bit-gamer.net

Sony: Games will set the standard for 3D

Sony: Games will set the standard for 3D

Sony thinks that games are a perfect fit for 3D technology and will set the standard for the future.

SCEE President Andrew House has said that "games are a perfect fit with 3D...[and will] lead the way in consumer understanding of how 3D enhances the entertainment experience."

The comment comes as part of an interview on the official PlayStation site, where House lends his support to the idea of 3D technology on consoles.

"Games can be adapted into 3D relatively easily and with this technology we can add depth and make games more immersive than ever," said House.

Sony current has a few 3D PlayStation 3 games on the way to coincide with a new range of Bravia 3D TVs, namely WipEout HD, Super Stardust HD, PAIN, but House has hinted at more 3D games in the future.

"As with all new technologies, initially there are barriers to entry, such as the cost of the TVs," said House. "Regardless of that, we feel that it is our responsibility to offer all consumers a choice. If you want to spend the money on a new 3D TV, then we will provide you with 3D content to play."

"That is not to say that out priorities have changed. Our priority is still very much our key traditional Blu-ray Disc titles, and that does not mean that we can't offer some 3D fun as well."

Personally, we're already quite sick of this new 3D trend and would far rather forego the limitations of the technology and the headaches that come along with it, but Sony has invested in it regardless. You can check out our look at Nvidia's 3D effort, 3DVision, for more of our thoughts, but let us know what you think in the forums.

59 Comments

Discuss in the forums Reply
rickysio 26th May 2010, 12:40 Quote
Oh gods no.

No.

Just no.

Games in 3D? How in the blue blazes will playing games that the general consumer plays like Wii Fit/Tetris/Pong/Brain Age enhance the entertainment experience?!
mi1ez 26th May 2010, 12:42 Quote
Let's just hope this doesn't ruin all production value, photography, cinematography etc. as has been the case in the film industry.
Stewb 26th May 2010, 12:53 Quote
tristanperry 26th May 2010, 13:03 Quote
If the good aspects of games nowadays (overall good graphics, good storyline, good gameplay etc) don't get diminished by this move, then I'm not too fussed.

I'm not all that bothered by watching films in 3D (especially since I sometimes experience motion sickness when watching some parts of 3D films!!), however as long as it's not like most games try to implement 3D and mess up the 'important' parts of games, I don't mind too much.
Bauul 26th May 2010, 13:04 Quote
3D is fine and all, but it adds about 2% to the overall experience if done well, and can massively detract if done badly (see Clash of the Titans remake).

Given games offer a much more 3D experience than a film by the sheer nature of the medium (Doom feels more 3D than Avatar did, just because you can move around), I'm highly unsure of what it would bring to the table in anything other than a funky graphical effect.
Unknownsock 26th May 2010, 13:04 Quote
Can't say im a fan of 3D..

This is a perfect example of other technologies, that should be chosen instead..
Youtube.. v=Jd3-eiid-Uw
uz1_l0v3r 26th May 2010, 13:11 Quote
3D makes sense on a massive cinema screen, but it's virtually useless on normal-sized TVs.
MSHunter 26th May 2010, 13:21 Quote
BTW has any one seen a 3D film in IMAX? Is it better ore worse then "normal" Cinema 3D?
memeroot 26th May 2010, 13:39 Quote
I disagree - 3d looks great - though you dont realy want to play with it on very often.
shanky887614 26th May 2010, 13:39 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by MSHunter
BTW has any one seen a 3D film in IMAX? Is it better ore worse then "normal" Cinema 3D?

worse casue you still have to wear the glasses and after a while your ears and eyes hurt way before they normally would
Skippylee 26th May 2010, 13:47 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by MSHunter
BTW has any one seen a 3D film in IMAX? Is it better ore worse then "normal" Cinema 3D?

Yeah, I saw Avatar in 2D and in 3D at an IMAX. I found the IMAX screen way too big and after about an hour or so I started to feel my eyes straining. Thinking about it I should have sat as far back as possible, that may have helped. All that being said, it was amazing in 3D at the IMAX!
Stelph 26th May 2010, 13:47 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unknownsock
Can't say im a fan of 3D..

