# So what do we think of the Nintendo 3DS?



## Lemmy

It's finally here, folks. Actually it's been here over a week, but I wasn't here then, so... um... Let me start over. 

The Nintendo 3DS has finally hit the stores, and I'm sure several of you have one by now. For those who don't know it, it's the very first handhelp console that can show true 3D graphics without needing any kind of glasses or other equipment. But it doesn't stop there! There's one camera facing the player and two cameras facing the other way, so you can take 3D photos with it. Which is a bit pointless until you can print 3D photos, but still a cool feature. And don't forget the gyroscope, letting you control some games by tilting the controller. Pretty cool in Super Monkey Ball. (a 'guide a ball through the maze' thingy).

The question is of course: What do we think of it? Was it the revolution we hoped it would be, or did Nintendo fail spectaculary? And how will it stand up against the PSP2? Or Sony's Playstation Mobile, or NGP, or whatever they end up calling it? It's too early to tell the last part, but I can say what I feel about the 3DS compared to itself and the regular DS. It's awesome. Sort of.

To get to the biggest selling point, the 3D screen looks pretty stunning when it works. Right now there are too few games to really take advantage of it, with games like Ghost Recon: Shadow Wars and Super Street Fighter IV: 3D Edition that might as well have been 2D games. Street Fighter is indeed just a port from the PS3/xbox360/PC-version, with some added features and slightly less amazing backgrounds. Still, if that's just a launch game, I can't wait for games we'll get in a year or two.

Still, it's not perfect. The screen is pretty good, but only if you look directly at it. If you move the console a bit too much, you will loose the 3D effect and risk getting a blurry picture. When I flew under a bridge in Pilotwings Resort and tilted the 3DS a bit, the bridge literally moved, making me crash into it. (or to be precise, it didn't _actually _move, it just looked like it.) And then there's the battery. Think about it for a bit. The 3DS is about the same size as a DS, but with a bigger top-screen showing two pictures at once (to get the 3D effect), has great use for the WiFi like Street Pass etc, has three cameras and so on. Of course the battery won't be nearly as good. In fact some people claim it lasts as short as three or four hours in 3D mode with wi-fi enabled. Maybe even less. In 2D mode with the wifi turned off, it can last as long as six or seven hours, through probably less. It's not a problem if you can connect an adapter to it and get power that way, but if you have to stick to the batteries like on a long flight, it's not much.

All in all, I love it. The DS is one of my favorite consoles, and the 3DS is even better. What's not to like? 

What about you?


----------



## CyBeR

I find it rather impressive how defensive some Nintendo hardcore fans are of this little handheld. They made a lot of fuss about the PSP's 4-5 hours of battery life compared to a DS and not Nintendo pulls this on them. Hehe, the wheel turns. 

My girlfriend is a bit Nintendo nut and she loves her DSLite...I'm thinking of getting her a 3DS for Christmas this year.
For myself...honestly...can't find a single reason to actually be interested in it. Sure, there's gonna be a new *Mario*, *Zelda* and whatnot but I'll just probably borrow hers if need be (that is, if a new 2D *Castlevania* comes out on it). 

For the time being...I think Nintendo is asking a lot of fans with the current line-up. I honestly would have expected a lot more from them, at least a new Mario game at launch, be it even a revamped version of an old one. 

For myself...I'm waiting for the NGP (Whole different thing from the Xperia Phone, aka the Playstation Phone).  It's what I'd expect out of a new iteration of a console: visual upgrade, functionality and a good line-up prepared. I'm hoping Sony will have their wits about them to actually come out with some good apps straight out the gate. If they do that, I think Nintendo may take their first ever beating in the handheld market.


----------



## Cayal

Meh, I'll stick to my PS3 and it's 3D. Better graphics, better controller, better games.


----------



## Lemmy

I'm not exactly a hardcore Nintendo-fan, but use my PC and PS3 much more than the 3DS. And while I do have a Wii, I haven't used it in months. I had an xbox360 too, but it broke. Twice. So I eventually got a new one, but it broke. Twice. As for the PSP... that's a different story. It works, but I don't care. The screen is good, but the rest... meh. It's especially the analog stick I hate. It's placed in a really awkward position, so I can't use it more than ten minutes before my hand goes numb.

Personally, I think Nintendo are the masters of handheld consoles and games. The DS was my favorite until the 3DS, and it has quickly stepped up and taken the throne. No other handhelds are anywhere near them. But the Wii... the idea is good, but where are the games?

The PS3 is pretty good too, and Sony does have some great ideas. The problem is they want to focus on 3D as well, but forget that we need both a 3D-TV and 3D-glasses to use it. I don't see the point in a 3D-TV, and even if I did, I wouldn't want to put on glasses every time I want to play a game. The PS3 is great for 2D graphics, but 3D? Why bother? 3D doesn't even enough to justify the glasses, much less the pricetag on a new TV. But that's the beauty of the 3DS. It doesn't need anything else. Everything you need is right there.

