> Stick to 2D, Since 3D is More Complicated

This isn't necessarily the case if you are looking at total cost of ownership.

3D provides things like perspective projection, which enables intuitive experiences and notions of "world space" that are fundamentally meaningful and map well with our physical reality. You can do a lot of damage with 3d primitives, an FPS camera, a skybox and some clever lighting.

▲

p1necone 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

I think that statement can only be said with the right context.

Building an engine from scratch? 3d is definitely more complicated.

Using an existing engine? Tbh shoehorning 2d sprite based games into engines like unreal or unity is often harder than 3d because it gets less development effort on the engine side put into it.

Asset creation? Depends - the great thing about 3d assets is you only need to model each thing once, whereas with 2d unless you're doing skeletal animation you have to draw every frame, facing direction etc.

But on the flipside creating one 3d model could take just as much time as a pixel art walk animation in 4 directions.

There's also art styles for both 2d and 3d that can significantly cut down on effort (low poly, drawing everything from absolute top down perspective, using ascii characters roguelike style, using simple 3d primitives only, first person perspective etc etc etc).

▲

jagged-chisel 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

And how did this illustrate that 3-D is not “More Complicated”?

▲

prisenco 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

2D games can require a lot of assets. And most programmers are not artists.

	▲	JoeyJoJoJr 2 days ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Also, 2D assets are much more difficult to change later if you decide you need to change the aspect ratio or scaling later on. While a tile map is comparatively technically simple, the initial choice of tile size carries a rather critical importance to how the game development process unfolds. If you want or need to change it later it is likely going to be a fair amount of work, and that friction can hinder a lot of experimentation. Compare this to a 3d camera, that affords you the ability to completely change perspective with a few lines of code, it’s evident that a 2d game is not necessarily simpler to develop in practice.
	▲	natertux 2 days ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		It is the exact reason why I choose to make my game in 3D. I am making a game similar to advance wars/apes warfare in threejs. My drawing skills are close to zero but thanks to the engineering background my CAD and 3D modeling are somewhat usable. So I am currently learning blender to improve on top of that and I cannot fathom how much more time it would have taken me to make assets if those were to be in 2D.
	▲	bcrosby95 2 days ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		Everyone is an artist. We're just not all equally skilled.
	▲	dragonwriter 2 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		> 2D games can require a lot of assets. And most programmers are not artists. That's just as true, if not moreso, with "3" in place "2". Conversely, 2D games can also require very little in assets. It's just a matter of what game you are making.

▲

imachine1980_ 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Game like a short hike use rendering pipelines instead of accuracy in the models for example

▲

2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

thrown-0825 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

better tooling around 3D in my opinion

▲

darth_aardvark 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

That's really cool! Sounds complicated though.

▲

forrestthewoods 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

[flagged]