Another example of gameplay you can't do quite the same in 3D compared to 2D is the Sonic games. In the classic games you can bounce on enemies to start a bounce chain of hopping from enemy to the next merely using the physics system in a fun whimsical way... however on the 3D games because you can fall around in any direction, they have to automate this overall idea artificially with the homing attack that pulls the character into the enemy usually stopping you in midair afterwards, and because of that design, they have to make special locations designed around it in order to make good use of it... while still fine, but It just isn't the same feeling as the 2D games.
This true with the newer Sonic games, Sonic adventure series still had the sort of rhyme and control. It felt different but it still maintain the level of freedom and control over your speed than the boost formula does.
That's not completely true. In Sonic generations there are many times when you can bounce on enemies, which is helpful because the homing attack is much slower. You can't really chain it, because most times enemies aren't placed in a straight line, but bouncing is very much still there. I think in gens it works because they made the enemies very big, in the advenure games they're much smaller so you can't hit them easily without homing.
Echoes of wisdom (and games like it) is definitely an interesting conundrum when it comes to the 2D vs 3D conversation. It is definitely a 3D engine, and many puzzles and enemy interactions rely on the third Z axis, but a majority of the player focus and camera POV centers it on a 2D plane of existence. I personally would still consider it 3D, but I do enjoy the term "2.5D" for games that kinda walk the line.
That combat example you had with hyperlight drifter I feel like could be achieved similarly in 2D or 3D. But it would feel different. If your goal is to keep players in the know, like the 2D version, then in 3D enemies could be outlined in red through walls with varying color intensity indicating how close or far they are. Or if in 2D you want to hide where enemies are you could do view cones with light being blocked by walls (akin to among us). I feel like with 2D vs 3D vs even like VR or AR games it’s all about the perspective the game provides. I think you can make most controls and mechanics work exactly the same between the various dimensions of play, it just has to be done with some tricks or differently and then at that point it’s the feel you want in one vs the other. I wouldn’t say 2D games are going anywhere, I love a good 2D game. Just there isn’t anything in one dimension vs the other mechanically that makes it innately better at somethings. Personal preferences also have a huge role to play. All this rambling is to say I agree but also not in the same way said in the video but that is my opinion and not gospel truth. Keep up the good work
2D games have their unique gameplay, and as long as there are enough people who enjoy this style of gameplay, 2D games will not disappear. The same goes for art styles. Technology may change the way we create various art styles, but as long as there are enough people who appreciate them, these art styles will not disappear.
Another great video! With respect to the Mario comparison at 4:39, that's a good point that you generally have more control in 2D leading to tighter platforming. But I would argue that Mario Odyssey was able to nail it in 3D - that game has some of the tightest controls ever! But to achieve that level of precision in a 3D platformer, the level design needs to be a lot more "open" and complex, and the developers need to work a lot harder to iron out the kinks.
@@OandCoGamesi would also argue that the developers of mario 3d world making the player run in 8 directions instead of the full 360 degree was an intentional design decision rather than a limitation of 3d game. No hate btw, good videos
Ever play the game Darq? It focuses mainly on being able to walk on walls an even ceilings. Some levels though turn being 2D on its head. There's one where a central area lets you switch yourself around so even though it's a 2D plane the actual level is a 3D environment. Pretty great. By the way, if you are at all interested in making a Wario-Like for your next game, let me know. My game pitch in five words is as follows: Wario Land 3 Point Five. Got a very short design document as well and theme song written in Musescore.
I'm a game developer who has explored both spaces, and I have a 2D favorite game and a 3D favorite game. Back when I wasn't very skilled at game development, whenever I envisioned my dream game, it was always in 2D. That was primarily many of my favorite childhood games were 2D games. Growing up, I picked up a few 3D games, and even started developing one. The amount of 3D games I love in relation to 2D games is overwhelmingly outnumbered. Some 2D games (like Terraria or Touhou, which I don't play but have seen gameplay of) have 2D-intensive gameplay that you just cannot imagine replicating or playing in 3D, and these games reach levels of sophistication 3D games can only dream of. 2D games are really great, but I must not discredit 3D games. They are hard to create, and if you execute it well, it is REALLY WELL. Remember the 2D dream game I mentioned? The dream game became 3D because I wanted to tell a story with a world I wanted players to *deliberately* explore. Many popular AAAs are 3D. Truly, both kinds of games are really good games, and to decide whether you should take 2D or 3D should really depend on what you want to create.