This is a perfect example of other technologies, that should be chosen instead..
Youtube.. v=Jd3-eiid-Uw


Ah you beat me to it, this is the kind of thing I would like to see microsoft come out with the Natal (since, I believ, that is able to identify and track your head, something that isnt essential to the game but gives it a "wow" factor without overcomplicating the game

Playing FPS and being able to peek round corners by leaning rather than pressing a button would add to the immersion of the game. Getting a 3D teabag in halo would not....
Almightyrastus 26th May 2010, 13:57 Quote
pRon will decide the standard for 3D, just as it decides the format for everything else......
javaman 26th May 2010, 13:58 Quote
How does 3D work for those who are blind in one eye like my friend? Its a step forward bringing 3D to the home market but its 2 steps backwards letting "non arrogant" sony do it. TBH tho, like blu ray, games consoles is the way to push adoption. I hope ATI start to push 3D for themselves.
Skippylee 26th May 2010, 14:16 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by javaman
How does 3D work for those who are blind in one eye like my friend?

Unfortunately it doesn't! Your friend will just see a 2D image.

I've found this site that will show you if you can see in 3D!
memeroot 26th May 2010, 14:26 Quote
life doesnt work in 3d if your blind in one eye - doh
javaman 26th May 2010, 14:35 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skippylee
Unfortunately it doesn't! Your friend will just see a 2D image.

I've found this site that will show you if you can see in 3D!

Had that problem when going to see clash of the titans. Everywhere near us and in the city centre where only showing it in 3D =/
ripmax 26th May 2010, 14:35 Quote
Glad to see 3D catching on. I hope all the whiners will give gaming in 3D a try before bashing it.
AndyCubb 26th May 2010, 14:36 Quote
Ive not had the "pleasure" of 3D yet but as long as they have an "On/Off" mode in the game then great, Im all for moving forward. Just dont want the bollox of either buying the 3D or normal version of the game, just gimme vanilla with the option for a sprinkling of 3D.
Skippylee 26th May 2010, 14:41 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyCubb
Ive not had the "pleasure" of 3D yet but as long as they have an "On/Off" mode in the game then great, Im all for moving forward. Just dont want the bollox of either buying the 3D or normal version of the game, just gimme vanilla with the option for a sprinkling of 3D.

Yeah, that's how they work. I have a 3D monitor and you set a key to toggle 3D on and off. If I play single player games I normally play in 3D - Bioshock 2 looked great! But if I play online its normally in 2D.
Fizzl 26th May 2010, 15:05 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unknownsock

Youtube.. v=Jd3-eiid-Uw

This technology works for me and none of the goggle techs do. I've tried the original GeForce 3 active glasses and both the active and passive technologies that are currently available at the likes of i-series (and cinema), nothing.

But as I understand it Johnny Lee (the guy in that video) got hire by MS and the result is Natal so I'm kinda optimistic about where the x-box is going at the moment.
Fizzban 26th May 2010, 15:55 Quote
Super Stardust is being made in 3D? Bloody hell...
Woodspoon 26th May 2010, 15:55 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by uz1_l0v3r
3D makes sense on a massive cinema screen, but it's virtually useless on normal-sized TVs.
Spot on

It'll also shove costs up and production values down.

It's a pointless gimmick in an attempt to sell more tv's / monitors now most people have updated from crt tv's.
Gunsmith 26th May 2010, 15:57 Quote
Dear Sony, Microsoft

**** off telling us what we're going to do.

signed - Gamers
Xir 26th May 2010, 15:58 Quote
I'm afraid 3D is not the way to go, but like "high gloss monitors" it's beeing massively pushed.

Clash of the Titans wasn't a good movie in 2D...3D doesn't help then :D

I've watched Avatar in 2D and 3D...in 3D it was good, but the edges of the field of view were blurry.
I would have to sit further away in 3D than in 2D.

Tried gaming in 3D with shutterglasses, the initial effect is great, but i got sick of it within half an hour.
Headache, then Eye-strain then motion sickness (each after about 10 mins in this sequence)
salesman 26th May 2010, 16:22 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by MSHunter
BTW has any one seen a 3D film in IMAX? Is it better ore worse then "normal" Cinema 3D?

