3 ms·
Using pixel coordinates for 2D space is like sizing web elements in pixels - it's just plain wrong and will look vanishingly small on future higher-resolution m
by hypertele-Xii 3y ago
Using pixel coordinates for 2D space is like sizing web elements in pixels - it's just plain wrong and will look vanishingly small on future higher-resolution monitors.
- zogrodea 3y agoWasn't it common practice on older systems like, say, the SNES Sega Genesis? A design responsive to multiple resolutions wasn't really a thing back then as far as I know.
- hypertele-Xii 3y agoImagine the richness of retro gaming today if they had had the foresight to design for resolution independence. Now only a vanishingly tiny subset of the best of the best games have the financial incentive or dedicated modding community to release in high definition.
- smokel 3y agoIt's just plain wrong from today's perspective. Back when pixel sizes were predictable, one could exploit this at all levels. Pixel artists would (and still continue to) consider every individual pixel, performing anti-aliasing by hand. Animations would be timed in relative to the (fixed) framerate, leading to optimal smoothness. Reaching this level of fluidity is only recently possible again, at the cost of vastly higher hardware requirements. Most people haven't even experienced this, because of the suboptimal period we have been in for some time now. You win some, you lose some.
- proc0 3y agoI was speaking a little more abstractly. For 2D, even if you use an intermediate coordinate system, the transformation between the two can be mapped 1:1 with the controller (in theory, not that you need to), because controllers are 2D in design (specifically the directional arrows and joysticks, which have 2D coordinates). I think allows for more natural responsiveness. If controllers had 3D joysticks, or eventually when VR gets better at hand motion, then 3D responsiveness will improve.