Spent the evening playing 3d console games on a friends 50" Samsung 3d TV....OMG!

Rash

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 3, 2005
Messages
2,557
I was absolutely blown away at how good Motorstorm, Wipeout and Superstardust looked, Its one of gamings greatest moments, im off out tomorrow to buy the same tv. It makes all other games in the same genres seem shit!!
 

DeathPrincess

Fully [H]
Joined
May 15, 2010
Messages
18,205
Your going to get lots of hate very very soon! But it's good it works for you, seriously, after finding out how fun the motion games were like I don't mind saying I play them anymore (even though I felt totally unhardcore! But 3d, as long as it isn't gimmicky, can be a great thing.
 

Tigerblade

2[H]4U
Joined
Jul 23, 2004
Messages
2,423
The hate comes from those that haven't played. I agree some movies just aren't done well (I'm looking at you Clash of the Titans) but Motorstorm in 3d, for example, is simply breath taking and I defy anyone to truthfully counter argue me. The depth is insane, forget what you have seen at the cinema, this is real depth, you can see the routes ahead of you (something the 2d version is very bad at, too easy to get confused), you can judge things perfectly.....if this is the start I'm buzzing to see where it ends up.

I really hope Black Ops is on a par with MS. I really do.
 
Last edited:

rampantandroid

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 14, 2006
Messages
1,962
My hate stems from a 50" screen not even being enough. If I do 3D, I want the screen to engulf my peripheral vision. Not even a 60" will do that unless I sit right in front of it.

Oh, and the cost of the TVs. No way was I going to pay for a VT25 over my G25....the cost wasn't justified.
 

Rash

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 3, 2005
Messages
2,557
In the uk a 50" samsung full hd 3d tv with freeview hd is only 999 with 4 sets of glasses and a 3d bluray player, more than affordable now seeing as they launche at nearly 4 times the price only a few months ago with 1 set of glasses. A 2d tv in the uk is about 700+ for a 50"....
 

Psychotext

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
5,897
I've been playing games in 3D for ages on the PC, and more recently I've had access to a 3DTV and have played some games on that...

...unlike the OP, I'm not impressed, at all. Not even slightly. That's why my 3D capable monitor has now been replaced, and I have no intention of getting a 3DTV unless I happen to get one by default on my next one when I buy it in a few years time. I'd love to be one of those won over by it (hell, being an early adopter on the PC cost a fortune)... but it's really nothing special to me.

That said, get the biggest TV (or monitor) you can if you go for it. Makes a massive difference as having more of your vision filled by the screen makes for better immersion.
 

rampantandroid

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 14, 2006
Messages
1,962
In the uk a 50" samsung full hd 3d tv with freeview hd is only 999 with 4 sets of glasses and a 3d bluray player, more than affordable now seeing as they launche at nearly 4 times the price only a few months ago with 1 set of glasses. A 2d tv in the uk is about 700+ for a 50"....

If I can believe Bing's conversion, that's around 1600 USD (did you include tax in your price?)

My G25 was around 650 GBP before tax (July 4th sale), and the VT25 3D capable Panny was 1000 GBP...to me, not worth it (again, converting to GBP and trusting Bing)

In USD, I paid around 1100 for my G25, the VT25 was around 1600. I just don't see that as worth it. For that price I can go buy a new phone...or laptop...or videocard...or just save the money. I see 3D as a gimmick in the long run. Until TVs can do it with no shutter glasses, count me out. :)
 

YeuEmMaiMai

Fully [H]
Joined
Jun 11, 2004
Messages
30,209
The hate comes from those that haven't played.

,lol stopped reading right there...because comment is retarded. Myself I get headaches from 3d when you use shutter glasses so it is an instant turn off for me.....
 

Snappshoota

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 8, 2005
Messages
1,975
Ive been putting money back to buy the new Toshiba TV that hopefully doesnt need the glasses. Even tho they are gonna be tiny. 12 and 20 inch..
 

Rash

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 3, 2005
Messages
2,557
I've been playing games in 3D for ages on the PC, and more recently I've had access to a 3DTV and have played some games on that...

...unlike the OP, I'm not impressed, at all. Not even slightly. That's why my 3D capable monitor has now been replaced, and I have no intention of getting a 3DTV unless I happen to get one by default on my next one when I buy it in a few years time. I'd love to be one of those won over by it (hell, being an early adopter on the PC cost a fortune)... but it's really nothing special to me.

That said, get the biggest TV (or monitor) you can if you go for it. Makes a massive difference as having more of your vision filled by the screen makes for better immersion.

