Skip to main content

Indie game storeFree gamesFun gamesHorror games
Game developmentAssetsComics
SalesBundles
Jobs
TagsGame Engines

Why Everything is 2D on itch

A topic by SOFT Games created Jan 09, 2024 Views: 2,711 Replies: 38
Viewing posts 1 to 20 of 22 · Next page · Last page

Do every indie devloper are obsessed with 2d

or thy don’t like 3d, 3d is simple, 2d is hard maybe

ITCH.IO

(+6)

What you say makes little sense. Also, you yourself only released 2d games, so answer the question yourself, why games are 2d and not 3d.

Also, there are games with 3d here.

It was my 1 public game and last , But it was a lot more easier than 3d one , in case you are making from scratch. In addition I can say it skill based work and needs understanding of concepts.

But idk why I didn’t look back 🤷‍♂️😄.

Moderator moved this topic to General Discussion
(+1)

Well making 3d games need a large amount of money  and a lot of the people on this site finds making 2d games cheaper

(+4)

3D adds a lot more complexity to development and lot more ways to brake the game adding more time and resource into testing basic features.

Also 3D assets are way more scarce than 2D.

Now that said, it's not hard to make a 3D game with the current big engines out there.

What you said is right but let me ask you a question can you do 3d modeling if the answer is yes you now how much time it takes 

Yes, I can model (not professionaly, I'm a programmer), it depends on the size and level of complexity of the model it can range from 20 minutes to weeks.

Same goes to pixel art, it's not more or less complicated, it's just different, and also modeling is just one of the 3D art areas, there's sculpting, texture art, rigging, skinning, environment, lightmaps....

(+4)

2d games are awesome, 

pixelart is more accessible to learn than 3d modelling

due to the low barrier of entrance on this site there are many, many 1-man teams and amateur developers, who just can't manage the workload of a 3d game


but as others already have stated, there are 3d games on the site. (the stuff by Siactro [ https://siactro.itch.io ], for example, which I very much enoy) But maybe a filter option for it similar to input devices and all that would be a good idea

Deleted post

Echoing everyone else's sentiment, I find making 2D games in Unreal difficult at times since its pro 3D, but 2D art requires less setup and I can make it all on my tablet in bed so it is very peaceful. 

Less software, easier to learn and usually games with 2D art have more personality. I would go for 2D everyday until I have to do animation. 

Deleted 1 year ago
(+2)

You make shovelware not games

Deleted 1 year ago
(2 edits)

Do i For example of your games Babes - Mariena sorry bud Ok let just end this issue you games be your game not my bussines

Deleted 1 year ago
Moderator(+1)

Making 3D games requires a deeper understanding of 3D math, at least to do it right, which can be a barrier for a lot of people.

On 2D games, it’s possible to figure out for yourself what’s happening on the screen and do custom solution to problems. When you start involving 4x4 matrices, different spaces, and shaders, it immediately becomes overwhelming, at least to someone who is not familiar with those concepts.

I saw a 4d game here :-)

But I believe the question in general is more in this direction: most devs use an engine and there are 3d engines to use, for those who do not have deeper understanding. Or rather, most do not even have a 2d understanding of their game math. So if they use an engine anyways, why not use one of them 3d ones.

I mean, there even is this rpg paper maker, that is in 3d, even though it is still pixel art. 

Maybe there is an anomaly/bias in itch users, and the amateur 3d game makers are just elsewhere. Like making mods for Minetest or Skyrim. 

(+1)

"It was my 1 public game and last , But it was a lot more easier than 3d one , in case you are making from scratch. In addition I can say it skill based work and needs understanding of concepts.

But idk why I didn’t look back "

You already had the answer before making this topic...

Right ! Other’s Opinions Matters 🥲

You didn't phrased like this.

(1 edit)

Apologies if my phrasing wasn’t clear. I appreciate your input! 😊

Simply just Get others’ views on this!

I posted two (partial) 3D games.
But as your screen is flat and mouse input is in 2D, it makes sense that everything is presented to the camera in a way very close to 2D.

Screenshot for reference.

(1 edit) (+1)
But as your screen is flat and mouse input is in 2D, it makes sense that everything is presented to the camera in a way very close to 2D.

That what you see is a 2d projection is a necessity, since the display is 2d. Not a necessity of the hid.

In a 3d game world you typically move around. And this is done with a combination of inputs. You use several input devices or at least several commands. The mouse usually does left and right and up and down. And a command does the forward motion. That is enough to fully navigate in 3d.

What your game probably has, is a point&click interface. That input area is of course 2d, since you move the pointer in 2d. But you could minimize the interface even further and eliminate the pointer, using only selectable highlights the player can navigate between by pressing left and right. Those highlights could be presented in a 3d environment, while the hid is basically 1d.

But at this point, we could extend the OP question to real time. Why is so much on Itch static gameplay, instead of real time. On second thought, there are lots of platformers and all those rpg maker games.

(And the answer is of course the same. It is easier to do.)

(+1)

Good question. Personally I love 3D and only do 3D using Blender, Daz, Marvelous Designer and Unreal. But 3D is not for everyone for sure. It takes a long time to learn it and there's more problems and issues that can arise over 2D development.

(+2)

Personally I don't see why everything has to be 3D these days. Quite often 2D is good enough to do the job. Of course, it also depends on the kind of game you are making. For an FPS I'd always go for 3D. For an RPG I actually prefer 2D and when it comes to a point-and-click-adventure 3D does in most cases more harm than good. 

Now 2D is indeed easier to learn, both on the coding side as on the artistic side. 3D graphics can very easily turn things into a mess when not done right. That was for me a reason to stick to 2D (when I began we only had characters), not to mention that for the kind of games I like most it's also artistically the better choice anyway, so it was a win-win. 

