Pete Hines fires back

TheWesDude said:
i think what hoka is getting at is that its impossible to draw 3d graphics in a 120/30 ideal, and that if you did it would cease to be a true isometric projection.

in 2d sprite based you can do true isometric projection, but once you move to a 3d engine to draw the 2d image, it instead ceases to be called isometric and is instead called oblique projection even though the angle and dimensions are the same, the method you use to draw the image ceases to be from a 2d engine.


now why the hell this distinction is even being made is akin to complaining about spelling on the internet...

in 2d you can have a true isometric graphical engine, but once you move to a 3d graphical engine it ceases to be true isometric and becomes either oblique or else 3/4 view.
Click to expand...
Thank god, there's someone knowledgeable afer all.

Though mind you, there are a couple of 3D engines that use non-square pixels , but none for personal computers. As far as I know, there are also rectangle pixels (used in TV screens, for example), so they do develop 3D engines for consoles (and perhaps TV output PC graphics cards) that are isometric (if the aspect ratio is perfect).
 
Hoka when you see Iso in this context it's just because it became a convention made in the late 90's, when the tech changed there was still the need for a name for the perspective. Birdsview (which is a view very high from the ground, used mainly on early 2d RTS games) and isometric started to be used because there was a need for a term that could convey the idea of a top down perspective, and since it was previously widely used in the 2d days it just stuck, became an industry convention, a gaming media helper.

It's simply that, don't sweat about it.
 
It's a common misconception that Fallout was isometric, similarly to how it's a common misconception that Fallout was turn-based.
 
pkt-zer0 said:
It's a common misconception that Fallout was isometric, similarly to how it's a common misconception that Fallout was turn-based.
Click to expand...

more nit-picking...

it was actually a hybrid RT-TB system.

combat was TB but otherwise it was RT. this hybridization allowed some exploitation of the mechanics, but it was still worth it for the TB combat for the strategy.
 
pkt-zer0 said:
It's a common misconception that Fallout was isometric, similarly to how it's a common misconception that Fallout was turn-based.
Click to expand...
It's not a "misconception," really. It's just the fact that, as Briosa pointed out, isometric has become a term in the gaming industry for the kind of perspective that you see in Fallout, Baldur's Gate, etc. It has garnered connotations beyond its purely technical definition. Similar things have happened with many other words that started out as a technical term for a specific thing.

Same with the turn-based thing. No ones going to argue that the game was played using turns outside of the combat, but obviously that would've been tedious and unnecessary. When people say turn-based, it's commonly understood that they're talking about the combat mechanics. Outside of combat, there's really not any game I know of that doesn't play out in real-time, because, as I said, it'd be tedious and would serve no real purpose.

Like Briosa said, don't sweat about it.
 
Kyuu said:
Same with the turn-based thing. No ones going to argue that the game was played using turns outside of the combat, but obviously that would've been tedious and unnecessary. When people say turn-based, it's commonly understood that they're talking about the combat mechanics. Outside of combat, there's really not any game I know of that doesn't play out in real-time, because, as I said, it'd be tedious and would serve no real purpose.
Click to expand...
Hey, it was Emil who first enlightened us that FO wasn't turn-based game but a game with turn-based combat
 
Slaughter Manslaught said:
Man, compare Jason D. Anderson and Todd... Jason would kick his ass anyday...
Click to expand...
that just gave me the mental image of Jason sitting on top of Toddler while Todd is helplessly flayling his arms and legs about. :clap:
 
Kyuu said:
Outside of combat, there's really not any game I know of that doesn't play out in real-time, because, as I said, it'd be tedious and would serve no real purpose.
Click to expand...
I know of one that is turn based with real time combat...
 
I thought that reusing one of Emil's stupidest comments would give it away. Seems like I need to use the [sarcasm] tag more often.

My point was that when referring to Fallout as turn-based and isometric, everyone knows precisely what you're talking about, even though it might not be completely isometric or turn-based. Arguing that Fallout isn't isometric is equally stupid as arguing that it isn't turn-based.
 
OMGES! But it's not really isometric! To be really isometric, it would have to be exactly just as my professors said, just check wikipedia!
 
pkt-zer0 said:
I thought that reusing one of Emil's stupidest comments would give it away. Seems like I need to use the [sarcasm] tag more often.
Click to expand...
Haha, whoops. Sorry about that. I admit I totally didn't realize it was a sarcastic comment.
My point was that when referring to Fallout as turn-based and isometric, everyone knows precisely what you're talking about, even though it might not be completely isometric or turn-based. Arguing that Fallout isn't isometric is equally stupid as arguing that it isn't turn-based.
Click to expand...
Agreed. :wink:
 
Kyuu said:
Same with the turn-based thing. No ones going to argue that the game was played using turns outside of the combat, but obviously that would've been tedious and unnecessary. When people say turn-based, it's commonly understood that they're talking about the combat mechanics. Outside of combat, there's really not any game I know of that doesn't play out in real-time, because, as I said, it'd be tedious and would serve no real purpose.
Click to expand...

You mean only RPGs. right? Because there are many strategy games that are always in turns.
 
Ausir said:
You mean only RPGs. right? Because there are many strategy games that are always in turns.
Click to expand...
Yes, I wasn't very clear there. Obviously an Alpha Centauri kinda game is always turn-based, but then I'd say a game like that is always in combat-mode. It's kinda like pointing out Stratego or Risk is always turn-based. :P
 
Morbus said:
Kyuu said:
Outside of combat, there's really not any game I know of that doesn't play out in real-time, because, as I said, it'd be tedious and would serve no real purpose.
Click to expand...
I know of one that is turn based with real time combat...
Click to expand...

OMG it took me like 3 days to remember what game this was...

fantasy empires i think...

that old D&D strategy game... it was turn based but when you fought someone it was a RT combat.

I LOVED THAT GAME!!!!!!!!
 
Whole lotta semantics going on in this thread. How's that saying go about arguing on the internet? I seem to remember it involving retards in some form or fashion.
 
Please elaborate how my point that some idiot claiming "arguing on the internet is retarded" had to be retarded himself to come up with it is a revelation of how I'm locked-up and don't "get out much." I'm thinking you took offense to a statement that wasn't directed to you, but maybe I'm wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top