• Welcome to the Angry Joe Show Army!

    Join our community of gamers passionate about our community and our hobby! Whether it's playing, discussing, or watching games, regardless of platform, genre, or location, we have a place for you, always!

  • PS4 Forum

    The AJSA Playstation 4 Division: Game Nights and More!

    The AJSA is on Playstation 4! Join us for weekly Game Nights with a selection of the best games the PS4 has to offer!

  • XBO Forum

    The AJSA Xbox One Division: We Got You Covered!

    The AJSA Xbox One Division is ready to connect with you on XBox Live with a ton of events for the best Xbox games!

  • News Archive

    The Best News from the Best Sites, Every Week.

    The AJSA News Collection Team is hard at work condensing a week's worth of news into one giant-sze digest for you to chew on and discuss! Links to source articles are always provided!

  • More Info

    The AJSA Expeditionary Force: Deploying to Play the Best PC Games!

    The elite vanguard of the AJSA, the Expeditionary Force (EF) chooses a new PC game every week! Join us for weekly events and help decide if the game has a future in the AJSA.

  • The Team

    Streaming Now: The AJSA Stream Team

    Joe can't stream every game, but our talented AJSA Stream Team covers a wide variety of games and personalities! Check them out, and show them some AJSA Love!

  • The Tube

    The AJSA Community YouTube Channel

    Featuring news, gameplay clips, and more from the community! The Community is a chance to showcase the best moments in AJSA Gaming!

1mirg

2D or 3D, which do you find easier to make?

2D or 3D?   23 members have voted

  1. 1. which do you find easier to make?


Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

13 posts in this topic

I been hearing around lately that some people think 2D is easier than 3D, while others think 3D is easier than 2D. 
So, out of pure curiosity here I was wondering how far these sets of opinions differ between one to another on a larger scale.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When it comes to programming 2D is definitely easier (assuming that you are starting with nothing).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it really depends on your skills and what your working with. There are many variables that can make it either or so it kind of sits in the center. What may be hard for one person can be more difficult from another.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having been programming both I will say that 2D is way easier as you don't have to worry about depth or Z-axel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I say modern 3D cost less Innovation then really good 2D. And if you go for 2D you better know how to or have someone to draw it for you. At the end it all comes to this. Coding have nothing to do with Artwork. And you can be only very good in 2D or 3D artwork (realistically every artist just picks one of them). I can only code, so what ever. From the coding perspective it does not matter if it's 3D or 2D. It's the engine that makes difference. Sadly the times that programmers had something to do with Game Dev are almost over. Now no one needs to make their own engine anymore. It's all about imports and events now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I depends on game mechanics and structure of the game if it works well in 2 or 3 dimensions. South Park works well in 2D because it's been that way for 15 years, and Silent Hill 2 works in 3D due to the fog effects and wonky controls.

 

I'd say if we take on 3D, then we need to think small and nicely compacted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would probably agree with LHusdon, when it comes down to the game mechanics and design.

But, with 2d you pretty much have to draw (pixel edit, old school), each frame of animation for each direction of movement (zelda, RPG maker style). while in 3d that same character you just have to model/rig and keyframe, and you would end up rotating the mesh around an axis. If you need to make a slight change with the look of the characters walk cycle, in 2d all the frames would need up dating, while in 3d just tweak the keyframes, and let the IK system sort it all out.

Example:

assume 8 direction movement (also assuming the character is not symmetrical), and a 5 frame walk cycle

2d

  • 5 walk frames * 8 directions = 40 sprites
  • plus idle animations for each direction if character doesn't reset to a neutral facing.
  • Need good pixel artist

3d

  • once rigged and keyframed, that same rig could be used for other characters
  • just keyframe the walk cycle/idle and let the gameengine manage the rotation/facing.
  • need 3d models/animator

of course programming a 3d engine is a little bit more complex , 3d transforms, matrix math, and loads of vectors (I hate maths... )

The upshot of 3d models is if the original is high res, you can use that character in cinematics/cutscenes and keep the player immersed .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Depends what exactly you're referring to. Each has their challenges to overcome. Overall I think 2d GAMES are easier to make and require less resources than 3d. It is REALLY easy to make a 3d game that looks absolutely horrible for so many reasons. You need several specialized people to take care of very specific things like level and environment design, animation, modeling, UI, programming etc... If you don't have those people you're really kind of screwed I think.

 

With 2d I think the amount of people you need is far less. If the pixel artist isn't also the animator than you'd need one of those too. If the pixel artist isn't the level designer than you'd need one. The only person you'd absolutely need for a 2d game is a programmer. Things are getting much easier for 2d animation as well, check out Spriter if you haven't heard of it before. It makes 2d animation a lot like 3d where you essentially create a skeleton and rig.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would probably agree with LHusdon, when it comes down to the game mechanics and design.

