[quote=Wormerine]
Isn't what is to come in BG3 kind of both? DOS2 was a hybrid of isometric and 3D (though more isometric IMO). BG3 looks like the camera can come down even lower, giving more of a 3D feel when wanted. How locking the camera at distance and at a certain angle with no ability to rotate can be seen as better than this is perplexing.
Neverwinter Nights and D:OS1&2 and BG3 are not
isometric, nor
pararel projection (I will be honest, I don't distinguish nuances, beyond that they present 3D objects in 2D enviroment.) They are 3d enviroments with camera positioned from high up.
Isometric view is beneficial to games which essencially take place on a flat plane. No need to wiggle camera around. Unless one utilises benefits on 3D engine, I see move to 3D to be detrimental (not the case with Larian works as they take an advantage of it). Different technologies are better for certain games. Heroes of Might&Magic5 gains nothing from being 3D. RTS tend to work better in isometric view. Can you imagine playing Starcraft in full 3d, and fighting camera in addition to regular management. I should also mention when talking isometric vs. 3D, I am talking about perspective, not the assets (pre-generated 2d background vs. 3D assets. Games can use 3D assets and still use parallel projection, like Civilization5, Diablo3, Starcraft2, Warcraft3, while Civ6 and D:OS1&2, NWN1&2, XCOM1&2 are 3D enviroments, with angled top down camera.) It's just as I don't see 3D platformers to be inherently better then 2D or 2,5D ones.
Camera in D:OS2 didn't impact my enjoyment, but it did annoy me. As I play games using pararel projection, I notice lack of zoom in older titles, but never feel a need to rotate the camera, as everything is perfectly well on display.
