No i'm not interested. And that picture is f*cking my eyes up and making it hard to read the article.

Do I need to upgrade my monitor and buy some glasses to go over my existing glasses to read the articles this week? And will I get motion sickness from reading the first paragraph?

3D at the minute is gimmicky, expensive and the tech is moving too fast to be worth buying. most of the 3D films are just 3D bolt-ons adding nothing to the film, hardly any games make good use of it. pfftttt bring on ultra high def over this 3D illusion crap

3D is just a gimmick, just like it always has been. I remember the last 3D craze in the 80's (Jaws 3D - that film haunts my nightmares for all the wrong reasons), and it doesn't seem to be any different now: studios tagging a "3D" onto the end of titles, 3D either shoe-horned into a film (with scenes created for no other reasons than shout out "Look! We've got 3D!") or used to prop up poor storytelling in a film.

The same applies to games: it's just a gimmick. Because of the interactive nature of gaming, for 3D to work properly, there has to be some VR aspect that allows you to look around objects with your head - using the mouse ruins that. Otherwise 3D becomes no different from films, where you have scenes or levels shouting at you saying "Look! We've got 3D").

Add on the prohibitive cost of a new monitor plus the stupid gasses (which are a bugger to wear if you already wear prescription specs), and 3D becomes even more of a gimmick on the PC. Proper 3D gaming won't appear until we can get some level of VR-style control in games.

Your picture is broken...:D

Originally Posted by SMIFFYDUDE
No i'm not interested. And that picture is f*cking my eyes up and making it hard to read the article.

+1 ... Its just not worth it....And that pic just gave me a headache like everything else 3D

Seriously.... investigating into these oldschool 3d-techincs, where you try to simulate 3d on a flat screen is a total waste of money. It isn't that interesting for the bigger part of the population.

And these goggles are a PITA! I get sea-sick of them after a while and my eyes are starting to burn after a few minutes allready.

Call me, when there's 3d-holographics without goggles to be had in the living-room.

Are we going to get free "glasses" to make us look like knobheads too?

The internet has spoken, no need to run the rest of the week.

Typical narrow minded internet.

I beleive as long as there is the option to turn something on or off it is still not quite right and is more of a gimmick. You might try it for a bit, get sick and tired, turn it off thinking you might try it again later and then just forget about ever turning it on again and still live a happy and fulfiling life anyway.

I am reminded that people are still so keen to turn off this technology even when it is already hardcoded into movies at the cinema, check out a favourite mod: Mark Kermode's 2D glasses.

Good old Dr. Flappy Hands

Looking forward to the rest of the week. Thanks BT, your efforts aren't wasted on some of us.

Sounds like some of the readers may need to get their eyes tested due to eye strain probably from trying to watch too much 3D p0rn :P

Incedentally, does anyone know of any 3D glasses that fit properly and comfortably over regular glasses? I would like to try all the 3D stuff out to make my own mind up about it but each time I try any of the glasses needed they either push too hard onto the arms of my regular ones causing pain being my ears, rest on the top of my frames and slide them down my nose or touch my lenses risking scratching.

Originally Posted by leveller
Looking forward to the rest of the week. Thanks BT, your efforts aren't wasted on some of us.

I'm not saying bit's efforts are wasted, but I still think 3D is a gimmick - although I would be interested to see if there are future developments to take the gimmickyness out of 3D as it stands at at the moment - whether that's true 3D (holography & VR) or whether any studios have any plans to use 3D in a sensible way.

Over the past 4 days I've been playing a lot of games in 3D, and I cant really say it's a gimmic. It's More of an enhancement to the games, adding that extra depth.
I just got off playing l4d2 after a couple hours, and I kept running after leaves flying around in the wind and staring at the zombies as they ran up to hit me. The added depth made the game feel more real.
Crysis 2 has been fun on 3D aswell. they obviously put a decent amount of effort into it's 3D development and implementation.

I think 3D is best done on games and not as a gimmic, but as an optional enhancement. I'm pretty sure valve didnt have stereoscopic 3D in mind when making l4d/l4d2, but the games just look and feel better with it.

Originally Posted by Arkanrais
Over the past 4 days I've been playing a lot of games in 3D, and I cant really say it's a gimmic. It's More of an enhancement to the games, adding that extra depth.
I just got off playing l4d2 after a couple hours, and I kept running after leaves flying around in the wind and staring at the zombies as they ran up to hit me. The added depth made the game feel more real.
Crysis 2 has been fun on 3D aswell. they obviously put a decent amount of effort into it's 3D development and implementation.