I argue that 3D is better for first person experiences than 3rd. Gameplay is better to get right in the 3rd person if the plane of action is limited to 2D -- it's a perfect example of a "limitations breed creativity". At the end of the day, the gameplay is the most important consideration. I love both 2d and 3d games. I grew up with games like Interplay's *Descent* series where 3D was built upon in creative ways. I missed out on Quake until way after the fact, but I would have enjoyed that game too. Descent could not have existed in 2D. It was basically a 3D sci-fi dodgeball festival. The gameplay is more built upon exploring the environment and using the environment as a dopamine-doping playground for your pew-pew adventures and objective routes, and using the right tool for the right job.
i think comparing mario wonder and oddysey would make more, because movement in mario oddysey is both extremely expressive and precise, i feel like 3d world puts more emphasis on level design and ideas, mario wonder movement is precise, but not as precise as celeste, but for example pizza tower is worth mentioning because it's movement is expressive as hell, nice video :D
I love 2D games. I have made 2D games with GameMaker and 3D games with Unity. I don't think one is generally easier than the other. There are some aspects of 2D that are easier, but there are other aspects that, depending on your type of game and your assets, can be much more time-consuming with no real benefit. Regarding the last point in the video, any game in which you can move forward, backward, left, right, and you can jump is a 3D game, by definition. In fact, adding platform jumping to a game like Legend of Zelda is very difficult to do in 2D but is simple in 3D. So I don't feel that was a valid statement. I would say, though, that there is another aspect of game development where 2D shines, and that is procedural runtime generation. There are 3D tools for procedural runtime generation, but they are far more limited than what you can achieve with 2D. This is especially true for things like rivers and lakes, which in 3D require specific alterations to the terrain, but in 2D are just another tileset.
2D Games will alway have a place! There is enough nostalgia from the incredible 2D games of the past to carry this art style on its shoulders alone. Nevermind the incredible 2D games that come out year after year (like TetherGeist!) Huge congrats on the sponsorship with Gamemaker!
10:07 altho a game could have a minimap or xray vision/indicator to make up for this. sounds that indicate an attack or movement (barks as they’re called) also help signal what’s going on out of view
minimap would have some challenges in a truly 3d layout, with vertical room connections, but with varying color, brightness, size, shape, whatever of icons i’m sure it could be made work
also a level designer could use this lack of knowledge to create a desired experience in a level. coming across a vantage point which lets you see what you otherwise could not would have a greater effect on the player than if they always had that info. tight spaces could feel more hostile, riskier, stressful, then contrasting with a large open area which trades that off for a less controllable way to approach enemies.
The only thing i agree is the precise movement of 2d enviroments. And i say enviroments, not 2d games. There is some 3d games called "2.5D". 3D or 2D is just an artistic choice. I dont think there is a mechanic exclusive to one or another. The exemples in the video are just camera isues, that can be mimic on 2D or 3D. I can make a 3D game, use a orthographic camera and fake a 2D enviroment. And i can make a 2D game that feels 3D, like Hades. People play 2D games because they find it to be beautiful or aestethic pleasing. Just an artistic choice. (it can be a performance choice too)
I'm pretty sure they are still called 2d, for example in the original Sonic platformer games you can see sonic standing😮 in 3d as he is spun around on a spinning platform, and a lot of characters in other games will show a different side of them eg when climbing ladders, or when attacking to give that 3d appearance.