And it's not just about the 3D, either. So all in all, I love it. It's a shame if you don't, but that's your loss.


----------



## CyBeR

Lemmy, you're making a rather big mistake. Sony have not announced so far a SINGLE game that would be ONLY in 3D. You can play them simply, on any TV you like, if you do not desire a Bravia in your home (expensive as all Hell). 

I play old NES, SNES, GB, GBC, GBA, Atari Lynx, Arcade, Neo-Geo, DOS, Sega Genesis, PSX and EVEN a couple of N64 games on my PSP. The online community has done literal wonders with the machine and I really can't imagine any other handheld that can offer as much, for such a low price. Old games really look quite amazing on the PSP3000 screen. 
Best thing?
You don't need to use the thumb stick for most of the oldies. 

The problem with the 3DS is the current line-up. I've yet to see something worth having so I can't really justify it to myself if I were to get one. Sure, the PS3 had a very bad launch line-up as well (EXCEPT for *Resistance* and *Heavenly Sword*) but what it offered as functionality besides everything else made up for that. 

I wouldn't say that Nintendo are the masters of handheld tech as much as they are masters of marketing said tech and choosing their selling points. 
I'm seeing the sales of the 3DS going higher and higher. I'm quite curious to see how they'll hold up for the next few weeks.


----------



## Lemmy

I love my PS3, so how am I making a mistake by not getting a 3D-TV? If I want 3D, I've got a 3DS. And sure, the launch lineup looks pretty bad, but I've spent hours in Ghost Recon, had a lot of fun in Pilotwings, ejoy Street Fighter a lot and even love to relax with Lego Star Wars 3. None of them are "special" in any way, but they are all pretty fun.

As for a line-up worth buying a 3DS for, there's plenty on the way if you care to wait a bit. Just to mention a few on top of my head, there's...

- Metal Gear Solid 3: Naked Snake
- Kingdom Hearts: Dream Drop Distance
- Dragon Quest 3D
- Final Fantasy 3D
- Paper Mario 3D (a 2D game in real 3D? Shoult be interesting.)
- Super Mario 3D
- Mario Kart 3D
- Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time 3D (many say it's the best game ever made, and we're getting a full 3D remake)
- Resident Evil: The Mercenaries 3D (Mercenaries was originally an unlockable bonus feature in Resi 4, but it got so popular they are making a real game for the 3DS)
- Resident Evil: Revelations (short version: they are making it mainly to scare the crap out of you.) 

That's ten games right there. Sure not all of them are interesting for everyone, but everyone should be able to find at least one or two games there?  And there are far more games on the way, of course.

Personally, I love the 3DS. It's a great system already, and don't forget the DSi Ware, 3DS Ware and Virtual Console coming in May as a free update. It's already excellent, and it's only getting better and better. And then we get great games for it, too.


----------



## CyBeR

I may have misunderstood something there it would seem. I thought you were referring that they'll be launching games EXCLUSIVELY in 3D so that you'd be forced to get an overly expensive TV and set of glasses. If that was not the case, I apologize for the rash post. 

You see...there's the problem with that line-up: most of them are ports of older games, or rehashes of old concepts. It's like going to the *Star Wars* films AGAIN just to see them in 3D: nice experience because they're inherently good, but does the 3D justify the price again? 

Nothing wrong with that, of course. The NGP current confirmed games are, the greater part of them, new iterations of old franchises, but with some interesting ideas about connecting them to the PS3 counter parts. 

I'm so far not convinced a 3DS is something worth having. As I've said, a new 2D *Castlevania* game and I may JUST change my mind. But so far...neah.


----------



## Lemmy

No, what I meant was I don't see a point in 3D on normal TVs yet. 3D-TVs are too expensive for us mere mortals, and even if I could afford one, I wouldn't want one anyway until I can ditch the glasses. With the 3DS, I can. So for me, I prefer 2D games on 2D consoles and 2D and 3D games on my 3DS. 

Another 2D Castlevania? Hell, yeah! Imagine if they could make it like Symphony of the Night, Portrait of Ruin and all those, but in a graphic style like Trine? Now that would be awesome!  I wouldn't mind a new 2D Metroid like Metroid Fusion and Metroid: Zero Hunt either. Especially if it's made in 3D, on a 2D axis like Trine.


----------



## Jake Reynolds

I think, like with the Wii, that Nintendo is banking on a gimmick payoff. Given their success with the Wii, that may not be a bad thing, but man, the first kid whose parents sue for eyesight problems and it could go down the tubes. I'm waiting for NGP (PSP2) myself. Have never had a problem with the analogue on PSP, except to wish that were two of them so that every PSone and PS2 game could be ported. 