I think 3D is best done on games and not as a gimmic, but as an optional enhancement. I'm pretty sure valve didnt have stereoscopic 3D in mind when making l4d/l4d2, but the games just look and feel better with it.

A believer!!

ill stick to 2D for now thanks, I don't think its bad that the industry is trying to move to 3D, they are doing it because they need to exploit new technology to keep their profits moving. I am sure eventually that 3D will be the norm and will be implemented into things really well.
But until they stop purposely throwing random hammers and ninja starts into the camera at the movies then it is just a bit gimmicky right now

Not interested in the slightest tbh, i really hope its not the "future" of gaming.

when they can make it so you don't need to wear glasses (2 sets in my case), then maybe i'll be interested.. until then.. i'm plenty content with 2d, thanks!

Anyone who buys into 3D might as well walk up to the entrance of one of these tech companies, wait until the marketing department comes out, and then bend over.

And afterwards they can clean up the mess with their latest app from the Apple.

Ooh, 3D. How thoroughly yawntastic.

The sooner this irritating fad vanishes up it's own ar$e, the better.

So who paid for this then?

I could not care less right now, but I can see it developing into something pretty great. What it needs for that to happen is a ton of early adopters to make the industry happy to sink money into it and keep developing it so everyone goes for the upgrade. So thank you, those of you that are buying into it and enjoying it as it's infancy.

Saw the new Pirates of the Caribbean on the cinema in 3D and realized that 3D isn't at a level that gives me any advantage. I rather stick with my 1080p screen and squeeze it hard and good with my pc, be it playing games or movies. Pass really =\

Originally Posted by adam_bagpuss
3D at the minute is gimmicky, expensive and the tech is moving too fast to be worth buying. most of the 3D films are just 3D bolt-ons adding nothing to the film, hardly any games make good use of it. pfftttt bring on ultra high def over this 3D illusion crap

^ He said it all. If you preface every 3D article with his post you'll save a lot of unnecessary reading about this worthless and (again) soon to be discarded technology.
You would be helping a lot more people with articles on High Definition, how best to achieve it now and its future. Pandering to the niche 3Ders is unjustifiable.
All I want, for now, is a higher resolution monitor. Practically all of todays video-cards can support a higher resolution than my present ASUS 27" monitor @ 1920 x 1080 and 60Hz. One with a zero dead-pixel policy and something that'll last long enough to justify its expense would be perfect.

PLEASE help the victims of the Joplin tornados. http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/05/23/joplin.how.to.help/

Originally Posted by SMIFFYDUDE
No i'm not interested. And that picture is f*cking my eyes up and making it hard to read the article.

+1

Makes me slightly less bothered that I don't have internet at home this week.

I don't want it, I only know one person thinking about it, and everyone else I ask about it just say 'meh'. I'm amazed the industry is pushing this tech hard, especially as around 20% get headaches so can't/shouldn't use it and the rest seem uninterested.

Greetings!

Yesterday was AMD, today is nVidia... 3D effects on the porn industry will be covered when?

Originally Posted by Bungletron
I beleive as long as there is the option to turn something on or off it is still not quite right and is more of a gimmick. You might try it for a bit, get sick and tired, turn it off thinking you might try it again later and then just forget about ever turning it on again and still live a happy and fulfiling life anyway.

Shame to have forked out twice the money for a "3D-Capable" device then, isn't it?

3D-TV sales soar...yeah, because nearly all high end TV's have it in if you want it or not...

Was this week all BT's idea or is there amy sponsorship or collaboration with those pushing 3D tech?

1. Sat down? check
2. breakfast eaten? check
3. fresh cuppa tea? check
4. wednesday's installment of 3D tech? negative :?

Originally Posted by leveller
4. wednesday's installment of 3D tech? negative :?

Maybe they've gone back to the B3-mobo tests that have been promised for weeks...or even a z68 board, heaven forbid

Originally Posted by Cleggmeister
Was this week all BT's idea or is there amy sponsorship or collaboration with those pushing 3D tech?

It was all our idea. The idea of these content weeks was my idea, the 3D topic was Clive's. You might remember we also did the UK Games Industry week last year too, which was my idea.