>>13099783It's saying that 2D sprites are HARDER TO WORK WITH than 3D models. You can do things with them easier than with sprites. You can make adjustments to the models, and make animations faster than you could with 2D. It doesn't mean that 2D is horrible, it just means that from a monetary standpoint, 3D is more cost efficient in the long run. Yes, you have to initially put work into the creation of the engine for your models to live in, model creation, etc; and yes it is a lot of work, but it's not AS MUCH WORK as it'd be to do something similar with a sprite.
3D model needs an alternate costume: Create a new one, strip off the clothing layer of the older model, throw on the new clothes. Bam, all the animations and such can remain untouched, relatively simple addition.
2D sprite needs an alternate costume: Redraw shit, redraw shit, fresh animations from scratch. You have layers still, but you still need to draw the new costume along with the current set of animations.
2D requires more time, effort, and money to work with. It's not a question of just being old technology or anything. You can mass produce TV dinners cheaper, but it doesn't mean actually cooking meals is a way of the past. I mean the analogy in the most respectful way; it wasn't my intention to imply 3D animation was a shitty imitation of something real. I like some 3D artstyles just like I hate some 2D art styles (Sorry Atlus. some of your stuff doesn't suit me at all. Still may pick up Dragon's Crown, but that art style...). I just felt like pointing out that just because it's easier to make something similar with a different method that's more cost efficient doesn't mean that the older method is outdated.