I always kind of wish the best to Nintendo, because they drive the gaming industry and keep Sony and Microsoft on their toes. Anyways, I've no gripe with it, each to their own. And though I love Resident Evil and Final Fantasy, the titles won't make me buy a 3DS, especially given that they'll probs come out on PSP2 anyways.


----------



## CyBeR

Lemmy said:


> Another 2D Castlevania? Hell, yeah! Imagine if they could make it like Symphony of the Night, Portrait of Ruin and all those, but in a graphic style like Trine? Now that would be awesome!  I wouldn't mind a new 2D Metroid like Metroid Fusion and Metroid: Zero Hunt either. Especially if it's made in 3D, on a 2D axis like Trine.



No no no...keep *Castlevania* in beautiful 2D sprites. I've seen Dracula X Chronicles on the PSP and I really did not buy the whole 2.5D debacle it had going on. 
I'm nearing the end of my...5th finished *Castlevania* game I believe, on the PSP. So far got through *Symphony of the night* (the PSOne port), *Castlevania 1*(completed is a very very wide way of saying it, could not get past Dracula), *Super Castlevania 4* (my game died at some point because the ROM was crooked), *Harmony of Dissonance* and *Aria of Sorrow* (almost done with this one, just need a bit of leveling up). None of these experiences would have been improved in ANY way by getting them in 2.5D.


----------



## Lemmy

Heh, don't worry. Want to list all the Castlevania-games we've played? This could take a while. 

- Castlevania (NES)
- Super Castlevania 4 (SNES)
- Symphony of the Night (Xbox360 through XBLA)
- Lament of Innocence (PS2)
- Dracula X Chronicles (PSP)
- Circle of the moon (GBA)
- Harmony of Dissonance (GBA)
- Aria of Sorrow (GBA)
- Dawn of Sorrow (DS)
- Portrait of Ruin (DS)
- Order of Ecclesia (DS)
- Lords of Shadow (PS3)
- The adventure rebirth (Wii)

You were saying?  I love the Castlevania-series and definitely want more of it. Lament of Innocence and Lords of Shadow aren't bad, but they feels too much like Devil May Cry clones for me, and not like a proper Castlevania.

Castlevania, Super Castlevania 4 and Dracula X Chronicels are pretty good, but too linear for me. I strongly prefer the Metrovania-style gameplay. That's why I loved Metroid: Zero Mission and Metroid Fusion, but hated the Metroid Prime-games. Metroid: Other M was fun, but had too much of a identity crisis for me.

My point is I have had a lot of fun with Metrovania-games, and yes, proper 2D is much better than bad 2.5D. But that said, I still think proper 2.5D is better than proper 2D. Remember a little game called Dragon Quest? They worked really hard to bring the 2D games into the 3D era with DQ8, but they did it, and it looks wonderful. Why can't they do that with Castlevania as well?

But 2D, 2.5D or 3D, the gameplay is the most important part. Order of Ecclesia is pretty darn good and one of the best in the series, but what holds it back is that it's too linear. But as for the GBA and DS games, I don't really care which one I play. They are all brilliant, mainly because they are so similar.


----------



## CyBeR

Let us not compare a classic JRPG like Dragon Quest to a platformer like Castlevania. You could easily bring something like Final Fantasy or Star Ocean out of 2D into 3D, but it's not quite the same soup as bringing an action game defined by a few set characteristics into an extra dimension. 
You said it yourself, the 3D Castlevania games added nothing to the series except for similarities with other bigger and better action games. Adding an extra half dimension usually can't help in any ways just that it may seem "prettier" for the time being. 
Castlevania is best defined by the gameplay it has. Whip attacks, sword attacks, a 2D castle that makes no reasonable sense and exploration (at this time). You can't bring that into 3D without ridicule (even Mario had to renounce quite a bit to come into 3D and I still consider most of the old Mario games to be more entertaining than the new 3D ones). 

The 2D aspect of the game work wonderfully with the animated sprites. Those give the game personality and identity in a genre that's seeing quite the boom lately. Do we the series to fade to obscurity or do we want it to stand tall on what it was built upon? 

I'm a late bloomer to this series (started working on it about a year and something back). But I'm making good headway through it and I can't see it being improved by better graphics.


----------



## Lemmy

CyBeR said:


> Castlevania is best defined by the gameplay it has. Whip attacks, sword attacks, a 2D castle that makes no reasonable sense and exploration (at this time).



