• Top 10 Reasons All Video Games Should Be 2D

  

  Written by Zeromage 104 Comments
  Last Updated:: October 19, 2008

  With modern games like Halo and the Resident Evils, the video game world has become obsessed with the first person 3D format where you’re “virtually” mimicking your own real life movements. In a modern game like GTA, you’re able to move in all directions in a 3D environment. What are all these games missing? In this article, we’ll discuss the fact that what’s missing from these games is mainly due to the 3D format of modern video games. With this in mind, we’ll see how the video game world needs to go back to 2D gaming to capture its lost greatness from the 8 and 16-bit eras. The problems started happening at the 32-bit era. It’s time to move forward by taking a couple steps back.

  10. Simpler

  Remember how simple Mario 1 was? Remember how simple Contra was? Were these games easy because they were simple? Absolutely not. They were difficult, detailed, and challenging. These games proved that you could make a game simple, yet at the same time complicated. Super Metroid serves as another great example of how great a game could be in its simplicity. Castlevania “Symphony of the Night” is yet another game that will always be remembered in it’s grace and beauty, but also held it’s simplicity with it’s 2D scope. It’s with combining the simplicity of the 2D space movement and the complexity possible within this space, that great games were made.

  9. More Entertaining

  How bored did you get playing Mario 64? You were walking…and walking some more in the same direction, with nothing standing in the way of where you were going. In the 2D video game space, there is always something to see, evade, or destroy. Why would I want to meander about a 3D world? I do that everyday in real life. In the 2D world, there’s always something in front of you keeping you on your toes. This keeps you in the game knowing that something can come from behind or in front of you. This makes the game much more entertaining and has much more of a possibility of always being on.

  8. More linear

  With the 2D format for gaming, the video game was obviously more linear. Why is this a good thing? It gives the gamer a sense of purpose knowing that they have to go from point A to point B rather than having the relative options of going from point A to any point in a massive geographical 3D environment. The linearity of a game gives the gamer a specific place to go, and a specific thing to do. This linearity creates a sense of escapism for the gamer who already has too many things to do in the 3D environment in which they live in “real life”.

  7. More room for creativity

  With not having massive world where you can move anywhere you want, the game developer is given more room for creativity rather than just filling space. In a 2D environment they can worry more about the enemies that a protagonist encounters, or a perfectly timed jump that needs to be executed. The game developer can also worry more about how to challenge the gamer, rather than how to make the game seem more like real life. Remember, we are in the video game world, not “3D reality” where we have to be in every day. Video games’ original greatness came from their sense of escapism rather than its pretension for some purported reality.

  6. Easier on the eyes

  There was much less strain on the eyes when playing 2D games. When you jumped, the whole screen didn’t jump with you. When you walked, you had a whole view of the screen while you were walking as the protagonist of the game. Turning around as your character in these 3D games sometimes puts them so up-close immediately that you quickly move backwards from being too overwhelmed with a full screen of some face. There’s just too much screen movement in these 3D games. With the 2D format, you could see yourself within a static surrounding. This was much easier and more pleasurable experience for the eyes, especially when you sometimes wanted to concentrate on an aesthetically pleasing background.

  5. Loss of focus on graphics

  If the video games went back to 2D, there wouldn’t have to be so much of a focus on creating the “new graphical chip that will expand graphics to even more real life themes!” Game developers will be less worried about eye candy and more focused on story line, innovative levels, and how to specifically challenge the gamer. Starting with games like Virtua Fighter, gaming has sacrificed quality for graphical innovation. Once this unconscious drive for technological innovation is curtailed, video games can once again find their roots.

  4. Smoother controlling

  Ever play Resident Evil? Ever play GTA? Don’t these games sometimes just piss you off with their poor controlling? It takes two fucking hours to turn around in Resident Evil. This isn’t real, its just fucking annoying. The blocky, slow movement of many of these 3D games takes away any sense of gaming moving forward by not replicating the real phenomena of the human body like it wants itself too. You’re getting eaten alive by zombies and it takes you literally 5 seconds to turn around and knock these bastards down. This isn’t fun.

