Narednik Igor Posted March 4, 2004 Report Share Posted March 4, 2004 For me better is 2D grafic like X-com3 I know it is ugly but , for me, 3D gr. isn't ... real.I'm hoping for new era of X-com" I heard some talking about new unoffical game " :wink: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cpl. Facehugger Posted March 4, 2004 Report Share Posted March 4, 2004 3d graphics, if done well, can be much more immersive than 2d pictures. Xenocide's 3d models and such are of the highest quality. Although, 2d graphics look okay, 3d graphics look more real. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[[Micah]] Posted March 4, 2004 Report Share Posted March 4, 2004 Yeah, I would say 3D graphics, but not like Aftermath Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deimos Posted March 4, 2004 Report Share Posted March 4, 2004 I'll second what Micah said But then again I am kinda biased. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albino Crow Posted March 5, 2004 Report Share Posted March 5, 2004 I'm kind of divided between the 2D and 3D issue. It really depends on what you're doing, and like Facehugger I'm a huge fan of the style of the first two games. The isometric pixels will never die. 3D, as mentioned, if done right is quite potent and can't be looked away from. Perhaps in the isometric view of the first few games, only with 3D models would be ideal. Now that would make a lot of people happy. Lmao. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SupSuper Posted March 5, 2004 Report Share Posted March 5, 2004 i prefer 3d, but 2d's still nice. 3d's much less work and more detail, since you do a model and it works for any direction and/or zoom level. in 2d, you have to do a sprite for each thing, which is lots of work, but it tends to look nicer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now