Have you tried Order of Ecclesia? It's one of the best in the series, and yet it has none of that. First of all, the main character is a woman using magic, so there aren't really any weapons at all. Sort of. Instead of using a sword, she summons a sword in front of her and so on, but a lot of the magic doesn't have anything to do with traditional weapons. There is a castle later in the game, but you start outside it and go through a lot of other levels first. In a linear path, of course. You can't really explore much on your own, other than inside some of the levels.

And then there's the first games, up to Circle of the moon on GBA. All of them were quite linear games without much reason for exploration. That didn't come until the GBA og DS games, aka the Metrovania-games.

The biggest problem with Lords of Shadow is that while you do have a whip and the main character is called Belmont, it doesn't feel like Castlevania. All the enemies are new. The enviroments are new. The gameplay is new.

Take a look at Resident Evil 4. The series came to an end with RE: Zero on GameCube, so there was no real reason to continue. When they finally did, they gave us a game set in Spain with a new story, new enemies, even a new main character. (it's technically Leon from RE2, but he looks different, acts different, even has a new job). As a result, RE4 isn't bad, but it has nothing to do with Resident Evil. Then we got RE5, which was mostly a joke. But we'll be getting Resident Evil: Revelation later this year, and while it uses an engine similar to the one in RE4 and 5, it's definitely an old-school Resident Evil.

The same goes for Castlevania, like it or not. Lament of Innocence and Lords of Shadow have very little to do with Castlevania, but that has nothing to do with them being 3D. If they had been 2D, they would still suck. If Order of Ecclesia had been 3D, it would still be a great Castlevania-game. It has everything to do about the gameplay and staying true to the lore, and that's why I want a 2.5D or 3D Castlevania. If it stays true to the lore, it can be awesome.


----------



## CyBeR

I have just started on *Order of Eclesia*, and however you want to define it, you still use weapons. Even if every game in this series finds a new shtick for itself, the substrate is always the same: equip bigger, better equipment / spells / souls / magic books until you're finally ready to go toe to toe with Dracula / whoever the bad guy ends up being. 

Anyways, I was over generalizing in my previous post. If there's need, I'll go into detail on that. 

You're missing my point: 2D is not WHAT the game is, it's WHAT gives it the personality it has and the charm. People hated Bionic Commando but loved the ReArmed remake, although the ideas were the same. You can't say that Lords of shadow or Lament of Innocence would be just as bad in 2D because you can't judge them on the same principles. 

But you did offer an argument that actually supports mine: the 3D games lost identity. Yes, it has to do with the 3D. Most of the enemies in the 2D games just won't work in 3D that well (Oubouros for example). 3D is just as constrained as 2D is, and 2.5D is just a shtick that offers too little that's actually new or interesting about it. You can jump in the foreground or background, or go into first person or what not...but it add NOTHING by itself. Worse yet, it cheapens the experience by the simple fact that in itself it's cheap and easy to make. 
I would much rather play BlazBlue for its visuals than I would play Marvel vs Capcom 3, although the former is clearly more visually engaging. But BlazBlue is the one with more care shown and the more personality, which in part stems from HOW it's made to look. 

Resident Evil 4 was good BECAUSE it went away from the confines of the previous games which, in my own personal opinion, were crap. But going away from that was what gave it wings to soar.
Castlevania is built on an already solid foundation. The 2D fundamentals are solid and the gameplay, because it varies between iterations, is always kept pretty fresh. There is no valid reason to go away from that to a gimmicky, cheap experience.

Own 2 cents, of course.


----------



## Lemmy

I think Super Mario is a good example of what we are discussing. When Super Mario 64 was released, it had to drop some of the better parts of the 2D games to be possible. And worse, many people said it was the end of the 2D platformers forever. We had Mario in 3D now, so why would anyone want to go back to 2D? But then we got New Super Mario Bros Wii, a rather old-school 2D Mario-game. And guess what? It was awesome. For a while, at least. In the mean time, we had gotten Super Mario Galaxy, often rated the best Super Mario-game ever. Some even say the best game ever, no matter the platform or genre. But NSBW proved that while 3D platformers can be awesome, don't forget about 2D platformers either.

I think what people forget is that 2D and 3D are in many ways very similar, but they are very different beasts. What works in a 2D game might not work in a 3D game, and vice versa. And that's what you should remember when considering a 3D Castlevania. It can definitely work, but it would have to focus both on being Castlevania-game and a 3D-game. It's not a random 3D game. It's not a 2D Castlevania. It's a 3D Castlevania. If they get both parts right, it can be awesome. Sadly that has yet to happen. But some say, perhaps.


----------



## CyBeR

I do believe we've carried quite a bit offtopic here from the discussion on the 3DS. I'll pick this up again in a dedicated topic in a few days if that's alright with you. It's a stimulating discussion.


----------



## Lemmy

Yeah, this topic could almost be renamed 'What do we think of 2d vs 3d Castlevania'.


----------