  3. No more GTA’s

  Although the first two Grant Theft autos were 2D games, the series found its first real success in the world of 3D. This is when it started to dominate the video game world. In a 2D world, there would be no more Grand Theft Autos, thank God (or at least they wouldn’t be as popular as they are now). There would be no more news stories of this hyper-urban game that found its success on bloodlust violence and man’s lack of good taste for immediate pleasure. No more having to see front covers who people who wear “bling” and are holding guns in front of them. This pathetic excuse for creativity in a video game would be abolished if the 2D world was able to reign supreme. The gamer would be back on an epic journey rather than living a pseudo-reality of gangster life that has nowhere to go except to modern violence.

  2. You don’t want to play in the same dimensions you live in

  You live in a “3D” world. You walk in it, you eat in it, you sleep in it, and worst of all you work in it. Why would you want to carry over these habitual characteristics to the video game world? I don’t want to think about another 3D universe when I go home to play games. I want to be taken into a simple 2D world with great story lines that have nothing to do with my own “real” life. Mimicking what we perceive as “reality” is not progress for the video game medium; it’s a lack of understanding of other dimensions, and more precisely, just another way of unconsciously privileging ourselves (ego) in all facets of the universe.

  1. Better Games

  Why were games like Mario, Mega Man, and even Sonic (Yes Old-Wizard admits Sonic was OK!) great games? There were many reasons why these games were great, but one thing is common to them all. They were all 2D games. Even when Mega Man saw it’s ascent to the 16-bit format, it didn’t change it’s 2D style. If I remember correctly, the Mega Man X’s were great games also. The same holds true for Mario’s ascent to the 16 bit age. The games that will be remembered past this time will be the 2D games. The new 3D games are going to be seen as being too tied to the times, and specifically the times lack of substance.

  Related Posts: Top 10 Problems with Modern Games, Top 10 Reasons Old-Wizard.com Sucks

104 Comments

1. #1 ben says:
   November 20th, 2009 at 11:12 pm

   Project Firestart was a 2 dimensional survival horror game!

   I agree with a lot of the values you list, like simplicity and shifting the focus from graphics to gameplay, but I agree with a lot of the commenters. You seem to be scapegoating the 3d aspect of the overly-complex, non-linear, hard-to-control games… why not just write about game complexity, the virtues of clear mission objectives/linear storytelling, and emphasizing gameplay over quality—the link between your values and the 3d aspect of games is quite shakey.
2. #2 Geminorus says:
   November 20th, 2009 at 12:05 am

   I love 2D games, zelda being my favorite but I can take every 10 points you made and argue against them 10 times more. It’s all about *experiencing*. When you play Mario, what are you experiencing? I hate to say it but, you are experiencing the reaction of action. Not the fact you’re a plumber running through pipes and trying to save a princess. I’ve recently beat Crysis and started playing Crysis Warhead. My experience I had with Crysis, was that I was a special soldier out to do what ever task/order that can be deemed as impossible. This is saying more then reacting to and timing your jumps in mario. If I have never played Mario and Crysis and was presented to play one or the other. I would choose Crysis even knowing it would only run at a average of 20 fps. It’s the experiece i’m choosing, not the pretty graphics.

   Also one more thing about the “real world” argument. Games aren’t trying to achieve the exact representation of real life, but more of fantasy version of it, which you see in all movies/tv today. So if you hate 3D games now, you should hate all movies.
3. #3 paniq says:
   November 20th, 2009 at 6:39 am

   you forgot the best reason: the screen is 2D. 3D in games has no perception of depth, because the screen makes it impossible, and that is annoying. 2D always feels natural on screens.
4. #4 XYZW says:
   November 20th, 2009 at 5:37 pm

   Sorry sir but 3D games do have perception of depth, it’s called a Field of View. When you look out a window, look into a mirror, you are looking at and through a 2D surface. This doesn’t make the world flat. Just because you can’t touch it doesn’t mean there’s no perception of depth.
5. #5 supa says:
   November 20th, 2009 at 9:49 pm

   Here is the answer to your ridiculousness -

   http://www.imediapress.com/supa/2008/10/20/re-top-10-reasons-all-video-games-should-be-2d/

   Enjoy!
6. #6 bob* says:
   November 20th, 2009 at 6:32 pm

   Great article. I did enjoyed it.

