This is a $d$-dimensional generalisation of the post Inequality with Complex Numbers. (See my comment under Robert Israel's answer.)
Generalising Potato's proof for $d$-dimensions, we can show the following theorem:
Theorem. For any positive integer $d$, there exists $c_d > 0$ such that the following holds:
For any $n$ and any $n$-tuple $(v_1, v_2, \ldots, v_n)$ of $d$-dimensional vectors (i.e., $v_i \in \mathbb{R}^d$), there exists a subset $J \subseteq \{ 1, 2, \ldots, n\}$ such that $$ \left\| \sum_{j \in J} v_j \right\| \geqslant c_d \cdot \sum_{i=1}^{n} \| v_i \|. $$
I skip my proof of this theorem because it is exactly analogous to Potato's proof; with two modifications: (a) our vectors are in $\mathbb{R}^d$, rather than $\mathbb{C}$ or $\mathbb{R}^2$); (b) I am using the notation $v_i$ in place of $z_i$ here, since it feels more natural in this context.
Now, my question (slightly informally stated) is
Question. For any fixed $d$, what is the largest value $c_d^{\ast}$ of $c_d$ for which the above theorem is true?
If we cannot find the exact value $c_d^{\ast}$, it will be interesting to find nontrivial upper and lower bounds. Working out the details of the above proof, we can show that $c_d$ can be taken to be (at least) $\frac{1}{2d}$; i.e., $c_d^{\ast} \geqslant \frac{1}{2d}$. Can we say anything better?
It is easy to see that $c_1 = \frac{1}{2}$, which matches the above bound for $d=1$. Robert Israel's answer shows that $c_2 = \frac{1}{\pi}$ (exactly!), which is strictly better than $\frac{1}{2 \cdot 2} = \frac{1}{4}$. However, his proof seems to make an essential use of complex numbers that I could not generalise to $d$ dimensions.