2D or 3D

[Moogy]

Which one, to you, is better?

(Note: Picking 3D proves you fail at gaming.)

Let the flames begin.

[pfx13AE]

omfg







no u didnt

[xguitarmyx]

I think he did.

EDIT: DJ awesome man rofl

[jewpinthethird]

3D.

Why? ICO and Shadow of the Colossus and the Gran Turismo Series. Games that can only exist in the 3D world and games that are far superior than any 8bit/16bit game.

[Tasuke]

Depends entirely on the game doesn't it?
I like Mario64 much more than any of the 2D mario games.
But 3D fighters are just retarded. Then there's a 2D shooter=retarded.
It totally depends on the game. But i would have to say 2D.

[Afrobean]

I prefer 2D. Just look at the Zelda series. All the best ones were the 2D ones. The 3D ones, while being decent games, could not even hold a candle to the classics. Also note that Super Mario 64 (also an excellent game) pales in comparison to the original Super Mario Bros. series and even the Super Mario World series.

Simulated 3D with 2D is cool though.

[Linkisdoomed]

I like classic 2D gaming, but with all of the new upcoming titles, it's good to have 3D sometimes (Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess). In any matter, they're both good. If you don't like classic 8-bit, then you ain't got roots.

GIVE IT UP FOR 8-BIT ROOTS!

-Link

[Kenzya]

More satisfying? I can shoot a load 30ft for any beautiful 2D games.
The most beautiful 3D games.. Well, I can only shoot about 10ft for them.

I was impressed by the likes of Doom 3 and Half-life 2, but I wouldn't drop my pants...

(P.S. anime vs. CGI girls -- porn)

[jewpinthethird]

Ya'll need to play ICO and Shadow of the Colossus.

[87x]

3d.

I love 2d fighters, but fighting is a small catagorey. There is also FPS, Simulators, RPGs, Action/Adventure, ets. games to think about. And some of the greatest games ever created, if converted to 2d, would suck ass.

With 3d the developer has so many more options to add whatever he wants. He has 360 degress of rotation to work with as well as Height, Width, and Depth. You get a wider playing area, Larger worlds, and million more possibilities for gameplay ideas and scenerios.

[blitzmage]

It all depends on the type of game and what you are going to have to do in the game. Some things work better in 3D and some in 2D.

I like both 2D and 3D there is no superior option.

[Moogy]

2D is beautiful. I have, honestly, never been impressed by a 3D game. I'm replaying Chrono Trigger now, and I still think it's the best looking game ever made. SaGa Frontier II is another game with awe-inspiring graphics. La Pucelle Tactics, Disgaea, Phantom Brave, and Makai Kingdom all have incredibly amazing graphics, too. Atelier Iris has the smoothest, most fluid graphics I've ever seen. Etc. etc. The only thing I am able to see in 3D games is how bad the graphics are, not how good. I.E., I judge them negatively, rather than positively. I don't know why. This is just how I think.[/b]

[Omeganitros]

The problem with most "3-D" games is that they're not really THAT three-dimensional. Sure, there's polygons and stuff, but how many axis things can your main character move on? While they may run up hills or walk up slopes or whatever, the games like Zelda: OoT are mostly made of characters moving on a compass; anywhere but up or down.

[87x]

Well you have 3d because you have the dimensions. Height, Depth, and Width. Whether your character can move on all three plains or not, its still 3d. Now your using a game from the 64 to base your delima off of. I mean of course not every game ever made as a 3d game is going to let you have the ability to let you move on the X Y and Z axes', but visually those axes' are there for other things to use.

@Moogy - I can understand why you would say what you say. 2d characters usually have around 8 different angles you can view them at. Which usually means there are only 8 different directions in which your character can move. Now I know this applies on a game to game bases, where a 2d game is going to make the worlds compatable with the characters limitations, but I personally like to be able to move in any which direction I chose out of my 360 degree radious of movement.

I have an opinion on why you like 2d graphics better then 3d. And that is, 3d tends to try and look real. 3d games have the ability to polygon the shit of of things to give them ultra realistic looking things. The problem is, it isn't realistic. No matter how hard they try, they aren't going to get exact human textures. This makes characters look CG and thus eliminates itself from being realistic. 2d games usually give more of a cartoon look towards things. you know they aren't going for ultra realistic, so you are never let down by the fact that it isn't perfect. You expect "blocky" characters and you don't look forward too "ultra smooth" animations. You look more at Visual style, or "the artwork" of the graphics department than haveing real life physics.

If anything in here sounds uncompleted im sorry, im rushing this out because im late for work and I still haven't taken a shower yet.

[evilbutterfly]

Simulated 3D with 2D is cool though.

Simulated 2D with 3D is better. AKA: Gradius V.

But honestly, it's entirely on a game to game basis and what I'm in the mood for. It's just like console vs PC. One is good for certain things (FPS games, aerial combat, and stuff I can't think of) while the other is good for other things (fighting games, RPGs, Worms, whatever else I forgot). Given that you're an RPG person and not much else, I can see why you'd be humping 2D's leg hardcore like you are, Moogy. And then the hardcore FPS kids are all like "omfgsoh 3d pwns j00" and such.

See, I'm an oddity in that I play pretty much everything. I do everything from CS to SM to MS to SC to SF2 to SFW to DW to BF2. I love playing lots of games of lots of styles on lots of different platforms. I'm not a "niche" gamer like everybody seems to be.

However, 2D is DEFINITELY underrepresented in today's market. Pretty much the only big-name 2D games are for like, Gameboy, and that doesn't care. That one Zelda game, Four Swords or whatever. I've only played it at Best Buy once, but I was like "HOLY SHIT YES!!" because it was awesome and in 2D. Gradius V makes me cream my pants for being so awesome. I'm sure they could have made it true 2D, with super hi-res sprites with a bajillion hand-drawn frames, but the 3D does things just as well, I think. Still, good 2D games are very rare, and the few that do get made are usually shit compared to classic SNES games. Hell, even crappy SNES games are better than lots of games (2D or otherwise) that come out.

And I think 87x has a point. Because 2D games can't be realistic and they know it, they aim more for originality and style rather than the realism that 3D games shoot for. I mean, we're getting closer and closer to the day when games really do look realistic, and I'm sure before we're all dead there will be a time when we walk into a room and don't know if there's a game on ESPN or if the guys are sitting around playing Madden, but 2D will still have its uses far into the future.

And then there's cell-shading. I love cell-shaded games, just because you can get the cartoony 2D style but with 3D gameplay. Things trying to be hyper-realistic is just silly these days, and it gets kinda annoying. Nobody worries about that with cell-shaded games, though.