   I personally don’t hate 3D but is true that is not always the best format. It depends solely on the design and purpose of the game.

   As many said, the problem is not that is 2D or 3D but that they are bad designed. But the sad truth is that 2D was more creatively demanding and just more fun.

   I have been playing for 20 years and I can’t just find any kind of “fun” in 3D games like Gears of wars (AWFUL controls), Halo (terribly camera), Grand Theft auto 4 (do what I want? why? why I should do the designer’s job?!), Final Fantasy 7-10 (yaaawn), Metal gear solid 4 (90 mins cut scenes?! no way) and so on. Of course there are exceptions like Zelda twilight princess, Mario galaxy and Resident evil 4 but that’s because they are not aiming for realism and they can be done in 2D withouit a problem.

   Simply pu, 2D was more pure and fun towards gameplay than “reality” or film likeness in 3D. Games are virtual toys, not art.

   I guess that a balance between the 2 is needed.
7. #7 Kith says:
   November 20th, 2009 at 4:40 pm

   @Old-Wizard

   Okay, I think there are gaping holes the size of the crater the moon would make if it crashed to the earth in your article. However, I will not go on because the article supa left clearly lists them all.

   @ bob.

   Now, I’ve only been playing games for 12 years. (If you don’t count flailing an atari controller at the age of 4 And I’ve played everything from my sega genesis (which I still have) to a PS3 and it is my experience that 3D gives a better experience in general.

   Now, that being said, both styles have games that could easily be pointed at while saying ‘Thats why xD sucks.’

   For 3D I would point out Halo (Completely average for a FPS. The only special thing is how far its head is up its own ass.) The GTA series (Why do I want to watch gangster violence when I could turn on the news?) And Fable (Good for what it is, but it should have been sooo much more.)

   2D I would point at Megaman (Most are oppressively difficult.) (Go ahead and start the hate) Final Fantasy I, II, and V. (Really pretty much just turn based hack and slash, which while it fits a niche, doesn’t make for prolonged enjoyment like VIII or X did.) And, just to be a jerk, E.T for the Atari. (Enough said)

   All and all I think 2d is really something to feel nostalgic about, not something to go back to. 3d doesn’t need to be gotten rid of, it needs to have more focus on story and compelling gameplay.
8. #8 Real Gamer says:
   November 20th, 2009 at 9:20 pm

   This guy is insane !

   I like games that give the player a plausible story with games like Mass Effect (exellent) and GTA IV (universaly aclaimed). Now, i like the gameplay as much as the storyline. And i think i generaly represent 80% of the gamers. Now, i see no interrest in playing what today cold be considered like a “kid game” were the story is basicly that your a plumer that jumps on turtles.

   I found this article in Le Monde, a serious French newspaper. In the category “humour”….

   Old Wizard seems like a guy terribly bitter about the en of the black and white cinema…..
9. #9 LapinDuracell says:
   November 20th, 2009 at 12:23 pm

   I totally agree with that statement, even for PC’s RPG : I’m currently playing simultaneously at Baldur’s Gates 2 and Neverwinter Nights 2. Despite NWN2 shiny graphics and better user interface, there is much more fun in BGII. You can feel the art of graphics behind 2D, the beauty and atmosphere of the game world. It seems that 3D engines require so much work that they forget to put emotion in it.

   3D is just cold and it gives me headaches…
10. #10 Geese Howard says:
    November 20th, 2009 at 1:16 pm

    I have been playing games since I was 8 (Space Invaders), and I cannot disagree more with this article.

    It is true, there are many more low-quality games out right now; but that is just because there are just MORE games out of there.
    Also, just as it is happened to the movie industry, games are now mainstream, and producers are aiming for the lower common denominator.

    But this has nothing to do with 2D or 3D. If you do not believe me, go play Deus-EX or System Shock 2, and let me know.

    And yes, I did finish the original Konami Contra – on one quarter – in its time.

    Geese
11. #11 Ky-Guy says:
    November 20th, 2009 at 5:44 pm

    I, for the most part, agree with this article. When “Mega Man 9″ came out on WiiWare, I was playing that a lot. I also spend a lot more Wii time on the Virtual Console than on any of the new stuff.

