It just dawned on me, that Harvest Moon 64, and Back to Nature, were the only games to ever pull off a true 3D isometric perspective game. No one has done it since. Why is that? All other isometric games are either in 2D engines, or they bullshit the perspective. These are the only TRUE isometric 3D games.
Is this technology lost or something? It seems only natural that more 3D isometric games would have come out since then.
The whole point of isometric is so that you can save space and processing by using sprites instead of actual 3d models while giving the effect of 3d. That's why nobody else has done it. Cus it's stupid.
Are you fucking retarded OP?
I think OP means why hen't they prerendered the sprites from 3D models since then
Disgaea is proper 3D isometric. Off the top of my head. Probably plenty of other games. Technically, even Fez.
Whatever OP meant, he's clearly a retard.
i wish they still made HM/sos games that looked like this
Xenogears
Breath of Fire 3 and 4
Tactics games
>INB4 having a rotate camera button makes it fake
>TRUE isometric 3D
if those games were true 3D then so are every isometric game before it like X-COM. those harvest moon games use sprites for everything, even noticably the character
He probably means using GPU to render parts of the world as polygons, but instead of central projection, using parallel projection, so that lines that are parallel in the world always stay parallel on screen, unlike most 3D games nowadays.
...
>He
stop right there. there is absolutely no way you could have ever thought this was what op meant from the bullshit he wrote and it still doesn't make sense how whatever you are saying suddenly makes it "real 3d". fuck off op
Best Harvest Moon game Cred Forums?
Magical Melody
Aren't those Lara Croft games isometric 3D?
Im playing Rune Factory 4 right now on hard. Im getting bodied by Lightningbolt boss but I just beat it. The last form is easier than I gave it credit for
I'm not OP, I posted . That's my interpretation of what he posted since this topic has been brought up multiple times and always boiled down to that.
B
A bunch of people have made top down 3D games. Zelda for 3DS immediately comes to mind. But not many games have made it a true isometric perspective.
I mean either 3D models or 2D sprites. Harvest moon is obviously pre-rendered for the bulk of it's graphics. But the environment is 3D.
Ah, there's one. I didn't think of Disgaea
Me too.
the snes one, but only because its the only one that doesn't look like dog vomit and is much faster
B or D if you can hop over the crops in game. A for 1time pick crops and you have fully upgraded water can
OP here. He actually understood what I meant, and added technical bits I don't understand myself. Because he's knowledgeable about these things, and can grasp such concepts. Don't belittle him for your own ignorance.
The one with best SJW Xigender trash.
I only ever enjoyed the ones that had a a goal or limit and ending. Such as Btn and AwL, though I never beat it. 64 had me playing for a long time to.
The series now is stale as fuck and I think that's because it's stuck on hadheld. It's holding it back.
Magical Melody was one of my favorites as well. But it's hard to choose the "best". I haven't been into harvest moon games for a while, because Rune Factory is too anime for me, and the main series is too shallow of an experience. I just need more meat from my NPCs, and a higher skill ceiling for farming, without it being an anime knock-off.
F, for rotation to not deplete the soil. Fite me.
right. i am Cred Forums as fuck, and have spent every day on Cred Forums for the past 4 years. i have never seen this topic once. whatever
Full 3D with isometric projection, without any sprites.
Underrail, aka Fallout '3'
The world does not look like 3D geometry in that at all. Are characters 3D? In that case Pillars of Eternity also works.
>all the horrors of programming 3d games
>all the limitations of a 2d game
Why couldn't Skydew Mountain look like this? It is so repulsive in comparison.
When you have people who are experienced in 3D programming, why not? Some genres have those "limitation of a 3d games" as requirements.
>TRUE isometric 3D games.
>no 3D models in OP's pic, only billboarded sprites
Fuck off, retard.
3d is never easier to program. Just shut the fuck up you ignorant gaymer baby
>I googled isometric and now I think it's some how a measure of a game's quality to how strictly they follow it
GTA 1
Didn't say it's easier, just said a person could have more experience programming 3D and less programming 2D games.
The ground is quite clearly 3D. If you google for Harvest Moon 64 screenshots, you'll find more complex 3D geometry as part of the world.
GTA1 is not isometric. No GTA games are isometric.
Who would even fucking use E? Is there any advantage to it?
Could be very useful when you are trying to write HELP on the ground.
>this flat plane with the worst texture seams ive ever seen is very clearly 3d
could you show some screenshot examples? the op image doesn't prove this statement right at all.
The fact that texture seams exist alone is a good envidence of it being 3D geometry rendered by GPU.
Here's the screenshot, I googled it specifically for you, user, because I know you are not very good at doing anything by yourself.
Your mother must've been quite the crack whore who put gin in your bottle to quiet you down because you're such a whiny little bitch.
