional graphics that's made to appear three-dimensional (eg simcity, outrun, rock n roll racing, or most sidescrollers with parallax scrolling)

i'm locking this because there is nothing to argue about and never was in the first place. can read the wikipedia article quietus linked to for more.

tomatobob

2009-07-17 07:57:26 pm

One shall stand, one shall ball.

That is the definition used by the uneducated peons that don't know anything, not by those well versed in GRAPHICS SCIENCE.

(user is banned)

2009-07-17 08:01:27 pm

thats me

Just one example:
"2.5 platformers are sidescrolling platforming games that use polygons to render the world and characters (3D graphics) but the gameplay is restricted to a 2D plane"

Would "3D platformers" not hit the nail on the top here. Why buffling someone with 2.5D?

2009-07-17 08:03:44 pm

Super Secret Area - Dead Ahead!

3D platformers are things like Super Mario 64, Jak and Daxter, Banjo Kazooie, where everything is full 3D.