    Let’s be realistic, 2D games are, for the most part, a lot better than 3D games.
12. #12 NovaYoshi says:
    November 20th, 2009 at 6:17 pm

    Yeah, I prefer creating 2D games more than 3D. I grew up playing 2D platformers like Super Mario Brothers 3 and Yoshi’s Island, so they’re my favorite type of game.
13. #13 XYZW says:
    November 20th, 2009 at 6:24 pm

    I, for the most part, disagree with Ky-Guy.

    Let’s be realisticlly real, 2D games are apples and 3D games are oranges.
14. #14 Rami says:
    November 20th, 2009 at 9:15 am

    On a side note, the first GTA was a 2D game
15. #15 Zeromage says:
    November 20th, 2009 at 2:26 pm

    That’s actually stated in the article.
16. #16 Iridis says:
    November 20th, 2009 at 2:39 pm

    I don’t agree with this. 2D games should be made as a sideline to 3D games (like on the nintendo DS), but not have them all made in 2D.
    In the 80’s everyone thought that Virtural Reality was going to be all the rage, but that never took off.
    I think today is there is a much higher level of control as only large companies can afford to make them, as back then every man and their dog made console games. If we went back to that with today’s technology things would go complete off the wall and there would probably be as many games as their are pages on the internet.
    Also, back in the days of Doom and Grand Thieft Auto, those games were though of as being grossly violent and controversial.
17. #17 George says:
    November 20th, 2009 at 9:37 pm

    Look, 2D is great. But to say a 2D game is the reason for their greatness is gullibility towards markets.

    The problem with modern games is that they are all being geared for money and wide appeal. The hardcore player is left out for many releases.

    If anything has been proven, it’s that greatness can be achieved in 3D. Just look at this list.

    Legend of Zelda Ocarina of Time
    Majora’s Mask
    Twilight Princess
    Windwaker
    Shadow of the Colossus
    Guitar Hero III
    Halo 1, 2, and 3
    Mario 64
    I could go on forever, but just look at your top 100 games list.

    And Grand Theft Auto Vice City is one of the best games ever made. (San Andreas was a clusterfuck) Just try to make it clear to these guys that you have money, and they will make good games for you. That’s just how things work.
18. #18 James McCloud says:
    November 20th, 2009 at 10:40 pm

    ohhhh thats why you hate the n64
19. #19 ShavenLunatic says:
    November 20th, 2009 at 11:37 am

    problem is, I have fond memories of a lot of the old 80’s games. Yet I stick on an emulator and very few of them hold the same fun they used to.

    Yes, SOME of them are still great to this day, Death Chase for one, although that was kind of a 3d game for the Speccy), JetPac and Manic Miner… but all of the truly “stand the test of time” 2D games were, IMO, on the Amiga A500, my Amiga gaming days have never been bettered and are still fun to this day
20. #20 Alexx says:
    November 20th, 2009 at 7:51 am

    Just got the Mega Man X Collection the SNES one was pretty good. Yah 2D is cool brings back good memories when I grew up in this era. FinalFantasy 3 or 6 whatever you prefer is my favourite game of all time. Illusion of Gaia, awesome. I do like the new games like Resident Evil but SNES kicked major ass.
21. #21 AGREE says:
    November 20th, 2009 at 8:24 pm

    There’s no doubt 3D is the only way to go for a FPS. But modern 3D RPG’s are missing an important element of 2D games.

    Part of the fun in older RPG’s was exploration. In 3D games, exploration is TEDIOUS. Constantly looking at your compass to check your bearing and jumping or moving around obstacles that serve no purpose other than to look real is not fun. Walking around a town in 3D can be disorienting and painful. Going from point A to point B in 3D often feels like WORK and you just wish could run/drive/fly faster or use an autopilot.

    In oldschool RPG’s movement was performed in “blocks.” Each block could represent a mile travelled. Even in the scrolling ones, outdoor movement was often represented in scale. So you would walk through an entire forest in seconds, and perhaps have a chance encounter while there.

    In modern 3D RPG’s, in order to walk a mile, you literally have to walk a mile. And say good bye to chance encounters. Now you see 5 trolls standing on a hill meandering back and forth incessantly. Apparently they don’t have any purpose than to wait for someone to walk by. So you can walk around them, or you can attack them. For some inexplicable reason, even if you kill them, they keep respawning on the same spot.

