Whats the point in 3d?

[unmerged(14180)]

Then just admit it was a bloody gimmick!!! :rofl:

I knew that it was used for reaching the graphics whores as soon as I heard about it, but all these other 'reasons' have been making me see red. Its cool, you want more money. Power to Paradox.

Just make sure the 'prettiness' doesn't get in the way of the gameplay and we can remain happy partners

Edit: Actually, I will voice one of my fears now and be done with it. Too many games have gone from greatness, with lesser graphics, to catering towards the low IQ crowd over time in order to gain more sales....Uber Graphics and shallow, 'simplified' gameplay that couldn't challenge a pre schooler...

Just so we understand each other

 

[pdubz]

Whoa, calm down guys! It has already been explained (numerous times) exactly what 3D has added, but if you would rather have had an EU3 with fewer features so that 2D could be implemented, that's up to you; may I recommend EU2?

I also think you will find that graphics would take just as long - if not longer - to make in 2D, so the point about the time being better spent on AI is purely academic. Give them a chance; most of us already knew beforehand that EU3 was going to be a case of biding your time until a few patches have been released.

Finally, what is it you find so terrible about the new map? If you hate the textures or the political mapmode colours so much, why not download the TOT map mod, or even better, make your own?

 

[L'Afrique]

Then just admit it was a bloody gimmick!!! :rofl:

I knew that it was used for reaching the graphics whores as soon as I heard about it, but all these other 'reasons' have been making me see red. Its cool, you want more money. Power to Paradox.

Just make sure the 'prettiness' doesn't get in the way of the gameplay and we can remain happy partners

If "gimmick" in your language means "attempt at actually make a profit" in English, then yes, 3D was a gimmick. But the fact remains that it has added features to EU3, and it will become more and more obvious that 3D was the right choice as Paradox releases more games on the new engine.

And to the one person who has already whined about this and anyone who will in the future: I seriously doubt the addition of 3D impeded development of gameplay-related features, at least not any more than 2D would. That is unless you think EU3 should have been released on the same engine they've been using since EU1.

 

[jpd]

Ok. This just begs to get a response.

EU3 has gone 3D to take advantage of the raw processing power that is present in today's graphics chips. In short, anything and everything that needs to be calculated in order to show you the current state of the map (especially nation borders and such) is off loaded to the graphics chip.

So the main CPU doesn't have to spend milions of cycles to calculate all that, and is thus free to calculate other things.

And, just to show you why that makes sence:

A few years ago, the main CPU had just one core, and optionally had a feature called Hyper Threading. Which, given correct software support gave the appearance of having two cores, which effectively could operate roughly 50% faster as one single core. Today, those main CPU's have dropped Hyper Threading, and replaced it with two cores. Giving roughly an effective speed increase of some 50% over the last few years.

In contast, the graphics cores of a few years ago had one or two pixel shader units. Each pixel shader can be regarded as a single core. Today's graphics cores have increased to 120 shader units (for NVidia), or a whopping 192 (in case of the upcoming ATI).

So, where the main CPU has seen a marginal increase in raw processing power, the graphics cores have enjoyed a massive, double digit increase over the same period.

It therefore makes perfect sence to let a game make as much use of that incredible raw processing power that is available in the graphics chips as is possible.

 

[unmerged(14180)]

What 'features' would be missing from a 2D EU3? features that do something please, not 'zoom in, zoom out'.

Map is fine. I have no problem with it.

As stated, I simply said that the 3D business was a waste of time. It took them time to create the engine and also time to create the map, so no, it would not have taken longer making a game in 2D.

I have nothing against 3D, but I also think its a waste of time creating it for no purpose. The question of this thread was 'Is 3D a gimmick with this game?' I answer yes. These are my own opinions, but off from the world of business.

Now...

Its a gimmick in order to suck in more people who would shy away from a 2D game. It worked, thats good. But it has done nothing wonderful for me having EU3 in 3D.

I just hope and pray that the 'casual' gamers don't start whining that 'Its too HARD!!11!!' and force a great dev down the path to mainstream obscurity. Its hard enough finding a challenging strategy game these days.

Edit: What are all these calculations in EU3 that exist that are not in Doomsday? Does anyone here seriously state that the AI is better in EU3? If so, please explain in detail why they believe that. If you cannot, then I have to once again state that the move to 3D, thus freeing up all the powah of the CPU has done....nothing!

Edit 2: Except for those who wish to make maps. And for commercial reasons. Map making will not be done by many players, and the commercial reason covers 'gimmick'.

 

[unmerged(12921)]

I also think you will find that graphics would take just as long - if not longer - to make in 2D, so the point about the time being better spent on AI is purely academic. The "graphics" were already there in EUII, and generally worked just fine. I never had any trouble seeing what was going on..., and that's what graphics in a strategy game are all about. So every minute that was spent making it "pretty" was a minute lost to making it "better".

