I know this is a broad topic, but hopefully that generates some great discussion for all sorts of video game series. Do you like 2D or 3D games more? Which one have you played more of overall?

This question isn't one that I expect an answer for, but have you played any 2.5D games?

For me, I lean more towards 3D games because they have more replay value in my opinion. Also, they give me much more to do than I usually see in a 2D game. As for which one I've played more of, I've actually played more 2D games since I started out with those. They used to be the only ones I was interested in exploring and gaining skill in.

I don't recall playing any 2.5D games, but I have played a 2.5D hack of a 3D game, which was greatly unique.

For me it really goes back and forth. There have been a lot of good games in both. I've seen some older games I would love to see go into the 3D world. On the other hand, I've played 3D games that because of the camera with 3D made me want to break my controller. I'm sure I'm not alone there.

Droog : Lol yes you aren't alone, I get annoyed at the camera in 3D games easily. I didn't even think about that, 2D games getting a 3D remake. That would be no doubt amazing and I'd be interested.

I prefer 3D games a little more, but I think that largely has something to do with the Playstation 2 and Nintendo Gamecube being two of my favorite consoles, also because of certain genre preferences. I really like Action RPG, First-Person Shooter and Racing. Don't get me wrong, I also love a lot of Sega Genesis,
Nintendo Gameboy Advance, Gameboy Color games like Sonic the Hedgehog, Pokémon and The Legend of Zelda: Oracle of Ages and Oracle of Seasons, as well as arcade games like Galaga, Pac-Man and Metal Slug. But for me, being mostly a Playstation 2 and Gamecube gamer, 3D is my preference.

I will say that some genres work better in one or the other. In my opinion, Sonic the Hedgehog shouldn't have ever gone 3D. The Legend of Zelda works in both, but I don't think the 2D and 3D games can be reasonably compared since they're almost entirely different. And, obviously, First Person Shooters and racers just work better in 3D.

I can't really say I have much of a concept of what 2.5D is, or what an example of such a game would be. It's something I'm interested in, though.

m0ssb3rg935 : Oh hey, you like Galaga and Pac-Man too. Woohoo!

I didn't know how rare 2.5D games were when I made this thread, so I'm glad I know how to explain it. Simply put, it's a game with 2D gameplay (sidescrolling and only going left and right) in a 3D environment. I hope 2.5D becomes more common because I think it would be great for retro gamers that want something out of the ordinary.

Oh. Yeah, I know what kind of game you're referring to, kinduh. Things like Super Smash Bros. where you have full character models and a 3D stage, and optionally a backdrop of sorts. What about games like Soul Caliber and Tekken? I feel like those games are pretty much 3D ans that the side scrolling is really just all camera angles. Would things like that qualify as 2.5D?

m0ssb3rg935 : Yeah, Smash Bros. would count. I was also referring to actual objects and scenery being 3D instead of just a backdrop. I suppose it's more complicated than I originally thought but I figured it would be a great topic to bring up.

Pacman+Mariofan : Cool, I'm glad it's not just me. While, I love it in sports games. In God of War, as much as I love that game. The camera angle could be so bad at times. 

I don't think I have a preference when it comes to games. It all depends on what I feel like playing from an old 2D platformer or older game with 2D to 3D adventure games. When it comes to 2.5D games, I don't really know what can classify as 2.5D from what I use to play or have played before. I think the one thing I played in that dimension was Mario World 2.

I would say that 3D games are probably better in nearly ever single format except for maybe platformers and metroidvania games. 

Platformers really struggled to get 3D right and it's a very hard genre to do well, especially if you are remaking a game from the past.... just look at Yooka Laylee and the new Dark souls.... I mean crash games....

It really depends on the game I'm playing.

For example, I preferred playing the older Pokémon games on their original 2D format, it was simpler and just more Pokémon. Also side scrollers I prefer to be 2D as apposed to 3D.

Racing, shooting, fighting, and everything else I prefer to be in 3D, as the extra dimension normally allows game makers to make graphics and even gameplay better and more detailed then they were able to do before.

I've also never even heard of a 2.5D game.

I thought 2.5D was a 2D game with simulated 3D movement, like Legend of Zelda, or Toejam & Earl. You know, top down so you can move up, down, left, and right. I could be wrong, but that's how I've always taken it.


That said, I prefer 3D in almost all cases, but there are exceptions. Much like m0ss, I think Sonic is much better in 2D, even though I'm not a fan of either. Toejam & Earl works best as a 2.5D game (if my understanding of 2.5D is correct), and so on. In platformers I like 2D and 3D, but so few people get 3D platformers right. In just about everything else 3D is by far the superior in my opinion.

Eirinn : I think that's a better description of what 2.5D is. When I tried explaining it to Barathemos, my post got eaten up XD

I can't imagine 3D platformers ever becoming common, that sounds hard to make.

For me, it really depends on what the game is trying to do. If its a game about skill mastery or demands mechanical precision. 2D is definitely the better option (though some 3D games do it alright). If its a narrative driven game or a game that features a lot of systems (like physics and AI and the like) and open ended design (like say the original Deus Ex and System Shocks) I think 3D is a superior approach. 

That being said there's a place for both perspectives, and as long as the game uses it's chosen dimension correctly I don't really care what viewpoint I'm playing the game at as long as it helps compliment and works with the games design. 

G@mehe@d : Wow, that's a brilliant point. I didn't think of it that way before! Now that I can think about it that way, I can say I would much rather have any card/Pinball games in 2D because they are meant to provide a basic atmosphere and easy controls.

tornadocam : Yeah, my eyes are pretty sensitive so I can't watch 3D movies for long periods of time. They can give me headaches. I don't think the same thing would ever happen with 3DS games because that isn't a giant screen looking like it's right in your face. But my 3DS's screen is almost off its hinges so I haven't played those games anyway.

I'm only 17 but I've been an old school gamer from the first moment I played Pac-Man.

I mostly like 2D games more. I either don't play 3D games enough to be wowed by it, or the stuff I see in a 3D game just doesn't really appeal to me enough.

There are a lot of games in both 2D as well as 3D. Though I personally like to go with 3D. You might decide according to the game of your interest. I mostly like to play Pokemon Sun and Dark souls.

I have found I enjoy 3D for games like the 3DS ports of Mario 64 and Starfox. Other more detailed games, like Resident Evil, I prefer in 2D there is just to much to look at to stare at the 3D all the time. I have also found that traditional 3D and Virtual Realtity gear should not be mixed unless you can handle some serious motion sickness issues.