    Regardless of how realistic the monsters look, the game play becomes very unrealistic in this regard. In terms of actually making walking around feel like work, they have it spot on.
22. #22 Flap says:
    November 20th, 2009 at 5:09 pm

    pfff. Silly discussion. Everybody knows there there can only be on type of real good games : 1D games.

    Yep, that’s interactive fiction. You read the text, a serie of symbols following each other. You can keep reading forward, or go back.
    When you interact, more text comes, and you can keep following the serie of symbols. Ahhhh… god that’s good.
23. #23 Chase357 says:
    November 20th, 2009 at 5:47 pm

    I agree with this list but only to back up the arguement that 2D games should still be made.

    3D gaming should not be completely written off. Just think about great games like The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time, Metal Gear Solid and Resident Evil 4 and try and say 3D gaming doesn’t have stories or gameplay as good as 2D games.

    Eventhough I prefer 2D gaming, you gotta be honest and realize that one isn’t better than the other. It’s all about personal taste.
24. #24 Nant14 says:
    November 20th, 2009 at 7:25 am

    They should be in 2D.Braid redefined my imagination of how interesting games must be.And it’s just a low-budget 2D game.
25. #25 Robert says:
    November 20th, 2009 at 11:31 am

    I can’t believe how many people left comments poking fun at the authors age, rather than discussing the content of the article. Perhaps the “hard-core-gamer” should reconsider their notion of “gaming,” which seems to be leaning further away from simply playing a video game to enjoy themselves; and further towards total immersion, where the player needs more and more graphics and special effects to distract themselves with, often sacrificing any real substance. “Hard-core-gamers,” if this is the case, you have much more in common with drug addicts than you do with anyone retaining the capacity to enjoy 2D games. And not even fun drug addicts. Open your minds. I’m 19, age has nothing to do with it. 2D gaming is an artform.
26. #26 XYZW says:
    November 20th, 2009 at 5:07 pm

    I’m a so called hard-core gamer but nothing like what you described. I think you are refering to what I call trash-gamers. They have big mounths with online communities, trash talk/flame/grief/troll on forums, they need more realistic games to simulate their non-existant real life because they can’t figure out what to do and need to feel like they won a gold medal at the same time.
27. #27 Ultima Online 97 says:
    November 20th, 2009 at 9:19 am

    Developers are going into 3-D because the processors are faster and they don’t have a effin’ clue what makes a good game. With the Exception of Mark Jacobs Dark Age of Camelot now that was a decent 3-D game because it stripped 3-D down to the basics. Now developers are pushed into making these crappy overly textured pieces of playdoh that give you the immersion of a trip though Mcdonalds drive thru.

    2D games were in fact better because of the soultion less=more and you could see the pixels that is what made games like Ultima Online and NES sucessfull part of Wii’s suckcess is due to
    playing games from the past go figure.

    I just finished or almost finished Zelda for the Wii what a piece of crap that game is it has it’s moments but man is that one empty game.
28. #28 FuNx says:
    November 20th, 2009 at 10:39 pm

    While a few of these are valid points, this article is basically an opinionated rant against 3D games. You seem to really hate Grand Theft Auto and Resident Evil which is fine, everybody has a right to dislike things, but to shut out an entire dimension of gaming simply because of a few titles
    is absolutely ridiculous. I’d say more but it would only mirror Stevedave’s comment above.
29. #29 Kaura says:
    November 20th, 2009 at 3:49 pm

    I feel dizzy trying to understand this logic. I mean really, wow. How stupid arguments can you have?

    “3D is bad because I go to work in 3D” Are you serious?

    “3D makes any game’s controls bad” ARE YOU SERIOUS?

    “Everyone was bored playing Super Mario 64 because it was 3D” YOU CAN NOT BE SERIOUS.

    I’ll never come here again, your only purpose for writing these is to make me angry and to spread the word.
30. #30 Frozenx2p says:
    November 20th, 2009 at 2:58 pm

    Ok i have to say , everyone remembers those old good games but yeah now they are slowly dieing out.