Worse because of the price!
http://www.masslive.com/entertainment/index.ssf/2010/05/shrek_on_imax_nearly_cost_20_p.html
luna 26th May 2010, 16:32 Quote
What about us poor buggers who have really bad eyes and cant watch 3D movies let alone play games?? looks like I might have to take up scrabble...
Da_Rude_Baboon 26th May 2010, 16:47 Quote
I'm really surprised at the negativity towards 3D gaming here. I dont wear glasses and i have found the 3D experience so far has been great, no eye strain or nausea at all. Eurogamer has had a few previews of Sony's 3D system and they have been very positive so far. They said it transforms driving games making the in car view the preferred option and its much easier to judge cornering and breaking zones. They also had a demo of Killzone 3 in 3D and again were very positive about the benefits of 3D.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eurogamer
Straight away there's an immediate impact. The weighty, long-barrelled minigun has a real presence in-screen, highlighting the fact that the majority of Killzone's 3D trickery is done via the impression of depth rather than projection. Shuffling behind cover emphasises the effect superbly, each vanishing line and focal reference point making the illusion ever more real.

The game's particle effects really come into their own under the influence of the active shutter glasses too. Snow seems to swirl very distinctly in front of the screen, its fluttering hypnotism starkly punctuated by the bullets which zip and zing towards you. We're told there's a lot of work to be done on the perfection of the 3D yet, and in certain effects that's obvious, but generally the whole effect is a mesmerising one, drawing you into the screen and surrounding you with it, generally just in time to recoil from a projectile or ten. It also adds a competitive advantage, allowing players to judge the jetpack jumps with much greater accuracy. How that will skew the playing field between 3D enabled multiplayer users and their dimension-poorer counterparts remains to be seen.

I think Sony are correct that gamers will be the drivers of 3D adoption. look at how much PC gamers are prepared to spend on hardware and i think games will take advantage of the benefits before the film industry will.
tristanperry 26th May 2010, 17:02 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Da_Rude_Baboon
I'm really surprised at the negativity towards 3D gaming here. I dont wear glasses and i have found the 3D experience so far has been great, no eye strain or nausea at all. Eurogamer has had a few previews of Sony's 3D system and they have been very positive so far. They said it transforms driving games making the in car view the preferred option and its much easier to judge cornering and breaking zones. They also had a demo of Killzone 3 in 3D and again were very positive about the benefits of 3D.
Yeah I can definitely see the advantage there.

I guess I'm just a little skepitical since I wear glasses and so it can be annoying to where 3D glasses too, especially when I have experienced nausea when watching 3D films.

Plus it sometimes seems like it's been forced on us (e.g. some films only being shown in 3D even though the 2D version exists) despite it being more expensive, etc.

I can see its benefits though.
Hex 26th May 2010, 17:32 Quote
Joy, I only have 1 working eye. Can all this 3D stuff just go away now :'(

I think most of us who have issues with it are, like tristanperry says, annoyed that it's being forced on us. There are some recent films I haven't been able to watch yet as they've only come out as 3D which will be completely pointless for me.
dillingerdan 26th May 2010, 17:38 Quote
Another successful diagnosis from House!

Anyway... Apparently 3D gaming is a MUCH more convincing effect than 3D film, mostly probably due to (upto Avatar) being converted to 3D rather than filmed specifically for it. But still, I am not a nay-sayer, I am willing to give it a try. I mean most of us here will be willing to try new tech no doubt since we all keep up with our PC stuff, and it's this platform which will yield the best results, since we can have the effect at little cost of resolution with enough GPU power.
rickysio 26th May 2010, 17:41 Quote
The next thing we know, the US congressmen will complain about how lifelike gaming has became again...
ZERO <ibis> 26th May 2010, 18:45 Quote
WHY!!!
sandys 26th May 2010, 19:12 Quote
Can't wait, well I can as I can't afford, but having read a lot pf the preview stuff over the past year this is going to have a bigger impact on a game than some things brought in, but hey what do I know i bought a Physx card too....I'll just buy whatever they tell me too :p

