Live data from Hacker News

MAR1D: First-Person Mario

mar1d.com

41–50 of 168 posts

Re: MAR1D: First-Person Mario

#41

Something I've never understood about 2D/Flatland as a "visual" idea: In the case of this Mar1d, if I'm on the X-axis, and can only see the Y-axis, wouldn't any amount of detail in the Z-axis constitute a 3D image? The Y-axis stretched even a single "pixel" along Z would make it 3D, right? Similarly, for Flatlandia: If I'm a 2D square on the X-axis, and can see "around" me on the Z-axis, wouldn't my ability to see an…

Correct. That's why this game is 3D and not 1D.

Re: MAR1D: First-Person Mario

#44

Something I've never understood about 2D/Flatland as a "visual" idea: In the case of this Mar1d, if I'm on the X-axis, and can only see the Y-axis, wouldn't any amount of detail in the Z-axis constitute a 3D image? The Y-axis stretched even a single "pixel" along Z would make it 3D, right? Similarly, for Flatlandia: If I'm a 2D square on the X-axis, and can see "around" me on the Z-axis, wouldn't my ability to see an…

It's basically a 2D game but they replaced the width dimension with depth. Wolfenstein 1-D [1] is a true 1-dimensional game. The game is represented by a single straight line of pixels, and player movement is restricted to a single axis.

1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolfenstein_1-D

Re: MAR1D: First-Person Mario

#45

Something I've never understood about 2D/Flatland as a "visual" idea: In the case of this Mar1d, if I'm on the X-axis, and can only see the Y-axis, wouldn't any amount of detail in the Z-axis constitute a 3D image? The Y-axis stretched even a single "pixel" along Z would make it 3D, right? Similarly, for Flatlandia: If I'm a 2D square on the X-axis, and can see "around" me on the Z-axis, wouldn't my ability to see an…

Yes, it wouldn't be 3D, but what you are alluding to is projection (X onto Y, or more generally instead of X which would be orthogonal only, a 1D plane of any orientation - AKA line segment) ultimately you are still looking at a 1D image, but it has a 2D shape projected onto it that changes depending on both your orientation and position, so that you can perceive part of the 2D shape's surface as you move.

And this would be more physically correct than either Mario or Mar1D.

The generalisation, starting in 3D, is that you can project the surface of a 3D object onto a 2D plane (which is how we see)... we get a little bit more by gauging depth through stereo separation but ultimately we only get to see one 3D projection onto a 2D plane at any point in time, i.e the entire 3D surface is not accessible, we can't see behind it, or inside it, and the perception of 3D is constructed in our mind from a combination of general learned/evolved intuition of 3D space and shape and temporal samples for a particular scenario e.g looking around the object from different angles.

Projection can extend to higher and lower dimensions, e.g in 4D space the surface of a 4D object can be projected onto a 3D "plane"; and as you are suggesting, for 2D space you can project a 2D object onto a 1D plane. The projection changing depending on the orientation and position of either the shape or eye/camera.

Normal 2D game rendering doesn't really make any physical sense as a projection unless you consider them to be a narrow 3D world (consider the fact that you can see the entire surface of a square and inside of the square, but Mario the character cannot possibly see this, only a small part of the surface).

But this is all based on a "projection" with the assumption of a lot of opacity... if each particle received from the projection also contained accurate enough depth information and was a vector of all depths traversed for some limit, then full 3D could be perceived in a single 2D projection within a 3D world i.e if you could see "through" objects while still being able to sample each depth.

Re: MAR1D: First-Person Mario

#46

If you like this, you'll like Planiverse (1984) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Planiverse A bit like the classic Flatland book, this also imagines a 2D world, and also fosters thinking about higher dimensions. But there's a nice shift: if there's an "up" in Flatland, it points out of the world, whereas in Planiverse, the up is in-world, and we visit the world by looking at it from the side, rather than from above.…

Planiverse is one of my all-time favorite books. Some tasty morsels:

The Planiverse: Computer Contact with a Two-Dimensional World - Engineering Designs in Planiverse - https://cs.stanford.edu/people/eroberts/courses/soco/project...

---

> Dewdney wrote The Planiverse as..an allegory for his search for a reality deeper than that of scientific enquiry, and his subsequent conversion to Sufiism.

We're the ones living in flatland, a planiverse of limited 3D perspective, who yearn for higher dimensions of experience, a glimpse of the beyond. Unfortunately it's not without risk, as this way madness lies - either as a trap of illusion, or at least as a step toward fundamental truth (if any).

Re: MAR1D: First-Person Mario

#47

Well, we see the world as a 2d projection BUT we (usually) have 2 eyes so we have some amount of 3d-info. Maybe mario has 2 eyes too, which would give him some amount of 2d-info. (Just like an MRI can construct a 2d slice from 1d info). So the first person game should have maybe a depth info on those pixels. What I mean, mario does not see only a line. He sees a silhouette of what lies ahead of him.

I think it would require one eye above the other to have depth perception in his 2d world.

Eyes can’t even be side-by-side as that axis doesn’t exist.

Having said that, the human brain is capable of reconstructing a 3d perception with only one eye through learnt understand and interpreting the picture change over time as you move. I image it’s the same for Mario, but in 2d.

Re: MAR1D: First-Person Mario

#50
post #26

“this site proudly uses no javascript”, nerdy sites that don’t use modern css and or modern javascript most of the time have subpar user experience, I don’t read past the first sentence, it traps yourself into a niche of developers who don’t mind an ugly Design tradeoff

In what way could you make the experience of this site better with js?
Post reply on HN