Another reason for 2D games longevity is it is easier to watch others play. For example in a tournament you can get all information at once on one screen. 3D games often need a screen-per-player to see what's happening, and rapid camera movement gets tiring on the eyes. As for 2D being easier than 3D, that's true in some facets like math being simpler. But in other ways 2D can be harder than 3D, for example you can view a 3D model at any angle but to get the same effect in 2D you'll have to manually redraw the art at various angles.
There is a difference between a genera and s style. 2D is a style, side scroller is a genre. you wouldn't call a 3D side scroller a 2D game but this video presents it as such. then there is the implication that a 3D game can't have unique movement ignoring games like monster hunter, Ultra Kill, Titanfall. 3D games can use point and click as well I can't name any off the top of my head but I know I have 100% played many 3D games with point and click mechanics. 3D games also can use cameras in more then just a locked to characters view type of way. Think of little nightmares, or leauge of legends. I love 2D game and they are never going to go be it be due to limitations developers face or because of an artstyle chosen by the devs, but i think the resons here are a large stretch of the imagination.
Agreed, genre and style are two very different ways to categorize games. The 3D games you listed all exhibit the same imprecision I'm talking about. They're super fun, movement is great, but it requires extra cognitive effort by the player and can never be as precise as 2D games. The lower barrier to entry for 2D games will keep them popular and allow game designers to make challenges that, while fun in 2D, would just be frustrating in 3D. Point and click in 2D is different in 3D, and people like it in both. Enough for 2D to stick around for a long time. Developer limitations and art style are the low-hanging fruit of the argument. The intent of this video was to go beyond the obvious reasons and provide insights from a game design perspective that most players likely aren't aware of, but have a big impact on what makes 2D games still relevant today. The gameplay in League of Legends is 2D. The designers of Little Nightmares did fabulous work with the camera that had strengths beyond what could be done in 2D. Great example of the point made at 9:51.
"you wouldn't call a 3D side scroller a 2D game" Why not? The idea that the rendering method determines a game is silly. What matters is the gameplay, in my opinion. It is completely irrelevant if Mario is a sprite or a 3D model, the sidescroller is a 2D game. You can make a sidescroller that is a 3D game (for example with 3D sections), but by default it's very much a 2D game with graphics that are 3D models. In the underlying engine, you're likely using 2D physics, not 3D physics for most of these sidescrollers, too, and for good reason too. It has many advantages to do so, and is often a lot easier to code, especially with uneven geometry. They're 2D games.
I think better categorization is game datastructure. Like, is the map and object positions 2D or 3D. There are also 1D games, like Monopoly. Also game map can be real time or turn based, and all positions can be vector based or some grid/array. Some games are based on graph structure where you got nodes and edges. That data structure is hugely important on game design so they are not go away. Visualization of that datastructure is own thing, 1D monopoly can be be visualized in 3D vector graphics. But important thing to understand is that 2D _visualization_ do have benefits because 3D sucks on pixel level details. That is why 3D vector graphics benefits on 2D billboards to get pixel level geometry and details right.
i also agree that if you cannot move your camera in all directions up down right left back front sides etc its not 3d even even it might look because you can make it look 3d by adding realistic textures with dense color pallets and toy with lightning and shadows or tweak the contrast there are multiple ways to make it look 3d even tho its not so yea we're on the same page on that, altho tedious process to do so but if someone is that determined sure son go ahead xD
You made your RUclips account in Dec 2024?? Yet call yourself “GameDeveloper” and hate 2D games?? You are either a child new the internet with an invalid opinion due to your lack of life. Or you are a terrible game developer who lacks depth in understanding that good games don’t only include Fortnite, Minecraft, and Roblox. I normally never comment on people’s comments, but unfortunately this comment is one of the worst and most biased comments I have ever seen.
hey i love your videos and i tried to play tethergeist demo on my laptop like 1 week ago and fps was really bad. will it be better on finish version? laptop is not for games but it generaly good with 2d games (smooth with huntdown, hollow knight, bzzzt, undertale, terraria, makerking, celeste atleast)
Optimization is a big part of our process for sure and will definitely be better upon game release. I will admit we rarely hear about performance issues since our last demo release though. Is there a specific section that struggled, or was it the game as a whole?