But seriously I was quite impressed with Avatar in 3D, it wasn't over done and seemed to add great depth in places, even managed to forget I was watching a 3D film till I was trying to swat some bugs that were flying around me from the film :o
djab 26th May 2010, 19:48 Quote
"Personally, we're already quite sick of this new 3D trend and would far rather forego the limitations of the technology and the headaches that come along with it, but Sony has invested in it regardless. You can check out our look at Nvidia's 3D effort, 3DVision, for more of our thoughts"

Wow, as Da_Rude_Baboon, I'm too really surprised at the negativity towards 3D gaming here, in the article and in lots of the comments.

Joe, you were one of the writers of the "Nvidia's 3D effort, 3DVision" article and you seemed quite enthusiastic about the solution at that time. I know that is is a bit annoying to see every companies trying to milk any new idea as their new cash cow and most of them usually tend to only transform good ideas into crap products (ie: third party publishers using Wiimote just to release crap game :( ) .
Is that what made you sick of stereo 3D ?

For comments and people against Sony putting 3D in PS3 games, just try some 3DVision certified games on PC and you'll see what your are missing.
Of course it is better with some games than with others as the game as to be designed to take advantage of the stereo 3D.
Just try some platform games like Assassin's Creed or Prince of Persia. The effect is just incredibly good (even with just some cardboard red/blue glasses :) )
Just try the demo of Dark Void with the jet pack. I found it only playable with the stereo 3D as only stereo 3D allows you to estimate the distance between you and the enemies/mountains/... around the character.

I have glasses and I have no problem wearing 3D glasses over them.
Companies like Sony may be pushing the adoption of the tech a bit too hard and there will be some screwing for early adopters like with the HDready TVs that were not FullHD TVs.
But lots of people have been waiting for good affordable stereo 3D gaming for years and now that the technology is ready to become mainstream, others are spitting on it.
I can not understand that.
It is like hating colours and wanting only black and white display/film/game to be made.
Of course there are people who can not see colours, of course colours do not means that all games/films with colours will be better than black and white games/films. But when used correctly, colours can had a lot to a game/film and so stereo 3D can.

It should not mean that designers will be obliged do stereo 3D. There are still some good black and white films and some good 2D (with no polygons) games made.
Designer who want to try just have to learn how to take advantage of stereo 3D as they did (and continue to do) with colours, 3D (not stereo), sounds and music, motion sensor, ...
The only limit should be creativity.
And if designers manage to use stereo 3D to express new things in games or films (like they do with sounds and music), it would be stupid to stop them from using this tool.

ps: thanks for reading until the end and sorry for those who do not like long comments :)
bob 26th May 2010, 21:30 Quote
I already wear glasses and I'm not gonna put another pair over them to play games, and definitely not for watching tv.
Will it be technically possible in a few years to have 3D without glasses? That would be an improvement.
Blassster 26th May 2010, 23:06 Quote
I've had a dizziness problem for 7 years, so I haven't gone to the theatre (large screen) since then. I have to play games on a smaller type of screen <=32" from further away, but even as 2D they get to me. Screw this.
enciem 26th May 2010, 23:23 Quote
Just a personal thing but wearing the glasses is as embarrassing as having someone come round and see me with a full steering wheel and pedals set up, it's just a bit much.

Whatever happened to that to that 3D TV on Tomorrows World that didn't require glasses, won't be interested until something like that comes along.
The_Beast 26th May 2010, 23:33 Quote
Sony will claim that they set the standard but we all know that p0rn does/did
metarinka 27th May 2010, 00:21 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Beast
Sony will claim that they set the standard but we all know that p0rn does/did

Frankly I don't want a dong seemingly floating in my face.