(+6)

Agreed with the other posts here.

2d ui is often more intuitive, more accessible, just easier for many devs, and depending on the genre and game design there may not be a strong reason to make everything 3d from a game play pov.

Besides, some 2d titles actually do still look gorgeous. 2d game engine does not always mean 'low res pixel art.' I've seen beautiful hand drawn 2d work like in indie title 'Gorogoa' and painterly work like 'Braid' or recently 'The Master's Pupil' and then there are my aesthetic niches which vary...  can sometimes include handcrafted miniature art, I have an isometric minigolf game and a first person Mystlike puzzler, both of them are in the works and each one of those two done with realistically detailed large scale miniature art. 

And then there are the many, many 2d engine games that still make use of 3d rendered art. So many old 90s games did this from Simcity 4, rollercoaster tycoon, The Sims, Starcraft, the original Fallout. Myst, Riven.  Less common now as 3d is more attainable than it once was but still a valid dev route especially given the continued presence of lower end systems (mobile gaming) and the fact that it is possible to make a 2d game run and look beautiful on nearly any system. 3d games with that sort of fine, intricate art detailing will typically have higher hardware requirements as the cost of the added freedom of motion.

Now, some game developers on the indie side have done amazing stuff with 3d games.

I know a number of solo indie devs who made 3d games which look graphically amazing. Carlos Coronado, Danny Weinbaum and a number of others come to mind.

It clearly isn't impossible to do 3d art in a 3d engine really well as an indie, it just adds complexity and work. Danny Weinbaum spent over 7 years working on his "cozy, pacifist skyrim knockoff" - an open world game called Eastshade. 

He made about 2 million $ in Steam sales from his project, another reminder that though 3d is harder in some ways, if you do it well it can also be worth it.

But it is always also a gamble, to some extent, what if those 7 years had resulted in a total misfire? What if nobody even notices your game after you have been pouring years into it? 

There is something to be said for doing a smaller thing, a demo or similar, and throwing it out to the world game jam style as a way of confirming its core conceptual appeal. A way of checking if you are going off track before committing to a huge production. If the small example finds an audience, then it is likely the larger extension of the basic thing will too. And that is exactly what got eastshade moving in the first place, it is why Danny committed 7 years to it. Because he started with a little, modestly successful short project "Leaving Lyndow" and learned from that, that the sort of game world he was making appealed to a lot of people. 

I don't have a demo, I am diving straight in (for better or worse) and just gauging odds of success based on whether people respond in any way to early imagery and material relating to my work.

Maybe that is dumb but I know even if my efforts fail I will be okay life wise so... I just realize that even if some of this fails hard it isn't the end. I have game asset collections gaining ground steadily and a successful Etsy print services shop. I have fallback, that is valuable. Don't risk everything on a gamble that could fail horribly. Have a backup plan!

(+4)

I want to add two thoughts to that.

Perspective is important. Something like Diablo 1 & 2 is pixel sprites. No matter how they were created. But the perspective is isometric, making it 3d, while debatedly it is actually 2d, since you could use a top down view like old Moria games. Diablo 3 did not change this perspective thing very much, but the sprites were now rendered in a 3d engine. Starcraft 1 even had height differences and flying units, but all ultimately pixel sprites and iso view.

So 3d vs 2d is related to lots of aspects. Including the engine, the assets, perspective, user interface, level design and real time or not also is a factor of course. There are all sorts of combinations. Like a 2d platformer with 3d graphics for example.

And the other thing is, that the engine and presentation of a game is not important all that much. Bells and whistles can of course help. And are expected in some instances. But ultimately, the game has to be fun enough for people to want to play it. Lacking an advertisement budget and marketing staff, indie devs are wise to do what you described. Finding out, if what they want to realize will garner an audience. Bluntly speaking , there are successful games that are text based. So having nice graphics are obviously not mandatory for success.

But if you do make a 3d game, or any other kind of game of a certain category, you will be measured by the competition in that category. There is less AAA competition in 2d games. So like that saying about not needing to outrun the bear, you only need to be better than the other hobby 2d game makers and small indie developers. And this can be done quickly if you have a good story or mechanic or plain luck and a good enough game. There are examples of really simple games that did go "viral".

Not everything is 2d on itch, there are some 3d projects, but itch.io generally seems to be for newer/beginner indie developers often - and 2d is the obvious starting point for many of them.  My Itch Page has a few projects - some are 2d, and some are 3d, my latest is 3d.  

(+1)

I grew up in the 90s and pixel art is just a stylistic choice for me

(+2)

I'm pretty new to this entire site and was like "why is everything 2D games?" then found this thread. I had to scroll down this far for an answer that wasn't some type of "it's easier."  (you're like 20 posts deep)

(+1)

Besides the price and complexity, at least to me it seems that it's easier to make a 2d game look good and in a more reasonable amount of time. That could be only my impression though, since i am a 2d artist so I understand that whole part best

(2 edits) (+1)

I realized I didn't like 3D that much when working with Blender and Unreal. It felt creepy and not fun.  3D is like an alternate reality for me. Banjo Kazooie seems more like an activity than a game. 2D feels more like a game to me. I also like the style of low resolution and limited colors. That's not much of a defense for 2D, but there's no accounting for taste. 

Deleted post
(+1)

If it can be uploaded and downloaded, it can be released. Technical aspects would not be a hinderance. There are releases for ancient video game consoles or that playdate console. You will also find stuff for vr systems here.

And of course games are limited by their presentation. But how much d would a text game have? You could play a text game with voice output, so no screen at all.

Viewing posts 1 to 20 of 22 · Next page · Last page