Tethergeist. It's the game they're developing! They make devlogs about the progress of the game too. It's a lot like celeste but with a unique tethering mechanic. I'm not sure if its still playable but I played a playtest build of it and it was really fun.
Get started with Gamemaker here! opr.as/GM-OandCoGames
Hello brother, Best of luck with your game Tethergeist 🎉😄
Mario wonder appears to still be 3d, which leads me to point out that you don't mean 2d games; you mean games that don't simulate a 3d environment.
Another example of gameplay you can't do quite the same in 3D compared to 2D is the Sonic games. In the classic games you can bounce on enemies to start a bounce chain of hopping from enemy to the next merely using the physics system in a fun whimsical way... however on the 3D games because you can fall around in any direction, they have to automate this overall idea artificially with the homing attack that pulls the character into the enemy usually stopping you in midair afterwards, and because of that design, they have to make special locations designed around it in order to make good use of it... while still fine, but It just isn't the same feeling as the 2D games.
That is an excellent point. Might help explain why Sonic Team has had so many struggles with later installments...
This true with the newer Sonic games, Sonic adventure series still had the sort of rhyme and control. It felt different but it still maintain the level of freedom and control over your speed than the boost formula does.
That's not completely true. In Sonic generations there are many times when you can bounce on enemies, which is helpful because the homing attack is much slower. You can't really chain it, because most times enemies aren't placed in a straight line, but bouncing is very much still there. I think in gens it works because they made the enemies very big, in the advenure games they're much smaller so you can't hit them easily without homing.
I love 2d games
Echoes of wisdom (and games like it) is definitely an interesting conundrum when it comes to the 2D vs 3D conversation. It is definitely a 3D engine, and many puzzles and enemy interactions rely on the third Z axis, but a majority of the player focus and camera POV centers it on a 2D plane of existence. I personally would still consider it 3D, but I do enjoy the term "2.5D" for games that kinda walk the line.
Yes! 2.5D is probably the best descriptor.
Your videos are so great! Can't wait for Tethergeist!
That combat example you had with hyperlight drifter I feel like could be achieved similarly in 2D or 3D. But it would feel different. If your goal is to keep players in the know, like the 2D version, then in 3D enemies could be outlined in red through walls with varying color intensity indicating how close or far they are. Or if in 2D you want to hide where enemies are you could do view cones with light being blocked by walls (akin to among us). I feel like with 2D vs 3D vs even like VR or AR games it’s all about the perspective the game provides. I think you can make most controls and mechanics work exactly the same between the various dimensions of play, it just has to be done with some tricks or differently and then at that point it’s the feel you want in one vs the other. I wouldn’t say 2D games are going anywhere, I love a good 2D game. Just there isn’t anything in one dimension vs the other mechanically that makes it innately better at somethings. Personal preferences also have a huge role to play.
All this rambling is to say I agree but also not in the same way said in the video but that is my opinion and not gospel truth. Keep up the good work
Well said, and excellent points.
2D games have their unique gameplay, and as long as there are enough people who enjoy this style of gameplay, 2D games will not disappear.
The same goes for art styles. Technology may change the way we create various art styles, but as long as there are enough people who appreciate them, these art styles will not disappear.
And 2d games can use the 2 joysticks for movement or attack, but the 3d games practically all have the second joystick for the camera
Yes! Excellent point.
8:28 these visuals are cool
Symphonia is a beautiful game
Another great video! With respect to the Mario comparison at 4:39, that's a good point that you generally have more control in 2D leading to tighter platforming. But I would argue that Mario Odyssey was able to nail it in 3D - that game has some of the tightest controls ever! But to achieve that level of precision in a 3D platformer, the level design needs to be a lot more "open" and complex, and the developers need to work a lot harder to iron out the kinks.
Excellent call-out.