I'm one of the minority of the population who gets bad headaches and nausea from 3d, maybe I haven't tried all the types, but by the end of Avatar, I felt sick. I watched it again in 2D and enjoyed the experience much more.

that being said i welcome it for gaming. It's very easy to implement since they already have the Z buffer information so it doesn't take much more processing power or programming. I just rather the industry as a whole starts setting standards so that we don't get a 3d blu-ray vs 3d hd-dvd thing going.
Star*Dagger 27th May 2010, 07:04 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Da_Rude_Baboon
I'm really surprised at the negativity towards 3D gaming here. I dont wear glasses and i have found the 3D experience so far has been great, no eye strain or nausea at all. Eurogamer has had a few previews of Sony's 3D system and they have been very positive so far. They said it transforms driving games making the in car view the preferred option and its much easier to judge cornering and breaking zones. They also had a demo of Killzone 3 in 3D and again were very positive about the benefits of 3D.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eurogamer
Straight away there's an immediate impact. The weighty, long-barrelled minigun has a real presence in-screen, highlighting the fact that the majority of Killzone's 3D trickery is done via the impression of depth rather than projection. Shuffling behind cover emphasises the effect superbly, each vanishing line and focal reference point making the illusion ever more real.

The game's particle effects really come into their own under the influence of the active shutter glasses too. Snow seems to swirl very distinctly in front of the screen, its fluttering hypnotism starkly punctuated by the bullets which zip and zing towards you. We're told there's a lot of work to be done on the perfection of the 3D yet, and in certain effects that's obvious, but generally the whole effect is a mesmerising one, drawing you into the screen and surrounding you with it, generally just in time to recoil from a projectile or ten. It also adds a competitive advantage, allowing players to judge the jetpack jumps with much greater accuracy. How that will skew the playing field between 3D enabled multiplayer users and their dimension-poorer counterparts remains to be seen.

I think Sony are correct that gamers will be the drivers of 3D adoption. look at how much PC gamers are prepared to spend on hardware and i think games will take advantage of the benefits before the film industry will.

There are a lot of negative nancys on this site. They are against new tech until it becomes standard and then they pretend they were for it all along.
Teq 27th May 2010, 08:16 Quote
3D would be great if you didn't need the silly glasses, something about the polarisation that makes motion feel choppy to me...
Tyinsar 27th May 2010, 09:37 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Almightyrastus
pRon will decide the standard for 3D, just as it decides the format for everything else......
:| Not that long ago many web sites were claiming that HD-DVD would win because the porn industry had decided to back that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by metarinka
...
I'm one of the minority of the population who gets bad headaches and nausea from 3d, maybe I haven't tried all the types, but by the end of Avatar, I felt sick. I watched it again in 2D and enjoyed the experience much more.
...

Oddly enough I can't play FPS games because of motion sickness but I was fine watching Avatar in 3D.

I do have to agree though that games are a more natural fit for 3D since the content is being created in 3D. With movies some old tricks like matte paintings and relatively shallow sets could quickly kill the immersion - CG is getting better but it still often looks too fake to me. One issue, however, is that large TVs aren't generally the best monitors and gaming setups have to change to use them.

Also - for several reasons already mentioned by others - there should always be the option to turn it off and us 2D.
Da_Rude_Baboon 27th May 2010, 10:14 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Beast
Sony will claim that they set the standard but we all know that p0rn does/did

Sony aren't claiming that at all. They said games would set the standard.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sony
"games are a perfect fit with 3D...[and will] lead the way in consumer understanding of how 3D enhances the entertainment experience."
DbD 27th May 2010, 10:20 Quote
/me looks up and shakes head

I bet hardly any of you have played a game in 3D so the truth is you don't actually know if you'd like it or not, your just guessing based of the hearsay of others who probably haven't played in 3D either.

If everyone had this sort of attitude we'd still be playing pong.
ambrose 27th May 2010, 10:45 Quote
the problem is you need to render 2 images where in 2d you can get away with one. just getting away with crysis on 60fps now? well with 3d turned on your gonna get 30. hardware isnt keeping up with software so either spend twice as much or see twice as bad.

and as for the whole premise in life you FOCUS on what you want to see so the foreground and background are blurry, in the movies etc. the filmaker decides that for you so
NO ITS NOT 3D let me know when you crack that chestnut and ill be the first to buy
Grape Flavor 27th May 2010, 10:52 Quote
3D needs to be developed sooner or later. It's the next big step in graphics. Soon we will have nearly photo-realistic graphics, the only thing left after that is to give true stereo depth.