Finally, what is it you find so terrible about the new map? If you hate the textures or the political mapmode colours so much, why not download the TOT map mod, or even better, make your own? Well for one thing, with all the "bells and whistles" they forgot to include a "resource" version. But mostly, because it adds little or nothing to actual GAMEPLAY while sucking up a large pile of resources. True, they got a large influx of cash with this release. But I'm guessing that they also "flushed" a large resevouir of "good will" built up with their core fan base. Personally I am hoping for a last minute rally in the patching process to make this lovely engine into a GAME.

They didn't advertise a "graphics package", they advertised an improved "game". And it's as a game that EUIII falls on it's face.

 

[unmerged(14180)]

Just as an aside, I must admit I was extremely pissed off that there was no 'auto send merchant' tab in EU3.

I generally take no pleasure babysitting CoT's and sending merchant after merchant. I would much rather play along the same rules the AI does, instead of gaming the system to maximum advantage.

Can this be put back in please?

 

[L'Afrique]

They didn't advertise a "graphics package", they advertised an improved "game". And it's as a game that EUIII falls on it's face.

Er... EU3 is by far the best game in the EU series. You can keep your opinion, but sales data doesn't lie. Do you seriously think that missing features from EU3
are missing because of the 3D? The graphics are, by modern standards, still terrible. If Paradox wanted to push graphics over gameplay like other companies, they could have easily made it look at least like Rome: Total War's campaign map. It's obvious that Paradox didn't bother to prettify the graphics.

And for the last time: the 3D does not "suck up lots of resources." Unless you have an ancient video card, EU3 would run SLOWER if the CPU had been forced to handle 2D artwork as well as everything it already does.

Does anyone else get the feeling that some one-half of all strategy gamers are stuck in 1999?

 

[pdubz]

Can you remove your responses from the quote tags, please? Wouldn't want people thinking I have multi-personality disorder or anything...

The "graphics" were already there in EUII, and generally worked just fine. I never had any trouble seeing what was going on..., and that's what graphics in a strategy game are all about. So every minute that was spent making it "pretty" was a minute lost to making it "better".

That is just not true. Unless all the new provinces added in EU3 were dropped, and they decided just to make EU3 more or less a big patch for EU2 (which would have made extremely poor business sense), creating a new map was always going to be part of the equation. But even if it wasn't, what good would freeing up the artists' schedules do? They don't program. Since a new map was necessary, it makes sense for Paradox to look towards the future, for the sake of their own survival.

Well for one thing, with all the "bells and whistles" they forgot to include a "resource" version. But mostly, because it adds little or nothing to actual GAMEPLAY while sucking up a large pile of resources. True, they got a large influx of cash with this release. But I'm guessing that they also "flushed" a large resevouir of "good will" built up with their core fan base. Personally I am hoping for a last minute rally in the patching process to make this lovely engine into a GAME.

I agree, that is a serious omission, but that's either due to a design decision or human error, so you can't blame 3D for that.

As for the graphics adding nothing to actual gameplay; as said before, by allowing the GPU to process the graphics, the CPU is freed up from that task so it can process the data from the game. Why not give Paradox a chance to explain what exactly this has allowed them to accomplish that they otherwise wouldn't have been able to before you declare there is nothing?

 

[NikkTheTrick]

Are you seriously saying that this games routines and AI are as good as that of Doomsday? If yes, then I strongly disagree.

:wacko: :wacko: :wacko:
Doomsday AI operates semi-decently ONLY because of events. Once things go ahistoricaly, AI is royally screwed. It can't do ANYTHING. I've seen Germany place over 150 divisions in Balkans against my 24 Soviet and have them just sit there while the Red Army rolled through Berlin.

AI in doomsday can only operate in a scripted way and you can have no script that covers everything. Try exporting Ricky game into DD and you'll see how pathetic DD AI is.

EUIII AI is capable of acting in its own interests, attacking weak targets. Just remember those times when you destroyed enemy armies and their neighbours DoW them to take a piece of the pie.

 

[unmerged(14180)]

Nope, I get the feeling that strategy gamers want strategy, not fluff

In any case, sales figures do not a strategy game make.

They make a sports game...they make a car racing game...they make a shooter game....

But for a niche audience like HardKore strategy gamers, RPG gamers, adventure gamers, etc. Sales do not equate 'good game'. Enough sales to make a nice profit and keep the ball rolling, thats good. But an eventual slide into 'mainstream' gaming...thats always bad for niche gamers.

Edit: Is this a 'please go in as groups of three' forum? :rofl:

This post was made in answer to that bloke with the granada flag avatar (Sorry, Edit doesn't allow me to scroll down and check names and posts )

Edit 2: L'Afrique, thats it...

Doomsday AI operates semi-decently ONLY because of events. Once things go ahistoricaly, AI is royally screwed. It can't do ANYTHING. I've seen Germany place over 150 divisions in Balkans against my 24 Soviet and have them just sit there while the Red Army rolled through Berlin.

And so on....

I actually haven't had this happen to me. I believe you though.

However, my experience with EU3 is basically a suicide job of idiotic attacks, where Venice, et al commit suicide....Large empires eventually form, and never attack each other, and so on.

Admittedly, I play Normal (So the AI doesn't rely on 'hacks' in order to be challenging) though I do not see such stupid behaviour in EU2 nearly as much. Its forgiveable on its current patch....though with it being '3' and all, I would have thought this old chestnut might have been sidestepped by now.

 

[NikkTheTrick]

If you are a semi-major power, no Paradox game is challenging - player is way more cunning that AI.

However, the fact that AI acts based on current situation rather than script is a huge step forward.

 

[DPS]

Can anyone explain--in very simple terms--how having a 3D map makes modding it easier than if it were 2D? That seems completely counter-intuitive to me.

 

[ComradeOm]

Can anyone explain--in very simple terms--how having a 3D map makes modding it easier than if it were 2D? That seems completely counter-intuitive to me.

Because you don't have to draw massive bitmap maps. In EUII every bit of coastline was unique and had been drawn by hand. In EUIII you are essentially using stock parts to assemble the same pre-made building blocks to create a new product.

 

[naggy]

For those people whining about 3D, if you were running a company and had to make a technology choice: 2D or 3D graphics. They'll take roughly the same amount of time to create, but 2D takes up more CPU cycles (slowing the game down) and will result in a sizable decrease in sales because 2D games don't get as much shelf space or reviews...

Hrm. Tough choice.

No one in their right mind who actually runs a company is going to make a choice that will cut their profit margins and bring no short or long term benefit.

If EUIII you an event that lets you choose between a permanent 20% drop in income or a permanent 10% gain in income...which would you choose?

 

[AlenlorDRot]

I was a 2d guy until I bought the game and played it a bit. Now when I go back to EU2 and HOI2 I keep trying to zoom and scroll with the mouse. For me it does improve the game to be able to do those things.

My only complaint is that the hardware requirements seemed to have taken more of a leap than may have been necessary. That was a business decision, and I'm sure it has cost some business. But we can't declare it a bad decision unless we have access to all the business factors that went into it like development time, tools, etc.

 

[Merrivale]

Sigh. Compare apples to apples, we all know that Paradox games get infinitely better as they are patched (which is a whole different discussion). Everyone complaining about the AI is comparing to DD, which is basically HOI2 patch 1.5 (or is 1.6 now?) or EU2 patch 1.9. Please compare to HOI2 patch 1.1 or EU2 patch 1.1. If you still think there is a vast difference in AI capabilities, then fine, that's your opinion and you are entitled to it.

And for everyone who says the map is ugly and should be prettier (given that it is 3D), it has been stated in mulitple places that the map was, in fact, prettier in earlier builds but that this was abandoned due to the higher level graphics card it would have required (higher than the current requirements).

As to the decision to go to 3D, I view it as an investment in the future. This is the new engine that all of the near-future Paradox games will be built on. In a sense, we are at EU1 1.1 in terms of the game engine. Could it be better? Definitely, and I hope it does get better as future games (CK2, HOI3, etc.) come out. It also is an investment in the future of computer hardware, for the reasons stated above. There is a difference between making the correct decision and correctly implementing your choice. The fact that the AI has problems does not prove that Paradox made the wrong decision. It just proves that the implementation could have been better.

 

[unmerged(6310)]

And the fact that 3D means Paradox actually gets shelf-space in stores instead of being ridiculously hard to find.

I don't know where you live, but around here I can't find EU3. I only got it because I pre-ordered it, otherwise the game shop wouldn't have even gotten a token copy or two.

The only copies they did get were from preorders - mine and one other.

I wouldn't exactly call EU3 easy to find. In fact, if I were looking for a copy now, it would be beyond hard to find - it would be impossible short of ordering it online - which, of course, isn't in the stores.

And in my area and near by, that would 7 EB Games stores, 6 Gamestops, as well as some Best Buys, Targets, etc other stores like that which sell games.

 

[unmerged(6310)]

2D games don't get as much shelf space or reviews...

I don't know if that's particularly true - at least not around here.

Ar Tonelico and Atelier Iris are two pure 2D games, and I can go to the store now and pick both up without a problem.

I can't do that with EU3 - and it's in 3D.

As far as Reviews - I can find reviews for both games as well.

 

[Veldmaarschalk]

I don't know if that's particularly true - at least not around here.

Ar Tonelico and Atelier Iris are two pure 2D games, and I can go to the store now and pick both up without a problem.

I can't do that with EU3 - and it's in 3D.

As far as Reviews - I can find reviews for both games as well.

That EUIII has more shelf-space worldwide, doesn't mean it can be found in every store, in every town in the world