Is isometric better than 3rd and first person, or not? Why?

it depends on how good your eyes are

I would say probably not.

Thing is, I consider isometric to be worse than simple tile graphics, for a couple reasons:
* It is sometimes hard to tell what's where, as objects can be hidden behind other objects.
* In isometric views, to follow things like roads and walls, you have to move diagonally. With many control schemes, moving diagonally is a pain (particularly if you're using arrow keys, WASD, or the d-pad of a controller).

Simple tile-based graphics do not have these issues.

(Another advantage of tile-based graphics; if movement happens only on tiles (this essentially means the game has to either be turn-based or turn-based with time limit per turn), then collision detection becomes trivial.)

Depends on what you're doing. What genre are you talking about? Can you give examples of how these games are comparable?

It depends on the game and genre. There is no definitive "one size fits all" answer.

Agreed with others, I think it depends on genre.

I think the genre where different perspectives are used the most is RPGs - even within the same franchise. Maybe the question is meaningful in the RPG context? E.g. the Fallout games are an example of a series that moved from isometric to first-person. Ultima games had overhead, isometric, first person (Underworlds 1+2) and third person (Ultima IX).

That seems to be more of a WRPG thing. JRPGs tended not to change the perspective, except for the transition into 3D (well, and sometimes having tile graphics with some tiles being high enough to hide what's behind them).

True, but there are few first-person JRPGs in general I think (I might just lack knowledge of them though). The Etrian Odyssey dungeon crawlers are one exception that comes to mind, but that series does have one spin-off, Etrian Mystery Dungeon, which changed the perspective into an overhead 3D one.

I'd say Isometric. It's easier to code, easier to deal with sprites, you know the exact distance of most things, no tricky math... can run it on a gameboy and some calculators...

The Etrian Odyssey games feel more like Wizardry than like JRPGs to me; in fact, I would classify them as Wizardry-likes.


(Etrian Mystery Dungeon I'm not familiar with, but my guess from the title is that it's a roguelike, just like all the other Mystery Dungeon games. Also, I really wouldn't count spin-offs as part of the series for purposes of this discussion.)

With monochrome graphics, it feels like isometric would be too cluttered to be playable with so few color choices.

Tile graphics work better.

How do you feel about Spiderweb Software's Avernum remakes (and upcoming Geneforge remake) which replaced the old overhead tile-based graphics of the original games with isometric graphics?

On the other hand, for Spiderweb's recent Queen's Wish: The Conqueror game, the perspective was changed again by removing the 45-degree angle, kind of a midway between the old and new graphics style.

Try playing Avernum 1 without a numeric keypad and see what happens.

(Fortunately, that control issue was fixed later in the series, but the fact that normal movement is diagonal still applies.)

Depends on how big each block is and how much detail you put in. Though a semi-3D item in a grid does suggest it wouldn't look too good and tiled/2D would be better.

Well, as Fallout changed developers and got immeasurably worse after Fallout tactics, you can't really count those as the same series. Completely different studios and publishers looking to get rich off someone else's work.

If you say "yes", please go play NES Solstice and report back with your confirmation you still believe so.