I do believe 3D should always be optional. Some people just can't tolerate the effect, or, like me, wear regular glasses and thus find it impractical. Even if they perfect the technology it will still be impractical for certain kinds of games.

3D isn't so great now. I see that. But we need to be working on it. The first cars sucked, the first planes sucked, but if it weren't for those early strides we wouldn't have our F-22s and high-performance cars, would we.
general22 27th May 2010, 11:46 Quote
I remember seeing an animated 3D movie at IMAX at while back and it was a great experience. 3D would probably work well with games as long at it is done well. The current 3D market is quite fragmented and full of incompatible solutions and equipment so once the market matures I probably would look to try out 3D.
Xir 27th May 2010, 13:43 Quote
Try it then, Z-Buffer based 3D with shutterglasses has been available on all NVidia graphicscards for over ten years.
The source-engine games for instance run like this.

Haven't heared of that? I'm not surprised...for most people, it sucked.
I agree though that you have to try before you talk. I tried and was not impressed.

Try it, shutterglasses shoud be loitering around ebay and the likes, remember this is relatively old tech...the drivers are freely available from NVidia. (don't know about ATI)
kenco_uk 27th May 2010, 14:00 Quote
I like the way Nintendo are approaching 3d with a version of their DS console due out.
rickysio 27th May 2010, 15:42 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by DbD
/me looks up and shakes head

I bet hardly any of you have played a game in 3D so the truth is you don't actually know if you'd like it or not, your just guessing based of the hearsay of others who probably haven't played in 3D either.

If everyone had this sort of attitude we'd still be playing pong.

My eyes -freaking- bled after an hour when I tried to watch Avatar.

And it also gave me the grandmother ancestor of all headaches, and effectively crippled me for the rest of the day. At least other improvements didn't try to raep my brain.
GiantStickMan 27th May 2010, 16:41 Quote
I've seen a few 3D movies now and I honestly don't think that it has added anything to the movie. There was only one point in one movie where I was immersed in the experience enough for it to trick my brain into thinking 'holy crap what's a bird doing in the theatre??'
Each time I tend to walk out with a headache. Maybe it's one of those things you get used to, I got motion sickness the first few times I played 'Timesplitters' on the PS2 - but I doubt it.

The cynic in me thinks this technology be it in games or normal TV's will be quite slow to be adopted. A lot of people have only just been convinced to upgrade their old CRT TV's, now they're being told how great 3D is and that they need to upgrade again. It's like the upgrade from VHS to DVD to Blu-Ray. DVD was jumped on when it was new and there were a lot more early adopters of the technology then there has been with Blu-Ray.

I'm all in favour of new tech, this is just one that I'm not interested in yet as I cannot see any real benefits.
dyzophoria 27th May 2010, 17:58 Quote
i really dont like this 3d thing a bit either, if they want 3d , give me something like holograms :p , 3D on a 2D screen is really a puke a magnet imo
supermonkey 27th May 2010, 19:13 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyinsar
:| Not that long ago many web sites were claiming that HD-DVD would win because the porn industry had decided to back that.
I was one of those people, and I think it was a valid point at the time. Fortunately for Blu-ray, Sony recanted an earlier decision and ultimately recognized the reach of the pr0n industry. Regardless, I'm still skeptical that Blu-ray is here for the long-haul. Seeing as how the adult video industry has fully embraced web video technologies, I can see it's popularity helping determine web video standards and driving the eventual wider adoption of direct download as opposed to physical media. The adult film industry is kind of like Apple in that regard; they're always a step ahead of the technology game.

Many televisions, consoles, and - funny enough - Blue-ray players are starting to include built-in wi-fi and internet access. There's still a part of me that sees Blu-ray as an intermediary format between DVD and direct download, with media PCs used for content storage.