@@OandCoGamesi would also argue that the developers of mario 3d world making the player run in 8 directions instead of the full 360 degree was an intentional design decision rather than a limitation of 3d game. No hate btw, good videos
Ever play the game Darq? It focuses mainly on being able to walk on walls an even ceilings. Some levels though turn being 2D on its head. There's one where a central area lets you switch yourself around so even though it's a 2D plane the actual level is a 3D environment. Pretty great. By the way, if you are at all interested in making a Wario-Like for your next game, let me know. My game pitch in five words is as follows: Wario Land 3 Point Five. Got a very short design document as well and theme song written in Musescore.
I haven't played Darq, I'll have to check it out.
@@OandCoGames Coolness. Also the offer of handing you your next game still stands.
I'm a game developer who has explored both spaces, and I have a 2D favorite game and a 3D favorite game.
Back when I wasn't very skilled at game development, whenever I envisioned my dream game, it was always in 2D. That was primarily many of my favorite childhood games were 2D games. Growing up, I picked up a few 3D games, and even started developing one. The amount of 3D games I love in relation to 2D games is overwhelmingly outnumbered. Some 2D games (like Terraria or Touhou, which I don't play but have seen gameplay of) have 2D-intensive gameplay that you just cannot imagine replicating or playing in 3D, and these games reach levels of sophistication 3D games can only dream of.
2D games are really great, but I must not discredit 3D games. They are hard to create, and if you execute it well, it is REALLY WELL. Remember the 2D dream game I mentioned? The dream game became 3D because I wanted to tell a story with a world I wanted players to *deliberately* explore. Many popular AAAs are 3D.
Truly, both kinds of games are really good games, and to decide whether you should take 2D or 3D should really depend on what you want to create.
Hell yeah, terraria is great. Factorio and cave story are too
A good 90 percent of my favorite games happen to 2D games.
Right???
I argue that 3D is better for first person experiences than 3rd. Gameplay is better to get right in the 3rd person if the plane of action is limited to 2D -- it's a perfect example of a "limitations breed creativity". At the end of the day, the gameplay is the most important consideration. I love both 2d and 3d games.
I grew up with games like Interplay's *Descent* series where 3D was built upon in creative ways. I missed out on Quake until way after the fact, but I would have enjoyed that game too. Descent could not have existed in 2D. It was basically a 3D sci-fi dodgeball festival. The gameplay is more built upon exploring the environment and using the environment as a dopamine-doping playground for your pew-pew adventures and objective routes, and using the right tool for the right job.
Well said.
i think comparing mario wonder and oddysey would make more, because movement in mario oddysey is both extremely expressive and precise, i feel like 3d world puts more emphasis on level design and ideas, mario wonder movement is precise, but not as precise as celeste, but for example pizza tower is worth mentioning because it's movement is expressive as hell, nice video :D
I love 2D games. I have made 2D games with GameMaker and 3D games with Unity. I don't think one is generally easier than the other. There are some aspects of 2D that are easier, but there are other aspects that, depending on your type of game and your assets, can be much more time-consuming with no real benefit.
Regarding the last point in the video, any game in which you can move forward, backward, left, right, and you can jump is a 3D game, by definition. In fact, adding platform jumping to a game like Legend of Zelda is very difficult to do in 2D but is simple in 3D. So I don't feel that was a valid statement.
I would say, though, that there is another aspect of game development where 2D shines, and that is procedural runtime generation. There are 3D tools for procedural runtime generation, but they are far more limited than what you can achieve with 2D. This is especially true for things like rivers and lakes, which in 3D require specific alterations to the terrain, but in 2D are just another tileset.
Excellent call out
Echoes of wisdom actually operates also in z axis
I've never considered Hades to be a 3D game, is it normally considered to be so?
Maybe not?
I have terrible spatial awareness and I tend to get lost in some 3D games, so 2D for the win!
Yes! I wish I had thought to use that phrase. "Spatial awareness" is exactly what I was trying to get at.
2D Games will alway have a place! There is enough nostalgia from the incredible 2D games of the past to carry this art style on its shoulders alone. Nevermind the incredible 2D games that come out year after year (like TetherGeist!)