    I have to say most of 3D games are just about killing … kind of booring… but there are games where you need good reflexes , i mean for example Counter Strike , You need skill to survive there , i mean you will surely get bored in time but then form a team and go Clan waring , well of course there are a lot of junky 3d games…

    on the other hand there are bad 2d games BUT there are also good 2d games like those oldschool games you said , oh and a good example is TIBIA ,there you need to be extremly Skilled to play it fully , yet you can choose easier worlds where theres no PVP and it will become a lot easier.

    All in all i think there are 2d games that are worth playing , trust me… BUT there are also good 3d games such as Counter strike , Half life and such , and GTA ? it is good but its too easy … i mean the missions are way too easy… and after the missions its booring , the multiplayer for me had no point.

    well when a game is playable it doesn’t matter if its 2d or 3d !
31. #31 Jo Jack says:
    November 20th, 2009 at 12:01 pm

    I apologize if someone already touched on this, but there are far too many comments for me to feel like reading all of them.

    I’m not going to knock 3d gaming, or more realistic graphics in general.

    However -

    There was, to myself and many others, a marked drop in the “fun-factor” of games as a whole around the introduction of the PS 1.

    I believe that there are many reasons for this, but I only care to touch on one of them here.

    I’d contend that a gamer’s imagination, at one point in time, was a much more significant factor in their gaming than it is now.

    As graphics edge ever closer to photo-realism, there’s less and less room for interpretation.

    In the same way that books force the reader to imagine the story they’re reading, and movies show you EXACTLY what you’re looking at, 3d games/games that are modern graphically cull the imagination’s ability to have any influence in a similar manner.

    There’s a “cloud” effect to 8-bit (as one example) graphics where what you are looking at can be indistinct enough that your brain has some leeway in how said graphics are interpreted, and the effect that they have upon you.

    For example, I remember in Metroid for the NES, when you first take the elevator down into Norfair, and there is a statue of a guard on either side of you.

    I swear to God, they looked like big dog faces to me. Basset hounds, perhaps.

    I’m sure those too young to appreciate “classic” games are thinking “Wtf?” at this point, but hear me out.

    When you look at a cloud, what the cloud looks like, and therefor how it feels to you is determined in part BY you.

    With older games with less distinct graphics, things don’t look just like their real-life counterparts.

    People don’t look just like people. Bricks don’t look just like bricks. Animals don’t look just like animals.

    There’s less detail. Their appearance is less exact. It’s all less well defined.

    So who fills in the details? Who fills in this missing definition?

    The gamer.

    The lack of distinction in the graphics allows you to have an unconsciously collaborative relationship with the game, where the details are simply a framework for a greater and more personal imaginative and emotional picture you build from them within yourself.

    I won’t knock 3d games/games with modern graphics on their merits. Their merits are great.

    But as the graphical capabilities of modern gaming machines have expanded, the role of imagination in games has contracted.

    And all in all, I don’t believe the sacrifice was worth it.
32. #32 Jack says:
    November 20th, 2009 at 12:05 am

    3d games aren’t bad, it’s just harder to differentiate the good from the bad, and easier to throw something together to make a quick buck. take games like fallout 3, ratchet and clank, super mario 64, or Ocarina of time, and you can see that much detail can be poured into them, resulting in an amazing game.

    Not to say that 2D games are worse, but time does change. Some would argue that records sound better than CD’s. But CD’s are just an example of how time changes and how it can open up new opportunities in quality.
33. #33 MR :D says:
    November 20th, 2009 at 7:18 pm

    I love 2D games and prefer them over 3D, but after reading this article that was so full of crap I started to doubt because your statements were so stupid that they had a reverse effect and I am pretty sure that you were mostly aware of this but just could come up with anything better.
34. #34 avi says:
    November 20th, 2009 at 11:25 am

    64 sunshine and galaxy and the sonic adventure games were great they can work in 3D. Link, Snake, Fox, Captain Falcon, Kirby, NiGHTS, Bomberman, Samus, Crash Bandicoot, Pikachu and even DK can work in 3D
35. #35 avi says:
    November 20th, 2009 at 11:27 am

    O ya and Ratchet, Daxter, and plenty of other characters can 2.
36. #36 avi says:
    November 20th, 2009 at 11:27 am

    Jak not Daxter confused there.
37. #37 Stratostygo says:
    November 20th, 2009 at 8:42 pm

    I would stop playing video games if they were just 2d again

    i guess i will stick with the older 3d games
38. #38 Chanurdar says:
    November 20th, 2009 at 8:21 am

    DUDE… i dont think you have even played a 3D game

    sure GTA IV was a little over (violencediaaated….??) It had to much violence but still 2D games are great… to a point but do you really think you can make a 13 Gig 2d game???? i mean (MapleStory) Is the largest single 2D game ever and that isis an mmo but its still only like about 2 Gigs max. and its not about size but about the game play.

