I've moved this thread to General Discussion. Please be sure to post your threads in the correct forum next time. Thank you.
Front-view has an advantage in perspective. In side view, when you put a dragon and two goblin minions in one battle, it will feel more cartoony, because the goblins are not much smaller than the dragon. In Front-view, you can put the Dragon in the back and the Goblins in the front. It will feel better, because it will look like the dragon is smaller than it should be because it's much further back than the goblins.Side view, absolutely no contest. Front view feels disconnected from the player characters and is generally less exciting. Enter commands, watch flashes appear on enemies or screen shakes when they attack you. Mash button get battle over with quickly, etc.
This looks like a matter of asset which you can customize.Front-view has an advantage in perspective. In side view, when you put a dragon and two goblin minions in one battle, it will feel more cartoony, because the goblins are not much smaller than the dragon. In Front-view, you can put the Dragon in the back and the Goblins in the front. It will feel better, because it will look like the dragon is smaller than it should be because it's much further back than the goblins.
Of course, let's not forget that they took like 3 generations of RPG Maker sticking with front view based assets. And finally, put side view option, but they also forgot that most of their animation is more suitable for the front view rather than a side view. The thing is, you don't use the default animation for the side view.Front-view also has an advantage in making the player feel more immersed, in making them feel like they are the ones fighting the battle, not some other characters. Great for horror games and such. Side-view is more detached, "gamey". Which isn't a bad thing, but it leads to a different experience. I mean, look at the Fire Breath animation from MV. That's the kind of stuff that works really well in Front-view. And First Person games in general.
Not really, this was just a quick example, but there's more advantages and cool things you can do by playing with perspective.This looks like a matter of asset which you can customize.
The argument about default animations (and RTP in general) being more suitable for Front-view is right, but... most RTP-only games seem to use Side-view combat (and even ones with some custom stuff like tilesets or characters frequently use default animations).Of course, let's not forget that they took like 3 generations of RPG Maker sticking with front view based assets. And finally, put side view option, but they also forgot that most of their animation is more suitable for the front view rather than a side view. The thing is, you don't use the default animation for the side view.
I get your point, it just you don't have to use the stock asset to support your argument while inserting a phrase "in a side-view" which highlighting "these assets are not meant for side view battle". As it can be replaced if necessary.Not really, this was just a quick example, but there's more advantages and cool things you can do by playing with perspective.
And people using the default animation database (for side view) has been my pet peeve for a long time, to be honest. They should be customizing the animation, and by that, I don't mean replacing the assets. But create your own animation database that is suitable for side-view battles.(and even ones with some custom stuff like tilesets or characters frequently use default animations)
The only time when I thought the front view was good (for immersion), is when I was playing a certain adult-themed RM game in which due to the absence of the side view sprite (only a portrait in the HUD that is changed based on the condition), I had to imagine what was actually happening. And I don't think that would work better if it has SV battlers.They are both better for different types of games, depending on the feeling you want to instill in the player.
You've got a point there, tbh.I get your point, it just you don't have to use the stock asset to support your argument while inserting a phrase "in a side-view" which highlighting "these assets are not meant for side view battle". As it can be replaced if necessary.
At the very least, they should pick the animations that work well in sideview too, but yeah, most simply use whatever they think looks cool even if it doesn't fit the perspective. Like the Fire Breath or Earth boulder launch animation.And people using the default animation database (for side view) has been my pet peeve for a long time, to be honest. They should be customizing the animation, and by that, I don't mean replacing the assets. But create your own animation database that is suitable for side-view battles.
I've played plenty of horror games that used side-view battles with one character, which felt like they would be way better with Front-view. Now, a big part of that is that most used the default assets for enemies and the character, which just really doesn't work that well if you want to spook the player, but even then, considering a Front-view battle system instead would have been a good idea.The only time when I thought the front view was good (for immersion), is when I was playing a certain adult-themed RM game in which due to the absence of the side view sprite (only a portrait in the HUD that is changed based on the condition), I had to imagine what was actually happening. And I don't think that would work better if it has SV battlers.