christo930 said:
I didn't say anything about Keen 4, I said that when a game makes a transition to 3d, it's not the same type of game anymore. Why bother calling it Keen anything, it won't be anything remotely close to any version of Commander Keen. So it wouldn't be a keen game anymore, it would be a totally new type of game that has NOTHING to do with the original other than the name and characters. Mario 64 was supposedly a good game, but it had nothing in common with previous mario games other than the name. They could have called it chris bros 64 for all it had in common with previous mario games. Look at Duke Nukem, what in the world did duke 3d have in common with duke 1 and 2? It had far more in common with Doom than it did Duke Nukem.
Sorry, you said "port a 2d game to a 3d game". To port something usually means you're literally taking a game and moving it to another platform, a 2D game into a 3D game in this case. That's why I was confused about what you were saying.
Taking your opinion and running with it, if I may, where do you draw the line? A 2D game becoming 3D you obviously claim is a totally different game, but what about other features? What about Mario 1 vs Mario 3? One was a straight side scroller one level after another, while 3 had an overland map and selectable items that greatly changed gameplay. Is Mario 3 even still a Mario game then?
Let's look at the Legend of Zelda series. Zelda 1 vs Zelda 2: would you state that the second one wasn't a Zelda game because it was a side scroller? Zelda 1 vs Zelda 3: would you say the third one had nothing in common because it was multi-layered levels, or possibly because it was a 16 bit vs 8 bit? Obviously Ocarina of Time is not a Zelda game in your mind, because it's 3D.
You've got an opinion, I'm just trying to figure out how deep it goes.