D
DArtagnan
Guest
PS, DArtagnan: the grid square thing that I was wrong about has no bearing on whether a game is 2D or 3D. Right? Distance traveled along one or more axes is irrelevant to a 2D/3D argument. Agreed?
If so, and I'll assume you do agree, how is it "only natural" for people to assume I was wrong?
Yes, it has a bearing when it comes to the "full" part of 3D movement. As in, you don't turn 90 degrees only (try turning in real life and not call it movement, by the way) and instead have access to the FULL 360 degrees. You can also travel any distance along the Z-axis and not just in pre-determined "block distances", meaning you have FULL control there as well. You can also travel any distance along the Y-axis - because of both levitation and inclines like mountains, staircases, etc.
It's natural to assume you were wrong because you were wrong, obviously.
That you can't accept it or fear losing face is another matter entirely.
Personally, I consider "being wrong" the natural state of any human being - so you're not going to lose face here with me.
But it should be supremely obvious what people are talking about now, and if you can't see why full 3D movement is 100% appropriate and correct, then you certainly fail to explain how.
That's all good, just as long as you understand what we're talking about.
OK, I'm done with this. You guys want to call yourself retro gamers and all old school and crap and then wallow in ignorance about key evolutions of industry tech, back in the day, it's entirely up to you. Hope that works out well for ya
I don't call myself a retro gamer or old school, really - but I'm afraid your irrelevant links didn't quite turn your weak arguments into strong ones.
If they ever make a gamer-knowledge competition, I'll be happy to compete with you.
That's when such things CAN be relevant