That's why I have a Wii. Only buy the games with shotty motion controls. Totally pwnin in Halo wii!

I think it's one more point leaning in the "3DS is getting shelved as soon as I get a Vita" column. I got the 3DS because gaming in 3D seemed awesome. I intend only to play it with 3D on, barring showing someone else a game/them looking on my screen for a few minutes. Virtual console games and the like I understand--but if I'm paying 40 bucks (........) for a 3DS game, it should be in 3D.

It's called the 3DS.

Not saying every game needs to use every feature (not every Wii game features balance board, Wii Motion Plus, and Wii Speak functionality) but hell--it's THE feature. Without 3D it's just a Gamecube with less buttons and a sloppy control stick...which wouldn't be an issue if there wasn't a PS3 with an unchanged amount of buttons and an infinitely more capable (conjecture) control stick right around the corner.

This makes me happy. 3D is just a gimmick that adds nothing to the gameplay. No sense every developer wasting their time on it with every game they put out.

Nintendo or most any 3rd party will most likely only not use the 3D is the game is heavily tilt-oriented. Just look at Cubic Ninja, if you play with gyroscope it doesn't display in 3D. Pac-Man Tilt from Pac-Man and Galaga Dimensions doesn't support 3D at all because of the tilting. I can't imagine any developer not making their 3DS game 3D just because. If someone don't want it in 3D, there is a switch right there for you. It would make zero sense to cut 3D for no reason.

We think alike bro. c^_~b

Aw, c'mon guys. We understand that YOU don't like the 3D and whatnot. But does that have to mean you wish for developers to take it away from everybody just because YOU don't like them? That's a little selfish, don't you think? It's optional anyway, so what does it matter to you?

Who said they didn't want 3D to be used? The argument here is that it's not absolutely necessary for EVERY 3DS game to have it

No it's more like "hey guys, here are some facts that EA said and that has been reported all over the internet. This information is fact and your opinion that it isn't true is like me saying 2+2 doesn't equal 4 when its very established that it does equal 4.

Ok well if this topic is about EA slamming 3d and the 3DS then why do you have an article talking about how Iwata wants companies to use the other features of the 3ds. Not just use the 3d even if their game doesn't need it.

3D is a gimmick. But it does add to the game. Depends on how well it's used and the like. But I'm still waiting for that game to really impress me when using the 3D slider. Zelda OoT is the best one I've seen. Can't wait for Mario Kart, Kid Icarus and Mario 3D Land especially.

Lol that was awesome.

I love 3D--in the proper context. In Zelda for example I get horrible double-ghosting with three Links running around before my eyes. It's also such a pain to hold the system in the perfect spot for the added depth which makes no gameplay difference. I would have much rather had Grezzo focused their time and energy on refining and enhancing the graphics and adding more valuable features than incorporating what is to me, meaningless depth (oxymoron alert). In Super Mario 3D Land, on the other hand, the 3D looks fantastic and I can't wait to get my hands on it and play with the slider all the way up the whole time.

Bottom line: stereoscopic 3D is a gimmick like motion control and the Wii U's touch screen controller (gimmick = "A trick or device intended to attract attention, publicity, or business" which 3D undeniably is; it's one of the 3DS' unique selling points. Another definition is "a unique or quirky special feature that makes something 'stand out' from its contemporaries," also an apt description of Nintendo's latest innovations) which has its place but shouldn't be required for games that aren't suited to it (Street Fighter for example). We're not trying to rain on your 3D-lovin' parade, but rather maintain and enhance its value by having it not become overused and detrimental to games so that the gimmick is popular and not abused.

The thread is about not using 3D on a system marketed around 3D. EA's comments fit with this very well.

This.

Though, to be honest, the 3D is hard on the hardware, so games that are designed to not use it are going to look better and have a steadier framerate. Plus I'll take gyro controls over eye-straining 3D any day.

This is what I meant all along, and by that I mean @lzbirdboy's post.

Yea but that doesn't mean every company has to use 3d. That's what nintendo was saying. There are many other features games can use. The main reason they marketed towards 3d is because that's the biggest feature. Since they can't show 3d on tv they had to find a way to show it. But that doesn't mean every game has to use 3d. They aren't stopping using 3d. They just want other conpanies to know not to make a crappy game just because you wanted to use 3d.

"3D" effects are outstanding, and they really add a lot to game immersion. The problem is that "3D" is terribly bad implemented by Nintendo, where you are always depending on that magic spot and if you move your head a single degree away then you simply cannot play (100% incompatible with games depending on gyros, and the lack of a second analog pad means you will depend on them). "3D" works fine with glasses, or there where you and the screen are always in fixed positions, something that obviously cannot apply to a handheld.

The only potential fix, if there is any, would be to have the 3DS camera recognizing your face's position, locating your eyes, and self adjusting the 3D effect depending on that after some pre-calibration. Sadly the crappy 3DS CPU and minimum RAM will hardly have enough power to do that process and run a game at the same time.

This bothers me. If it's not in 3D then why is it called the 3DS? A 3D system that plays 2D games. THAT makes sense...

Doesn't bother me a bit. I'm perfectly happy with the idea of games that use the extra power under the hood as opposed to relying on 3D effects to carry them.

If the non-3d 3DS games will be good no problemo.

Here's the thing:

3D Glasses are still on your head. Let's say it's floating in front of your face. If you move your head left or right, you're going to lose the full 3D effect because you're out of the sweet-spot. That's why the 3DS suffers from this problem as well as manufacturers trying 3D with no Glasses Televisions not really working out for them. Eventually, it'll be possible to view 3D from different angles without the need for glasses. It just has yet to happen.

Clever idea for recognizing your face position, but it'd be much more easier and inexpensive if a special 3D screen were implemented in the later revisions of the 3DS. Only time will tell when such a thing happens.