The TRUE reason why 2D games remain superior

[nerdelitist]

Playing 2D games engage the brain similarly to reading a book ! Both rely on filling in the blanks and require interpretation on the part of the player/reader.

3D or realistic graphics games give you high-fidelity visuals, leaving less to the imagination.

Now let's look at the parts of the brain that are stimulated while reading and playing a 2d game.

Books activates :

- Visual cortex

- Prefrontal cortex for abstract thinking

- Default Mode Network involved in imagination

2D games activates :

- Visual processing

- Abstract reasoning, problem-solving and pattern recognition.

- DMN (depending on how narrative the game is , like for example JRPGs)


When you're playing a 3D Game the game is fully rendered and tells you what to see , it's basically the same as watching a movie on Netflix !! while 2d Games you see a few sprite frames and imagine the character powers and scale.

This is another masterful topic from nerdelitist, thank you for reading.

 

[jankusanagi jankusanagi]

Well, yes... but countering that, 3D games (usually) involve handling a character who moves, and shoots, and whatever in more dimensions, so it probably lights other parts of the brain for that

Depending on the kind of game of course, you probably have to look around a lot more, and handle things coming at you (or hiding from you) in all directions.

 

[nerdelitist]

Well, yes... but countering that, 3D games (usually) involve handling a character who moves, and shoots, and whatever in more dimensions, so it probably lights other parts of the brain for that

Depending on the kind of game of course, you probably have to look around a lot more, and handle things coming at you (or hiding from you) in all directions.

3D games engage sensory-motor circuits and reflexes , it's less abstraction and more direct perception.

And we know from various statistical data that the normies who make up the majority of the world's population are individuals who tend to trust their senses rather than their intuition. Which explains why Fortnite (a brain-dead 3d shooter) is a popular game.

 

[Cris_Agev]

Well I don't know much about astrophysics.... but I love abstract reasoning as well as problem solving, my favorites subjects in university were algorithms, linear algebra and calculus, maybe that's why I always found 2d games more charming

 

[GardeniaSky's icon GardeniaSky GardeniaSky]

I will continue to play Castlevania

 

[moonbits]

I don't think so, I've heard that argument also used in low poly 3D games. 2D games are immediately accessible to anyone. You go up or down, left or right. There's no Z axis and babysitting a camera to know where's forward and what's left.

Superior? Maybe, but it's more welcoming.

 

[Mopeybloke]

I disagree that they are.
Moreover, many early 3D games leave a lot to the imagination, and people who worship at the altar of smeary sprites can't cope with those smeary textures.
In general, it would be expected that games of any graphic style become more detailed as time goes on, but the way we look at 2D games, especially pixel art, is more as a museum pieces. We don't expect them to change much or grow in detail even as much as 3D HD games on PS3 looked. They don't even seem to climb resolutions much. Most games using 2D pixel art graphics have a resolution no higher than 360p.

 

[nerdelitist]

Well I don't know much about astrophysics.... but I love abstract reasoning as well as problem solving, my favorites subjects in university were algorithms, linear algebra and calculus, maybe that's why I always found 2d games more charming

High IQ.

Personally, I've been interested in neuroscience and philosophy for some years now.

Something I failed to mention in my initial post is that I'm talking specifically about 2D games that are pixel art or stylized

 

[job32]

3d games have more money involved and bigger teams, more conflicts. 2d games had a better chance of staying true to the original idea.

 

[nerdelitist]

I don't think so, I've heard that argument also used in low poly 3D games. 2D games are immediately accessible to anyone. You go up or down, left or right. There's no Z axis and babysitting a camera to know where's forward and what's left.

Superior? Maybe, but it's more welcoming.

Simplicity of control doesn't mean simplicity of cognitive engagement , retro 2d games are typically easy to play and hard to master boyo.

 

[Mopeybloke]

Simplicity of control doesn't mean simplicity of cognitive engagement , retro 2d games are typically easy to play and hard to master boyo.

That's true for old 3D games too. It was the style of the times. Though I guess the move to 3D shifted the meta towards exploration from the more focused challenge in most 2D games prior.

 

[nerdelitist]

I disagree that they are.
Moreover, many early 3D games leave a lot to the imagination, and people who worship at the altar of smeary sprites can't cope with those smeary textures.
In general, it would be expected that games of any graphic style become more detailed as time goes on, but the way we look at 2D games, especially pixel art, is more as a museum pieces. We don't expect them to change much or grow in detail even as much as 3D HD games on PS3 looked. They don't even seem to climb resolutions much. Most games using 2D pixel art graphics have a resolution no higher than 360p.

3D is the antithesis of imagination , it doesn't involve any symbolic abstraction.

There's a difference between “I imagine this blocky character is scary because the textures are bad” vs. “I interpret this little sprite as a haunted child based on limited clues and my emotional engagement”.

 

[Mopeybloke]

There's a difference between “I imagine this blocky character is scary because the textures are bad” vs. “I interpret this little sprite as a haunted child based on limited clues and my emotional engagement”.

The only difference is the way you phrased it. Both low res 2D and 3D will involve abstraction because realistic detail is not achievable. The real difference in our minds is we don't have a lot of equally high-res 2D to compare.

 

[prnzoDraGoonZweiOrta]

idk 1-D games are best cuz an infinite line or infinite empty space cannot exist in any media format. you must conjure your imagination at every illusory turn. in fact, it gives you the (only) option of CREATING said (unspecified) title. hence its inherent superiority.

available whilst (imaginary) supplies Last!! for more inPHO caLL 1-800 wai TwuT

special mention goes to Vectrex! TOO BAD LASERDISC the eternal bridesmaiD.

