By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
LethalP on 08 October 2020
Edit Thread
The_Liquid_Laser said:
JWeinCom said:

"Heh, you really want to tear this whole 1D/2D thing apart with a fine toothed comb."

No, I really don't.

There's a picture of pong. The image of the paddles and the ball all have size and therefore are not zero dimensional. They all have length and width and are not one dimensional.

We can be sure they have at least two dimensions. That's as far as we need to go to disprove your claim. If you want to argue that they are actually three dimensional, you'd have to demonstrate that they have depth, and I'm not sure how we'd do that.

Whether 3D images can be displayed on a flat plane is a more complex question, but if we can't get definitions on points, line segments, and rectangles down, I'm not gonna go there.

Heh, you may not have read my original point, so let me go back to that.  I'm saying the transition from Generation 2 to 3 is the biggest.  The reasons are

1) Graphics - Transition from dots and sticks to actual 2D shapes like Mario and Link.  Of course if I call these dots and sticks 1D, then everyone has a hissy fit, but my point is that a character like Mario on NES has a hell of a lot more graphical depth than Pitfall on Atari 2600.
2) NES games had music.  Most Atari 2600 games did not.
3) Most Atari games had gameplay that was score-based, like arcade games, while NES games came to be about getting to the end of the game.
4) This change in gameplay lead to the downfall of the arcade.

This was my original point as it pertains to the topic of this thread.  For some reason people seem to really want to focus on the first point and I don't know why.

But to try to clarify with respect to 1D/2D or 2D/3D, my point is that people don't have any problem calling Generation 5 the 3D Generation even though there are lots of aspects that aren't really 3D.  I was using an analogy to show how early gaming went from 1D to eventually 2D on the NES, but at that point several people (including yourself) got very rigid about what 1D had to be even though people aren't terribly rigid with how they define 3D on the PS1 or N64.  A line segment is a one dimensional shape and early gaming was full of line segments.  Once we got to the NES, we stopped seeing line segments.

Lmao. No it's just that you're coming up with arbitrary definitions for everything and there's just no need. You could have just said Atari uses very simplistic graphics compared to NES so it was a huge jump, but you decided to like invent this weird definition for what you call a "1D" game.

The paddles in pong have both width and length. It's 2 pixels wide and several long. It's simplistic for sure, but regardless, it's a 2D object. Also the ball moves in many directions on a 2D plane. Then there's the numbers on the scoreboard. They can't exist in 1 dimension, physics just won't allow it, know what I mean though?

Though I do agree from a 'what you see on screen' point of view, that the jump from Atari 2600 to NES was one of the biggest.