Huge congrats on the sponsorship with Gamemaker!
Thank you!
10:07 altho a game could have a minimap or xray vision/indicator to make up for this. sounds that indicate an attack or movement (barks as they’re called) also help signal what’s going on out of view
minimap would have some challenges in a truly 3d layout, with vertical room connections, but with varying color, brightness, size, shape, whatever of icons i’m sure it could be made work
also a level designer could use this lack of knowledge to create a desired experience in a level. coming across a vantage point which lets you see what you otherwise could not would have a greater effect on the player than if they always had that info. tight spaces could feel more hostile, riskier, stressful, then contrasting with a large open area which trades that off for a less controllable way to approach enemies.
Excellent points here.
The only thing i agree is the precise movement of 2d enviroments. And i say enviroments, not 2d games. There is some 3d games called "2.5D". 3D or 2D is just an artistic choice. I dont think there is a mechanic exclusive to one or another. The exemples in the video are just camera isues, that can be mimic on 2D or 3D. I can make a 3D game, use a orthographic camera and fake a 2D enviroment. And i can make a 2D game that feels 3D, like Hades. People play 2D games because they find it to be beautiful or aestethic pleasing. Just an artistic choice. (it can be a performance choice too)
07:01 why it did. I like those games. Submachine, Rooms, Crimson Room etc flash games
I really like them too, but the market for them has really declined since they first started coming out.
As someone who love both 2D and 3D and also make stuff for game jams, I cannot agree more :D
Btw. what is the game at 1:38?
Symphonia
I do think that 3d is better than 2d but there is something in 2d Games I can't find anything else.
If we were 4D beings, 3D games would be as easy as we find 2D games.
lol agreed
What is the game at 2:00?
"Nice to Yeet You"
@@OandCoGames Thanks!
I completely agree, platformers, metroidvanias and fighting games are way better in 2D than 3D !
I'd have classed Hades as 2.5D
A mix of 2D sprites on a 3D plain
Fair point.
Maybe
I basically agree with everything you said there.
I love 2d games. One of my favorite games of all time is deadbolt, if that was 3d I probably would have never played it.
Technically, all video games are 2D because you are playing them on a flat screen/display.
There is a name for game on a 3D world with a 2D sprite, 2.5D, but is there a name for 2D world with 3D sprite ?
I've honestly also heard that called 2.5D, but that feels confusing doesn't it... maybe we should coin a new term lol
I'm pretty sure they are still called 2d, for example in the original Sonic platformer games you can see sonic standing😮 in 3d as he is spun around on a spinning platform, and a lot of characters in other games will show a different side of them eg when climbing ladders, or when attacking to give that 3d appearance.
Look ma! I'm in this video!
Hey hey! Nice to yeet you too.
Another reason for 2D games longevity is it is easier to watch others play. For example in a tournament you can get all information at once on one screen. 3D games often need a screen-per-player to see what's happening, and rapid camera movement gets tiring on the eyes.
As for 2D being easier than 3D, that's true in some facets like math being simpler. But in other ways 2D can be harder than 3D, for example you can view a 3D model at any angle but to get the same effect in 2D you'll have to manually redraw the art at various angles.
Great points.
10:42
10:50
Does anyone know the name of those games
Echoes of Wisdom and Pepper Grinder
Every video that shows games should overlay all games with the name of the game.
@@OandCoGames thank you
There is a difference between a genera and s style. 2D is a style, side scroller is a genre. you wouldn't call a 3D side scroller a 2D game but this video presents it as such. then there is the implication that a 3D game can't have unique movement ignoring games like monster hunter, Ultra Kill, Titanfall. 3D games can use point and click as well I can't name any off the top of my head but I know I have 100% played many 3D games with point and click mechanics. 3D games also can use cameras in more then just a locked to characters view type of way. Think of little nightmares, or leauge of legends.
I love 2D game and they are never going to go be it be due to limitations developers face or because of an artstyle chosen by the devs, but i think the resons here are a large stretch of the imagination.