>Didn't say it's easier, just said a person could have more experience programming 3D and less programming 2D games
And I just said to shut your filthy, uneducated mouth before you accidentally make Cred Forums stupider than it already is
the town has a ton of sprite work. in fact there is no fully 3d game on the n64 or psx lol
Fite. Me.
You're looking at this from the wrong angle. No one claimed that those games don't have sprites in them - we're talking about games that have 3D geometry rendered using parallel projection along with possibly some sprites. As opposed to 1. 3D games that use central projection, no matter if they use sprites or not, and 2. 2D games that only have sprites and no 3D geometry.
You failed to convince me.
That's like porn for my mind.
More like
>I grew up playing Isometric games, and now I have a fetish for that perspective, and feel like it makes artstyles feel much more cohesive.
oh so that is your definition of full 3d. yeah xcom had it before then. true x, y, and z axis.
It's known for a fact that there is no 3D geometry there; the game has been decompiled and we know how they draw the world. That's in addition to the fact that it clearly looks nothing like a 3D render.
but it is 3d. there are three dimensions. can you even go under a bridge in harvest moon? are there even multiple floors in buildings in harvest moon? yeah thats in xcom, doesn't matter how it is drawn.
Postal Redux?
50,000 hours in ms paint, I think this is what OP meant. He's still wrong.
If you are triggered about "full 3d" claim, then I never made that claim, and OP would most likely be willing ot admit that it was not the best choice of words on his part (exactly because it would trigger people like you).
The discussion is about games that render proper 3D geometry using parallel projection as opposed to central projection.
Here is what OP meant. A is parallel, B is central.
>no 3d geometry
>muh 2d illusion of 3d is more true than other illusions
That's a set of entities with each having three coordinates. Each entity is a point. 3D geometry would be set of vertices forming polygons. Or it could be even more complex, although GPUs only deal with polygons.
>more true
I don't thin that claim made.
>I don't think that claim was made*
fug
>The discussion is about games that render proper 3D geometry using parallel projection as opposed to central projection.
>proper 3d geometry
yeah, you did
What did I do?
you are saying one 3d illusion is more 3d than another illusion. xcom is full 3d with full 3d geometry
OP here. I meant the the image on the right. I see now that you've shown me that Disgaea isn't true isometric. That's a shame, because at a glance, it looks quite like it. But I do mean a very strict consistent measure throughout. Like what Harvest Moon has.
Now... I don't know if Harvest Moon is using polygons or not, because I'm not that knowledgeable technically. I'm aware that the characters and such are just sprites. But I assumed that the environment was true 3D polygonal geometry. Because if you press R or L while on the farm, you can actually shift the perspective of the world, and the buildings appear to be true 3D models.
I Chose the words "full 3D", because it was the only way I could communicate that the game is crafted in a 3D environment. Not like a typical isometric game like say Diablo, or Mega Man Battle Network. But one that is made on a real 3D plane with polygons.
Proper 3D geometry stays proper 3D geometry no matter what method you use to project it onto screen (or, "create an illusion" as you would say). Proper 3D geometry exists before you even project it. Xcom has no geometry, just a bunch of entities with their locations defined by three coordinates, and the process of representing those on a 2D plane that is your screen is not even projecting at all.
A short version specifically for you: no, my posts do not make a claim that one projection is more true than others.
Isometric games are only done to create the illusion of 3d objects using sprites.
No one uses it because the grid is done in an X shape and that's not how humans think naturally.
It's cute for a 2D game that doesn't require fast thinking, but FPS controls and camera are the optimal controls for any 3D game and the top down view is also superior to the isometric view.
low-poly isometric is my fetish
>The discussion is about games that render proper 3D geometry using parallel projection as opposed to central projection.
how many times do i need to quote you? here is a tl;dr of your post
yes xcom is 3d, but its not because it uses another method of drawing 3d
maybe if it had content beyond a year and marriage
The world is 3D, but it's not displayed onto your screen by the method of projecting 3D geometry.
Go back and read my posts carefully, I never said that the world of xcom is not 3D - I said it has no 3D geometry, and that's not the same thing as not being 3D.
3D isometric perspective would actually make the top down perspective obsolete. Normally you think only about building objects to fit the X shape. Because it's easier to draw that way. But with 3D, you could build front and side facing objects, or anything in between. Because breaking axis is a lot easier when you can freely move 3D objects around.
So essentially the isometric view, could work just like the top down view, only slightly askew.
Isometic games also benefit from being able to build worlds, without worrying too much about the verticality. Everything is mostly spaced out. And when you want to build vertically, everything is perfectly aligned. Never having to worry about the sky or upper limitations.
I dunno, I just feel like it's the perfect view to be observant of the world, but also in it at the same time. Feels like the perfect game board.
That's the real reason
The grid does not have to be in X shape.
Oh, there it is. Finally remembered. Monument Valley.
That was a nice game.
Durrrrrr
Hurrrr