• werdwood93 - July 5, 2010 10:02 p.m.

    who cares about 3d?
  • JimmyCooldaddy - July 5, 2010 9:39 p.m.

    3d makes it look hella real. It's like the holy grail of gaming. We're in exciting times. Can't wait for Killzone 3 in 3d!
  • Hayseyboy - July 5, 2010 6:59 p.m.

    Better Graphics. 3D isn't a miraculous milestone, the goofy 3d glasses and such have been around for years, just it coming to consoles is the only new thing, and I personally think it could work, but there are some people out there who do not have 3D vision, it doesn't seem fair on them to be honest, and considering I'm one of them, better graphics would be marvellous
  • Cyberninja - July 5, 2010 6:52 p.m.

    i want the 3d because it would along for interesting new ways to play puzzle games at least
  • bsoxfan554 - July 5, 2010 6:30 p.m.

    better graphics obviously. 3D is just a dumb trend so what that the thing looks like its coming at u thats stupid.
  • wormytables - July 5, 2010 6:19 p.m.

    there are some good, clever, ways to make 3d happen for a lot less than the cost they are implying - crysis 2 'just does' 3d at a tiny cost. if you can use pixel shaders you can make 3d incredibly cheap - it may take 30ms to render a 2d frame, but with a well done 3d implementation it will only take 31ms ... So this delta in performance is a lie - don't accept crap looking games just because they're 3d.
  • JohnnyMaverik - July 5, 2010 6:17 p.m.

    @ Wootles - 2 hours 26 minutes ago "but choosing between prettier graphics and 3D seems a bit silly since 3D makes the graphics better " No it doesn't, making something 3D doesn't automatically make it look better, it's not like pushing a "make this shit pretty button". If anything making something in 3D that still looks good is far harder with this kind of tech than with your regular, polygonal 3D.
  • Sabtos - July 5, 2010 6:09 p.m.

    Better graphics. I won't be buying a new tv in about 10 years, and if I do happen to need one it will be a smaller one (because I would assume I'd be living alone and on a smaller budget) and definitely no where near as expensive as a 3D ready tv.
  • Koouunn - July 5, 2010 5:50 p.m.

    3d is just a phase, graphics is what we need right now
  • Metroidhunter32 - July 5, 2010 5:43 p.m.

    Graphics big time. But the 3DS looks to pull off both well enough so the point becomes irrelevent.
  • BennY - July 5, 2010 5:13 p.m.

    Definitely better graphics
  • BodyDamage - July 5, 2010 5:04 p.m.

    I think in the handheld world i would rather have the 3d than a slightly more polished visual pallet. it wont look as good as a home console regardless so it'd be neat to have the 3d. On a home console though i would much rather have a game look its total best than be lesser and 3d. HD is yum.
  • reverandglass - July 5, 2010 5:04 p.m.

    if the question is 3d or better graphics on a handheld (such as the 3ds) it's 3d all the way. Handheld consoles are about portability and have always been not as powerful as their home based counterparts. I'd question the use of 3d, on say Killzone 3, though if it turned out it would look better without.
  • Fata1Stryke - July 5, 2010 4:48 p.m.

    I'm inclined to say better graphics, but I like that they're doing something different with this and if they do the 3D well I have no problem with it. Like others have said though, neither matter if the gameplay isn't worth crap.
  • JADENkOTOR - July 5, 2010 4:31 p.m.

    Balls its a Nintendo handheld. The graphics will never be good because they don't care about graphics and if they did they still wouldn't be good. Bring on the 3D.
  • NeonSalmon - July 5, 2010 4:05 p.m.

    don't really care graphics aren't a big thing for me I can happily sit down and play a game with N64 standard graphics if the gameplay is good enough
  • 510BrotherPanda - July 5, 2010 4:02 p.m.

    Seeing as I keep hearing you still have a Standard Definition TV, Matt, I don't care about either great graphics or 3D. Until video games look as good as things I can see in real life, I won't get an "HD" console. reCAPTCHA: official plebeian
  • kung_fu_russ - July 5, 2010 3:54 p.m.

    Better graphics. Ask most devs these days, and they'll even admit that people will forfeit framrate for better graphics.If the game gets busy, and the framerate goes mad, people feel like they're doing well, as the machine is 'struggling to keep up with the player'. Idiots.
  • FNG - July 5, 2010 3:53 p.m.

    At first I thought you would talk about the PS3, and I said graphics. But I think 3d is the better choice for the handheld.
  • Wootles - July 5, 2010 3:48 p.m.

    Pardon me, but choosing between prettier graphics and 3D seems a bit silly since 3D makes the graphics better in the first place. What's next, higher resolution vs anti-aliasing topics? Greater texture size vs more onscreen objects? I'm also wondering why people are so negative about 3D in games while most of them never even played a modern game in 3D.

Showing 21-40 of 62 comments

Join the Discussion
Add a comment (HTML tags are not allowed.)
Characters remaining: 5000


Connect with Facebook

Log in using Facebook to share comments, games, status update and other activity easily with your Facebook feed.