Agreed, genre and style are two very different ways to categorize games.
The 3D games you listed all exhibit the same imprecision I'm talking about. They're super fun, movement is great, but it requires extra cognitive effort by the player and can never be as precise as 2D games. The lower barrier to entry for 2D games will keep them popular and allow game designers to make challenges that, while fun in 2D, would just be frustrating in 3D.
Point and click in 2D is different in 3D, and people like it in both. Enough for 2D to stick around for a long time.
Developer limitations and art style are the low-hanging fruit of the argument. The intent of this video was to go beyond the obvious reasons and provide insights from a game design perspective that most players likely aren't aware of, but have a big impact on what makes 2D games still relevant today.
The gameplay in League of Legends is 2D.
The designers of Little Nightmares did fabulous work with the camera that had strengths beyond what could be done in 2D. Great example of the point made at 9:51.
"you wouldn't call a 3D side scroller a 2D game"
Why not? The idea that the rendering method determines a game is silly. What matters is the gameplay, in my opinion. It is completely irrelevant if Mario is a sprite or a 3D model, the sidescroller is a 2D game. You can make a sidescroller that is a 3D game (for example with 3D sections), but by default it's very much a 2D game with graphics that are 3D models.
In the underlying engine, you're likely using 2D physics, not 3D physics for most of these sidescrollers, too, and for good reason too. It has many advantages to do so, and is often a lot easier to code, especially with uneven geometry. They're 2D games.
I think better categorization is game datastructure.
Like, is the map and object positions 2D or 3D. There are also 1D games, like Monopoly.
Also game map can be real time or turn based, and all positions can be vector based or some grid/array. Some games are based on graph structure where you got nodes and edges. That data structure is hugely important on game design so they are not go away.
Visualization of that datastructure is own thing, 1D monopoly can be be visualized in 3D vector graphics.
But important thing to understand is that 2D _visualization_ do have benefits because 3D sucks on pixel level details. That is why 3D vector graphics benefits on 2D billboards to get pixel level geometry and details right.
i also agree that if you cannot move your camera in all directions up down right left back front sides etc its not 3d even even it might look because you can make it look 3d by adding realistic textures with dense color pallets and toy with lightning and shadows or tweak the contrast there are multiple ways to make it look 3d even tho its not so yea we're on the same page on that, altho tedious process to do so but if someone is that determined sure son go ahead xD
Game maker is extremely primitive and does not provide the functionality and is of use for animation and some other stuff. Left it for Godot 🎉
lol, I'm inclined to disagree that it's "primitive", but fair enough!
someone needs to tell that guy that always gives a bad reviews to 2d games this XD
hehehe agreed
Unfortunately this video is one of the worst and most biased videos I have ever seen
lol. Might I suggest watching more videos? I'll bet you can find something worse lol.
buwomp
@ you got the point here ngl
You made your RUclips account in Dec 2024?? Yet call yourself “GameDeveloper” and hate 2D games?? You are either a child new the internet with an invalid opinion due to your lack of life. Or you are a terrible game developer who lacks depth in understanding that good games don’t only include Fortnite, Minecraft, and Roblox.
I normally never comment on people’s comments, but unfortunately this comment is one of the worst and most biased comments I have ever seen.
hey i love your videos and i tried to play tethergeist demo on my laptop like 1 week ago and fps was really bad. will it be better on finish version? laptop is not for games but it generaly good with 2d games (smooth with huntdown, hollow knight, bzzzt, undertale, terraria, makerking, celeste atleast)
Optimization is a big part of our process for sure and will definitely be better upon game release. I will admit we rarely hear about performance issues since our last demo release though. Is there a specific section that struggled, or was it the game as a whole?
What is the game at 1:00 ?
TetherGeist!
Tethergeist. It's the game they're developing! They make devlogs about the progress of the game too. It's a lot like celeste but with a unique tethering mechanic.
I'm not sure if its still playable but I played a playtest build of it and it was really fun.