 

[nerdelitist]

That's true for old 3D games too. It was the style of the times. Though I guess the move to 3D shifted the meta towards exploration from the more focused challenge in most 2D games prior.

Mmmh ... many challenges from PSX and N64games were more about navigating jank than mastering a tight skill curve.

The transition to 3d was horrendous , unlike the transition from the Nes to the snes, for example.

 

[Waffles's iconWaffles]

3D games past the PS1 era mess with my sense of depth and space, that's why I prefer 2D games.

That said, I can enjoy a lot of things on the PS3, so perhaps they figured something out in the meantime.

 

[moonbits]

Simplicity of control doesn't mean simplicity of cognitive engagement.

Yeah it does; and this goes even beyond the controls.

Their difficulty is unrelated to what Im talking about.

"Boyo"

 

[nerdelitist]

The only difference is the way you phrased it. Both low res 2D and 3D will involve abstraction because realistic detail is not achievable. The real difference in our minds is we don't have a lot of equally high-res 2D to compare.

there's a major difference, 2D art focuses on symbolism while 3D art strives for literal representation , it generally aimed to mimic the real world.

Even with high res, many 2D games choose stylization and abstraction over realism that’s part of their expressive power

Post automatically merged: Today at 1:00 AM

3D games past the PS1 era mess with my sense of depth and space, that's why I prefer 2D games.

That said, I can enjoy a lot of things on the PS3, so perhaps they figured something out in the meantime.

Yes, that's because modern 3d games are based entirely on what the 6th generation of consoles built. You can literally remaster a PS2 game without changing the controls and you'll feel like you're playing a modern game

 

[therabidfrog]

3D games engage sensory-motor circuits and reflexes , it's less abstraction and more direct perception.

And we know from various statistical data that the normies who make up the majority of the world's population are individuals who tend to trust their senses rather than their intuition. Which explains why Fortnite (a brain-dead 3d shooter) is a popular game.

What is this "various statistical data" that you speak of? Got a link? Maybe mention the name of a study? You know that a lot of 2D games use 3D assets, right? You know there are a lot of 2D game that have high fidelity models and a lot of 3D games that use simple/abstract ones, right?

And why is Fortnite the example you go with? Why not Dark Souls, Fez, or The Witness? It sounds more like your argument is 2D (which you don't bother defining) vs Popular Thing. Do you really think people enjoy Fortnite because they're stupid?

Are you saying Super Mario Brothers requires greater intellectual engagement and a higher capacity for reasoning than a fully 3D game like NaissanceE? Or games like Mouth Washing or Envelope? You aren't just painting in the broadest terms. You dumped paint bucket in your lap.

 

[Big Finger Jim]

Playing 2D games engage the brain similarly to reading a book ! Both rely on filling in the blanks and require interpretation on the part of the player/reader.

3D or realistic graphics games give you high-fidelity visuals, leaving less to the imagination.

Now let's look at the parts of the brain that are stimulated while reading and playing a 2d game.

Books activates :

- Visual cortex

- Prefrontal cortex for abstract thinking

- Default Mode Network involved in imagination

2D games activates :

- Visual processing

- Abstract reasoning, problem-solving and pattern recognition.

- DMN (depending on how narrative the game is , like for example JRPGs)


When you're playing a 3D Game the game is fully rendered and tells you what to see , it's basically the same as watching a movie on Netflix !! while 2d Games you see a few sprite frames and imagine the character powers and scale.

This is another masterful topic from nerdelitist, thank you for reading.

This is some shit Uchikoshi would whip out to explain why there's like fifty clones of Sigma.

 

[Carlnshake Carlnshake]

What is this "various statistical data" that you speak of? Got a link? Maybe mention the name of a study? You know that a lot of 2D games use 3D assets, right? You know there are a lot of 2D game that have high fidelity models and a lot of 3D games that use simple/abstract ones, right?

And why is Fortnite the example you go with? Why not Dark Souls, Fez, or The Witness? It sounds more like your argument is 2D (which you don't bother defining) vs Popular Thing. Do you really think people enjoy Fortnite because they're stupid?

Are you saying Super Mario Brothers requires greater intellectual engagement and a higher capacity for reasoning than a fully 3D game like NaissanceE? Or games like Mouth Washing or Envelope? You aren't just painting in the broadest terms. You dumped paint bucket in your lap.

My POV the moment I boot up Super Mario Bros

 

[therabidfrog]

View attachment 85599
My POV the moment I boot up Super Mario Bros

I wish I could see through your eyes.

 

[Segadude113]

2D games are a lot easier to control. Being made of pixels means you can judge where you jump or attack much MUCH more accurately! Plus I really dig chiptune music in 8 bit games. Game Boy Color hacks are like new NES games!

 

[JG5009]

Hmm, I see how this argument makes sense and the point you want to get across, 2D can get away with the minimum and it still can look "natural", but I would also argue that 3D is more like a spectrum and between those detailed 3D worlds that have every detail at every time there's a huge range of titles that follow more loosely similar techniques as 2D sprite games where a lot of stuff is just not there and are pretty vague about it, N64/PS1 (Even NDS) low poly or pre-renders in particular being a pretty unique area I would like to analyse more because it's definitely at a middle spot of just being 2D visuals with more freedom and depth and the full 3D experiences that the 6th gen started to get.

And a special mention to 3D environments with 2D sprites for the characters, that's also a interesting combination.

 

[Clippy]

My takeaway from all of this is that you should play blindfolded for maximum brain activity.