But, with 2d you pretty much have to draw (pixel edit, old school), each frame of animation for each direction of movement (zelda, RPG maker style). while in 3d that same character you just have to model/rig and keyframe, and you would end up rotating the mesh around an axis. If you need to make a slight change with the look of the characters walk cycle, in 2d all the frames would need up dating, while in 3d just tweak the keyframes, and let the IK system sort it all out.

Example:

assume 8 direction movement (also assuming the character is not symmetrical), and a 5 frame walk cycle

2d

  • 5 walk frames * 8 directions = 40 sprites
  • plus idle animations for each direction if character doesn't reset to a neutral facing.
  • Need good pixel artist

3d

  • once rigged and keyframed, that same rig could be used for other characters
  • just keyframe the walk cycle/idle and let the gameengine manage the rotation/facing.
  • need 3d models/animator

of course programming a 3d engine is a little bit more complex , 3d transforms, matrix math, and loads of vectors (I hate maths... )

The upshot of 3d models is if the original is high res, you can use that character in cinematics/cutscenes and keep the player immersed .

While this is the closest answer in my opinion,

In almost any way I can wrap my head around it, 2D is the easiest.

 

First off, Model Rigging. That shit aint easy. I've taken 2 courses on 3DS Max for game development, and those rigs are easily my worst fucking nightmare. When I have to make a character, I cringe. Cringe hard. Even if you already have a rig for most characters, what if they are different heights? What its not human, but a animal like a cat or a dog? You can probably make butterflies and other insects into particle effects. (Note: I absolutely suck at it. There is a reason why we have modelers and riggers, because a lot of people cant handle rigging)

 

Second, Animations. Compared to pixel art, where you only have to perceive it in one dimension or vantage viewpoint, you must consider ALL the viewpoints ina three dimensional animation. If it's broken on one side, it will probably be broken and or noticeably choppy/unnatural. 3D anything requires you to overcome the Uncanny Valley. (While 2D animation is the same, its just easier with 2D)

 

And we haven't even begun adding the assets into an engine. Suppose you have an engine that handles the low-level code and a library to call upon when drawing the images into DirectX or OpenGL or whatever like Unity. Now you must consider hit-boxes, interactions with other items, weight, material type (for phongs/shading/ligthing). That's another thing, shaders. While 2D games might use shaders as well, the shaders are often baked on the actual material(or the actual pixel art themselves) that certainly cannot be the case in 3D. Borderlands has a cell shading based shader that draws the outlines as well as manages the overall lighting and shadows. Well, nearly every game has these shaders. And sometimes the shaders dont interact well with the model, and so you must modify and... It just gets complicated way to quickly with 3D

 

 

And to top it all off, this was with only one asset. Imagine doing that for every other asset in the game*.

 

 

*complexity and workflow depends on asset being added.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Generally it depends on the medium you are working in, or the game itself.  Some games are much easier to make in 2D than 3D.  The opposite is also true on rare occasions in specific circumstances.

 

Personally I feel that 2D games are easier to make for several reasons.  

 

The biggest reason is art assets.  Making art assets for 3D games are, in my opinion, much more time consuming.  Modeling and UV mapping and texturing take so much time and are just in general harder than simple 2D sprites.  Even high detail 2D sprites are easier than the simplest 3D models.  Additionally, animation.  Animation of 2D objects is generally pretty easy, but 3D animation can be a nightmare and is incredibly time consuming, even just the rigging.

 

There are also generally a lot more factors that have to be taken into account when designing a 3D game.  Adding in that extra dimension adds a considerable challenge when dealing with something like the clearness of graphical element in the game environment.

 

This is considering you are using a GDK that will do the 3D rendering for you.  If that isn't the case, you'd have to write your own 3D renderer from scratch, and that is exceptionally difficult.

 

Which is why it is my opinion that 2D games are easier to make than 3D games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it really boils down to what kind of game you want to make, it is true that most of the time 2d games are easier. To me personally how difficult making a game is really depends on what i'm trying to do. Survival Horrors and FPS games tend to be my favorite game genres to make at my skill level, This coupled with the fact that i spent the last 4 years learning how to stumble around in Unity3D i would have to say 3D games are easier for me to make than 2D......I'm also clearly not an artist and can't draw worth beans but anybody can model a 3d model if they tried. I also recently discovered a program that works well with unity3d, MakeHuman is a really easy human model maker that functions simular to how you would create or customize a character in an RPG game. These models can then be exported with rigs into an fbx file and you can set them up with unity's special mecanim animation system. Then all you need is one low poly model with a rig (doesn't have to be weighted good) with animations you can then use on your MakeHuman models. This saved me a butt load of time as I too still struggle with animating characters properly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just started codeing for about a year now. I made a 2D game in C# took me no time at all. To be honest the images took me the most time. I could only imagine how long it would take sitting in front of blender making models.

 

Sorry just revived an old thread..to be fair it's new to me..

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally suck at drawing anything better than a basic character design but I can understand the more maths-based way to construct 3D models (working on sculpting >.>) a lot better, which in turn makes working in 3D generally easier for me to do

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now