Just a question, Love3D?

[adrix89]

Why is it that on any 2d engine people want 3d?
Its like there hopelessly addicted to 3d for some reason

[Robin]

Why is it that on any 2d engine people want 3d?
Its like there hopelessly addicted to 3d for some reason

3D is a lot harder than 2D. People are always looking for new challenges, but often prefer to stay with what they know (i.e. LÖVE) as well.

[nevon]

Why is it that on any 2d engine people want 3d?
Its like there hopelessly addicted to 3d for some reason

Personally I just want the opportunities that 3D brings (shading, 3D models, etc.) Sadly 3D is a total bitch, and my math is really, really bad, so 3D frameworks are outside of my comfort zone.

[adrix89]

Personally I just want the opportunities that 3D brings (shading, 3D models, etc.) Sadly 3D is a total bitch, and my math is really, really bad, so 3D frameworks are outside of my comfort zone.

Why would you use a 2D engine for 3d?
They are perfectly good 3d engines out there,thats what I don't get

[nevon]

Personally I just want the opportunities that 3D brings (shading, 3D models, etc.) Sadly 3D is a total bitch, and my math is really, really bad, so 3D frameworks are outside of my comfort zone.

Why would you use a 2D engine for 3d?

I wouldn't, which is why I don't do 3D.

[Ryne]

You guys are asking the wrong questions. I don't think there is a problem with innovation. "Love2d" is a 2D engine though through programming such an an engine is never really limited to such a view. Just like you could code a 2D or 3D engine from scratch, using love2d as a base for a 3D engine would undoubtedly be faster than starting a 3d engine from scratch. I think that because it has "2d" in the name, it causes people to think it could be noting more. Though obviously it's been proven many times that Love can exceed expectations, See the project section.

Why is it that on any 2d engine people want 3d?
Its like there hopelessly addicted to 3d for some reason

If you read my previous post I said that I was "curious" if it were possible. Since in theory It would be. Not that I was hoping to create the next Minecraft.

[Robin]

Why would you use a 2D engine for 3d?
They are perfectly good 3d engines out there,thats what I don't get

I already answered that:

People are always looking for new challenges, but often prefer to stay with what they know (i.e. LÖVE) as well.

[vrld]

using love2d as a base for a 3D engine would undoubtedly be faster than starting a 3d engine from scratch.

Wrong. Because you have to do all perspective projections yourself.

[Ryne]

using love2d as a base for a 3D engine would undoubtedly be faster than starting a 3d engine from scratch.

Wrong. Because you have to do all perspective projections yourself.

Wouldn't you have to do that if you were programming from absolute scratch as well?

I thought in theory that It should work. The person who made that game apparently created the engine from scratch, So I was assuming it would be just as difficult as that. I couldn't image it being harder.

He is probably using a 3d framework like Direct3D or OpenGL that does all those pesky 3d-to-2d transformations for him.

To get 3D with löve, you'd have to write a software renderer, which is - as zac mentioned - far from trivial. It will be much, much slower than using OpenGL/Direct3D, since you can't use the graphics hardware.
Using textures might not be possible with löve, because you can't transform a rectangle to be a trapeze - which you would need for perspective rendering.

Referring back to your post, I think it would be just as easy to implement that into love2D as it would to implement it into something you made from scratch. In which case It's not easier, but not harder either.

[bartbes]

You're insane if you're going to do 3d without a backend like OpenGL. Luckily those also do stuff like projection for you, meaning it's a lot easier.