    Ok how bout this. For the baby boomers and mamby some people a little younger then them —-> READ BOOKS YOU 20- Y/O <– are 3D

    next thing is going to be V/R Virtual Reality. That is going to be our generation and the next generation. But the reason it includes our generation is because since were the Baby Boomers children we over populate any other generation and the natural way is everyone wants to be the same SO… we can co-op with the change and we will just migrate to V/R.

    The thing im saying is… Our books are just more high tech we make our stories with 3D non-linear games. If you dont want to play 3D games dont but dont complain and say that your jellous that no more 2D games are being made.

    Just accept what you got and dont complain for what you dont.

    PS: sorry for the spelling and bad format its 2:00 AM here and im watching tv.

    PPS: good luck with trying to stop the gameing industry!!!
39. #39 Kahless says:
    November 20th, 2009 at 7:58 pm

    It seems like your entire argument is based on comparing mediocre and average 3D games with the best of the 2D games or on personal preference. You also seem to be confusing “3D” with “Any property of modern games not shared with older games”.
40. #40 ExpSith says:
    November 20th, 2009 at 9:46 pm

    Is this farce? Please tell me this is farce. Your arguments are almost laughable, and thank God that supa fellow left a nice article detailing them so I don’t have to type them all out myself. I would not have been so offended by this if you didn’t seem to purvey this article as truth, when it’s clearly your (rather uninformed and, dare I say, BIASED) opinion.

    Looking at the recent articles (Top 5 Reasons Indie Music is So Bad, Top 10 Reasons British Music is Better than American Music) you’ve listed only leads me to believe one of two things: this entire site is satire, or you really are just that stupid and ignorant.
41. #41 Journeythroughhell says:
    November 20th, 2009 at 5:59 pm

    I am afraid, ExpSith, these guys are serious… Yup
42. #42 Journeythroughhell says:
    November 20th, 2009 at 10:24 am

    I’m enjoying myself thanks to you. This list is another nostalgia fanboy goldmine. Niiice.
    10. Simpler
    So?! “Simpler” doesn’t equal “better”.
    9. More Entertaining
    This is one of the most retarded claims I’ve ever heard. Seriously. Entertainment doesn’t depend on dimensions.
    8. More linear
    “Why is this a good thing? It gives the gamer a sense of purpose knowing that they have to go from point A to point B rather than having the relative options of going from point A to any point in a massive geographical 3D environment.”
    How the fuck would that be a good thing? What is wrong with you? Why don’t you like different approaches. Hell, I didn’t really love Crysis but I admired the freedom it gave to me. You can’t do that with 2D.
    7. More room for creativity
    Bullshit.
    6. Easier on the eyes
    Who cares, do you get fucking motion sickness or are you just so easily distracted?
    5. Loss of focus on graphics
    Look at modern XBLA 2D games. Look at Trials HD, Shadow Complex, ‘Splosion Man. Those look sweet.
    4. Smoother controlling
    Now this is not true. Controls can as easily be crippled in 2D. In fact, it happened much more often. I don’t know anything about RE but I’ve never had problems controlling GTA. But I’m not a “professional journalist”, what should I know?
    3. No more GTA’s
    Screw you, pal, I’ll play GTA 4 over Twilight Princess any day.
    2. You don’t want to play in the same dimensions you live in
    I do. What kind of reason is that?
    1. Better Games
    So not true. And even if it was, it wouldn’t have anything to do with the dimensions.
43. #43 Axe says:
    November 20th, 2009 at 8:07 am

    This article was retarded.
44. #44 ash says:
    November 20th, 2009 at 4:00 pm

    Totally retarded.. Every post is just a long list of reasons why you don’t like modern games, SEGA or reality