Will 3D be the next big thing? I'm inclined to believe no - at least not yet in the home. The economy is depressed, too many consumers just dropped several grand on HDTVs due to to misinformation about the DTV transition, as well as heavy industry marketing that HDTV was the next big thing. Now, consumers are being told the go out and spend a $2-3K more on a 3D set, plus expensive glasses for each member of the family. Consumers grew tired of the HD-DVD/Blu-ray format war and the inevitable confusion it brought, and another is looming between passive polarized and active shutter lenses.

I think the 3D gimmick will make in-roads in the cinema, where the theater experience is more conducive to gimmickry. As well, the movie industry can better control theater standards because you don't have millions of consumers selecting from a myriad of choices of TVs, players, and accessories.

As for gaming - I'm still skeptical when it comes to the home market. YouTube offers some pretty cool 3D options, so maybe there is some hope for 3D penetration in the home computer market. On another note, while 3D does provide technical challenges, it's actually pretty easy to pull off. Pulling off 3D effectively, and doing so in a non-gimmicky way, is much more difficult. It really requires the art director to think about the 3D environment ahead of time, and design the game or movie with 3D in mind. Adding 3D as an afterthought can lead to poor execution, and that will guarantee that nobody adopts the technology.

Interestingly Playboy offered a 3D pictorial in this month's issue, complete with a complementary set of red/blue anaglyph glasses. Perhaps pr0n will help popularize 3D after all!
Skill3d 27th May 2010, 23:57 Quote
games in 3d.... hmz let the motionsickness/headache begin?!
[USRF]Obiwan 28th May 2010, 10:21 Quote
It's all fake 3D just like the first, first person shooter. Before that it was all 2D then with the introduction of wolfenstein (or whatever depth perspective game) it was called 3D. So what is this called then 3D3D, 3D Enhanced, Ultra 3D?

I remember back in the days (1996?) they had these shutter classes. I was playing Descent with those classes. Although it somehow worked if you where concentrating and ignore the headache. And now they magically re-invented 3D for games. It almost soundss like a washingpowder add. first they had liquid washing, then a few years later you could wash your clothes better with powder, then few years later they had washing baskets and then 'pearls' and now its back to liquid washing again in about two years they introduce washing powder as the new best washing thing. Amazing!...


I will NOT call "anything they claim to be 3D" until the day I can physically walk around it and look at it from all angles.
Xir 28th May 2010, 11:00 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by supermonkey
Regardless, I'm still skeptical that Blu-ray is here for the long-haul.

It's currently the only way of getting full-HD into your house in large parts of this country.
Germany isn't the slowest technology market, but not very fast either.
There is no current TV station broadcasting in Full HD (1080). (nor is it planned)
The transition to "HD-Ready" (720) for TV broadcasting only started on a wide front this year, but still is far from the standard (PAL).

This is going to take some time. I see even sharper pictures as desirable over 3D (japanese have what? 2000something as opposed to 1080) as this means you could put a bigger screen up closer.
Paulg1971 28th May 2010, 22:50 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xir
I'm afraid 3D is not the way to go, but like "high gloss monitors" it's beeing massively pushed.

Clash of the Titans wasn't a good movie in 2D...3D doesn't help then :D

I've watched Avatar in 2D and 3D...in 3D it was good, but the edges of the field of view were blurry.
I would have to sit further away in 3D than in 2D.

Tried gaming in 3D with shutterglasses, the initial effect is great, but i got sick of it within half an hour.
Headache, then Eye-strain then motion sickness (each after about 10 mins in this sequence)

I get motion sickness on some games in 2D ,what would i be like in 3d
Saivert 31st May 2010, 05:17 Quote
yeah. some singleplayer games when I forget to turn on vsync cause nausea. probably also related to me sitting up way past bedtime playing them. fatigue coupled with heavy concentration and lots of movement on the screen may cause that.

also I would enjoy 3-D (please add a dash at least when you mean the stereoscopic thingy) but cant afford any of it. I need to buy a 120Hz LCD then I have to buy the emitter + shutter glasses kit from NVIDIA. Costs just way too much atm. I would rather upgrade my GPU instead of getting that.


But I'm sure most of you guys are filthy rich and can afford to both upgrade the GPU and get a 3-D set. Damn I envy you guys. Bastids!
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums