Forums > Game Forums > Isometric
Pseudo_Intellectual (66360) on 2/3/2009 1:28 AM · Permalink · Report
Right you were. I don't know why the approver thought it would help things for me to come forward and state that over-the-shoulder 3rd-person perspectives aren't isometric, but let it go down in the official record book.
vedder (70795) on 2/3/2009 11:57 PM · Permalink · Report
I recently also had a game correction WIPed back to me when an obviously 3D game was marked as Isometric. It seems there's multiple definitions floating around MobyGames. To me Isometric games only apply to games that use isometric projection, but apparently the thoughts on that vary and even 3D games with depth can be marked as isometric...
Kabushi (261204) on 2/4/2009 10:14 AM · Permalink · Report
I think it should be ok for 3D games, as long as the angle is somewhat right and the camera isn't movable. Hinterland for example is 3D but I think it still can be considered isometric.
The problem with free camera movement games is that we don't anything that's good enough. Most of the time they are neither isometric or top down, and 3rd person only works if you can see yourself on the screen.
Somebody bring me Sisko! (8) on 2/4/2009 4:34 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Kabushi wrote--]I think ... somewhat right ... I ... can be considered ... top down. ... problem ... is ... we don't good enough ...[/Q --end Kabushi wrote--] MobyGames™! Cataloging with precision since 1999™.
The definition, as Mr. stvedder already pointed out, is mathematically clear. What's here left to discuss?
vedder (70795) on 2/4/2009 4:51 PM · Permalink · Report
Anything where things that are further away from the camera become smaller isn't Isometric per definition. This rules out 99% of all 3D engines.
And just because there isn't an accurate description where 3D RTS games (for example) can fall under, that doesn't mean we should just dump it under isometric.
St. Martyne (3648) on 2/4/2009 8:02 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start stvedder wrote--]Anything where things that are further away from the camera become smaller isn't Isometric per definition. This rules out 99% of all 3D engines. [/Q --end stvedder wrote--]
The question is should we go with the literal meaning, or modify it so it would be of better use to the database.
Surely, it will be useful to note that perspective of Diablo 3 or Titan Quest haven't changed much since the original Diablo. Consider this: my mother has a big trouble handling camera control so this option might be of help to her, indicating that a game has a fixed quasiisometric camera view.
beetle120 (2415) on 2/5/2009 12:47 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start stvedder wrote--]Then I propose that its name be changed to something more suiting to both types games, or that a new genre be introduced to satisfy non-isometric games with a bird's eye view. [/Q --end stvedder wrote--] I was always wondering why MobyGames doesn't have a birds eye view option as when I think top-down I think the a view like the original GTA, Isometric needs that 45 degree angle, and Side-Scrolling is level with the with the action which leaves out all the games that don't fit into those views.
vedder (70795) on 2/7/2009 1:44 PM · Permalink · Report
I'm about to add more 3D RTS games. But now I have no idea what kind of perspective I should give it... Personally I'd say that top-down or 3rd person perspective are more valid choices than isometric.
I'll just leave that part empty for now. But we really need a solution for this, before we've got to submit thousands of corrections...
Trixter (8952) on 2/14/2009 8:05 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start stvedder wrote--]I'm about to add more 3D RTS games. But now I have no idea what kind of perspective I should give it... Personally I'd say that top-down or 3rd person perspective are more valid choices than isometric.
I'll just leave that part empty for now. But we really need a solution for this, before we've got to submit thousands of corrections... [/Q --end stvedder wrote--]
The solution is to create a new perspective if one is really warranted. I wrote in an earlier post that we should not expand the scope of isometric, because that would 1. not be isometric any more, and 2. invalidate the games that are already tagged with it.
When I first set up the perspectives, I meant for "top-down" and "third-person" to both be checked for games like Titan's Quest, RTS, etc. (actually, just third-person, but some people seem to think that third-person insists on a "behind the character" view) If this doesn't feel right, then I would be in favor of a new perspective to be added. As to what that should be called, I don't know ("over the shoulder"?). But -- this is important -- whatever it is, it should not duplicate what is already possible. Meaning, if a new perspective is created and the description says "a mixture of top-down and third-person", then that would not be acceptable, because we already have top-down and third-person and you can check them both for a game.
Sciere (930489) on 2/14/2009 8:24 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
We've actually moved on so far that third-person perspective is now used for every game where the character/object the player controls is visible, except when it's top-down or isometric. This means that Warcraft III, Tekken, Super Mario Bros. and Gears of War now share the same perspective. We can slightly differentiate further through side-scrolling and platform, but it's still a large scope and I'm not sure how it can be split up further, apart from the suggestions I made in the wiki (the additions "Not applicable" - "User-controlled" - "Fixed" - "Horizontally scrolling" and "Vertically scrolling").
Pseudo_Intellectual (66360) on 2/14/2009 8:43 PM · Permalink · Report
the additions "Not applicable" -
Would this suit audiogames and text games?
"Horizontally scrolling" and "Vertically scrolling"
While we're hashing these out, a period distinguishing qualifier could be "flick-screen" (or flip-screen for side-scrollers that don't really scroll.
Sciere (930489) on 2/14/2009 8:55 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
Flick-screen... interesting, I had included that as a part both H/V-scrolling, but it could be a separate one of course.
Not applicable
The perspective is not clear because the game design does not provide details (e.g. Tetris where the game is either viewed 1st-person through the player's eyes or third-person for the blocks that are moved). This also applies when there is no perspective intrinsic to the game itself. For Interactive Fiction the player becomes the character of the fiction.
User-controlled
The player is able to rotate the viewpoint slightly or completely, or can zoom in at will. This does not apply when multiple fixed viewpoints are used consecutively.
Fixed
The player is not able to adjust the viewpoint. This also applies when multiple viewpoints are used consecutively. It is not to be used where it is implied by another genre (e.g. "Not applicable")
Horizontally scrolling
The main setting of gameplay involves the player moving from the bottom of the playfield to the top (or vice versa) for a length of time. The player character can, but does not need to stay in the same place on-screen. The entire playfield scrolls left or right to accomodate player movement. Horizontally scrolling also applies when the playfield consists of consecutive playfields loaded when the player reaches the side of the screen, not showing actual scrolling movement.
Vertically scrolling
The main setting of gameplay involves the player moving from the left of the playfield to the right (or vice versa) for a length of time. The player character can, but does not need to stay in the same place on-screen. The entire playfield scrolls up or down to accomodate player movement. Vertically scrolling also applies when the playfield consists of consecutive playfields loaded when the player reaches the side of the screen, not showing actual scrolling movement.
Trixter (8952) on 2/14/2009 8:01 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start St_Martyne wrote--] The question is should we go with the literal meaning, or modify it so it would be of better use to the database. [/q]
When I created it, it was always meant to mean the literal meaning (ie. games like qbert, airball, knight lore, etc.)
We shouldn't change it, because that will invalidate all of the games that ARE properly tagged with it. If a new type of perspective is needed, it should be created. As to what that should be ("over-the-shoulder"?), I don't know; more discussion is needed.
For the game in question that started this thread, Third-Person Perspective is the originally intended perspective for games like this.
Trixter (8952) on 2/14/2009 7:58 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start stvedder wrote--]Anything where things that are further away from the camera become smaller isn't Isometric per definition. [/q]
This is 100% correct, and is a good way to keep in mind how to make sure the isometric perspective is properly tagged or not.
[quote] And just because there isn't an accurate description where 3D RTS games (for example) can fall under, that doesn't mean we should just dump it under isometric. [/Q --end stvedder wrote--]
Also true.
vedder (70795) on 2/15/2009 3:25 AM · edited · Permalink · Report
I think that flagging these types of games as both "top down" and "3rd person" (as was intended as you say) is the most sensible sollution with the current system. But perhaps there might be a more elegant solution.
I think the difficult part with naming this is that we're actually trying to describe two different things. Firstly from whose perspective the game is drawn:
- Look through the characters eyes (1st person)
- Look at him from behind the shoulder (over the shoulder (3rd person))
- Look at him from above (bird's eye)
- Look at him from the side (side-view (3rd person))
And secondly the technological means of how the viewpoint is achieved:
- Isometric is a form of bird's eye view
- top-down, as in straight down 2D (or rendered as if 2D) is also a method of bird's eye view
- Side-Scrolling is a form of side-view (as opposed as the static-screens Pseudo mentioned) And does it really matter gameplay wise if a game scrolls horizontally or vertically?
We can probably think of different viewpoint-techspecs for the others as well, for example a first person perspective can have static images (Dungeon Master, Myst) or be fully 3D (First person shooters, ultima underworld).
And the not aplicable that Sciere suggested might also be nice, because then you could actually search for such games with the game browser.
I hope I'm still making sense, cause it's 4:20 in the morning...
vedder (70795) on 3/3/2009 2:24 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Kabushi wrote--]I think it should be ok for 3D games, as long as the angle is somewhat right and the camera isn't movable. Hinterland for example is 3D but I think it still can be considered isometric.
The problem with free camera movement games is that we don't anything that's good enough. Most of the time they are neither isometric or top down, and 3rd person only works if you can see yourself on the screen. [/Q --end Kabushi wrote--]
In Staffan Björk and Jussi Holopainen's "Patterns In Game Design" (Charles River Media, 2004) they make a distinction between three types of game viewpoints:
- First-Person Views - Players are shown the game world as if they were inside it
- Third-Person Views - Players are shown the game world with a focus on a game element under the players' control
- God Views - Players are given a view of the game independent of game elements
I think this would be an excellent addition to record games with a free roaming camera.
edit: this has nothing much to do with a game being isometric or not. I just remembered Kabushi's post when I read this.