Ratchet and Clank: All 4 One!.....duhh thats why i am on xbox`s side now....

Don't get me wrong here, I'm not saying all 3D is terrible. Developers have gone to greater lengths at developing techniques to get a better outcome of 3D on a 2D screen. however, the original post of mine was talking about disappointment of some 1st generation 3D games compared to their predecessors, and justly so. 3D was still incredibly primitive back at the time, but it WAS seen as the future in graphics, so I generally refer to it as "The stepback we had to have", or else the gaming industry would have stagnated on the 2D platform without proper R&D put towards 3D.

In a way, motions controls of this gen are like the 3D of the N64/PSX era. They both draw a larger audience to the gaming industry. They're both a necessary step in order to advance the gaming industry. They both required an initial step back in terms of their functionality compared to their predecessor (1st gen 3D vs 16bit 2D and Motion controls vs the controller), and in order to make those initial steps, certain parts in games had to be made easier to cater for it (3D had Mario able to hang from cliff edges, Zelda series got Z targeting, Sonic got the homing attack, etc. For motion controls, we simply need to look at Twilight Princess vs Skyward Sword. The enemies in SS are a lot more....tolerant of the player standing in front of them and trying to get the movement right. But once again, theyre both necessary steps, despite the initial drawback. 3D has definitely gotten better since it started, not only in terms of detail in the graphics, but also programming techniques to help. However, there is STILL work to be done. As I mentioned before, there are still games that have you struggling with the camera, and things like that are what destroys the player immersion. 2D in a way is different. You can't say "Oh, I fell down that cliff because of the camera angle", no, one falls down cliffs in 2D worlds because they're a dumbass, there's no way to sugarcoat it.

is not about beauty, its about the experience, of course 2d graphics can be more beautiful (dat kirby!) but 3d graphics provide an enhanced experience.
I played Oot, then i played Alttp and i was a bit disappointed , the content was great truth be said.
I prefer jrpgs with 2d graphics, cause they are about storytelling and well written lines, zelda is not about that, i dont feel like going back to 2d zelda while i would love to play a ultra detailed 2d FF .

I was thinking all day about how I should have added in a comparison to motion controls. The only thing I would add is 2D to 3D is much more important than analog to motion. Anyway, some early 3D were atrocious, but I still love the PS1 Final Fantasy games and other 3D and 2D mixed RPGs/games. Someone shoud make a few more of those instead of the mostly 2D or 3D only titles out now. FF7's battle was so much better than thier 2D older brother, but I loved the use of 2D backgrounds using a 3D charcter to allow you to travel in mapped depth. Way better than what 2D only could pull off at the time. Remember Wild Arms 3D battle graphics? Now talk about bad, they should have stuck with 2D for that one for sure. Thankfully that was still a great game.

I dont know what games with camera controls you are referring to. Most have free controls now adays. Also why do I keep seeing people use psx for ps1. PSX was a japanese only DVR version of the PS2.

ps one was the slim one, the original was called playstation x

See, this is where we differ. Fans of FF6 see FF7's battle system as too slow or sluggish, especially when the long, drawn out summon techniques are used. FF6s introduction of the ATB system made it that you had to keep on your toes, or else the enemy would get the upper hand. I can't remeber a summon or  magic spell in FF6 that lasts more then 5 seconds (Kefka might have had one in the final battle. Thats about it). While Neo Bahamut of Knights of the Round look appealing to see, it's almost like it's drawing you out of that state of panic that should be induced in a tough fight, in order to relax and watch a cutscene or restrategise.

PSX was the Playstation's original call mark. I believe it came from when their system was in beta and just passed along in IRC channels and such medium back then. However, when the PSX DVR was released, people started dropping the original beta usage in favour of PS1.

Final Fantasy XIII

ninja gaiden 3. i absolutely loved ninja gaiden black, it's one of my most favourite games of all time. i liked the second one a lot as well, not as much as the first one but it was still nice. the third one? omfg what a shit :(

€dit: ohh ok i believe i'm wrong here i didn't own ninja gaiden 3!

The way I always saw it was that, with each new development in gaming, the first foray is always rocky, like others have said, look at Motion Controls. The Wii was adequate, but now that we have Kinect, Move, and Wii Motion Plus, the original Wiimote controls are pretty lame by comparison, and I think we can all agree that we were unjustly wowed by the novelty.

3D gaming had its same baby steps with the N64 and PS1. While they were good 'at the time', the reality is that they were still learning the technology and therefore there were issues. To deny this as a fact is just foolish.

With 2D gaming, developers had many generations to perfect the art, and by the time the SNES came out, 2D gaming was close to perfection; games controlled remarkably well, content was WAY up from previous generations, and they were able to experiment with new graphical styles (Donkey Kong Country) and were able to cram MASSIVE games onto cartriges (the Final Fantasy series, Dragon Quest, Tales of Phantasia, etc). These games, while not flawless, were very well refined as the tech had been mastered at that point. When they went onto 3D gaming, quality had to take a hit in lieu of innovation. Hell, even content took a massive hit, Ocarina of Time had less content than Link to the past. Mario 64 had less content than Super Mario World or Yoshi's Island. Mario Kart 64 has less content than the original MArio Kart. In addition to that, many game series' were unable to make the leap to 3D with ease, like Donkey Kong Country 64. (I personally didn't care for Mario 64, but I'm in the minority there.)

All of these issues apply to Ocarina of Time, as it has less content than Link to the past, the 3D graphics carried with it inherent obstacles (some of which were not overcome), and frankly the visuals were ugly as hell. There's nobody in the world that will convince me that Ocarina of Time's hideous polygons look better than Link to the PAst's toony sprites. More technically impressive, sure, but art direction is just as important as technical aspects when it comes to how a game looks, which is why Wink Waker will last throughout the agies, due to its toony celshaded graphics.

for this gen

gta4 theres nothing really to say here if you played the last 2 gtas from last gen, i did like the realism in the controls driving and on foot but there was really nothing to do after you finished the story and alo i mean alot was striped from SA and vice city

RE5 very bad i dont think i liked anything from it, maybe the last parts of the game, hated the environments and the AI partner that you had to babysit as well as the enemies

Uncharted 2 and 3, 2 has imo the most balanced MP i played, thats about the best thing of the game i like its basic maps and the small amount of them, aswell as no load out selection and power weapon locations on the maps. the SP was a different from imo the best SP of the uncharted games DF, 2 and 3 are much more linear, less shooting and way to much filler ie. scripted events and platforming