Yer i tried Batman and a few other Completely 3d ready pc (there are only a few that fully support 3d vision) games on a 22" monitor and i thought it was ok but not amazing, BUT The PS3 took it to a whole new level, i think you must be mad if you werent even slightly impressed by super stardust or motorstorm 3d. Even Gears of War 2 looked like a completely different game and was epic when upscaled to 3D by the Samsung 3d TV
 

Psychotext

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
5,897
Some of the effects are better, but it still does absolutely nothing for me.

As for TV generated 3D... no, fuck no. If you rate that then I'm not sure how much your opinion on the matter is worth anyway.

Edit - That sounds insulting. It's not my intention, but 3D generated from a 2D source is bad, bad, bad.
 
Last edited:

techpriest

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 22, 2008
Messages
479
Does anyone here wear prescription glasses like me? are we forced to use contacts for 3d or is there a hybrid prescription/3d lens we can use?

also, anyone know if frys or best buy are demoing 3d tvs? or even nvidia 3d? although I cant go back to eye cancer tn panels even for 3d
 

Rash

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 3, 2005
Messages
2,557
Some of the effects are better, but it still does absolutely nothing for me.

As for TV generated 3D... no, fuck no. If you rate that then I'm not sure how much your opinion on the matter is worth anyway.

Edit - That sounds insulting. It's not my intention, but 3D generated from a 2D source is bad, bad, bad.

Lol thanks!! :p Yer a lot of games we tried that were 3d generated from a 2d source made shit all difference and actually made it worse but a couple of games like super street fighter 4 and gears 2 looked a lot better imo obviously not as good as the full 3d games but very good anyway. The major plus about motorstorm is the fact you can now actually see what the fuck is going on lol and your timings improve wether its noticing a shortcut, knocking someone off their bike, sense of speed etc, the game is much more fun. Heres hoping that Gran Turismo is also in 3D.

Fair enough if 3d does nothing for you atm.
 

Tigerblade

2[H]4U
Joined
Jul 23, 2004
Messages
2,423
If I can believe Bing's conversion, that's around 1600 USD (did you include tax in your price?)

My G25 was around 650 GBP before tax (July 4th sale), and the VT25 3D capable Panny was 1000 GBP...to me, not worth it (again, converting to GBP and trusting Bing)

In USD, I paid around 1100 for my G25, the VT25 was around 1600. I just don't see that as worth it. For that price I can go buy a new phone...or laptop...or videocard...or just save the money. I see 3D as a gimmick in the long run. Until TVs can do it with no shutter glasses, count me out. :)

You must be getting a massive discount then as, assuming you have the 50", I see the vt25 for around $2600 which equates to £1638 going by the current exchange rate. The same set will most likely be £2500+ here but afaik it isn't out yet. The 50" VT20 (for comparison) goes for around £2000 ($3150ish)......with one pair of butt ugly 3d glasses. Period.

That's the thing with comparing cross atlantic prices. It's retarded. You will always get more bang for your buck and yes he included tax on his price.

I 100% agree on bigger screen size means better for 3d, but the thing also has to sit in your house......this BS 'I need to have it fill my vision 100%' is laughable! Do you often get distracted whilst watching tv?

At the end of the day we are all different, but Motorstorm is fuckin impressive. Shame Pain was utter toss :D
 

Baker

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 12, 2003
Messages
3,474
I believe Samsung has come out with/soon to come out with a 3DHDTV that does not require glasses. The current technology doesn't allow for 60inch screens (only up to like 21''), but this is the future and evolution of TV's. I don't plan on updating my HDTV until I can get another 46'' size that does 3D with no glasses. Probably in the next 8 years we'll have this, and mine currently does 1080p, so I can do w/o 3D for now.
 

Domingo

Fully [H]
Joined
Jul 30, 2004
Messages
20,814
My Sammy DLP died last week and I ended up getting a Sony (HX800) 3DTV. 3D is still a pretty weak gimmick for movies (my opinion only...no flaming needed), but for games I think it's pretty cool.
The 3DTV's that have the effect sans glasses have a very limited viewing angle, so I don't see that changing for a while, nor do I really think 3DTV's will catch on that much any more than having needless widgets on your TV. Eventually I think we'll see something, but the current stuff is a stop-gap. If my new TV didn't come 3D equipped, wouldn't have paid extra. It's more of a nice bonus than something I really needed.
 

theNoid

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 23, 2003
Messages
7,441
I spent 30 minutes playing 3D games on a PS3 at E3 and it was pretty meh... Wearing 3D glasses means this is going nowhere.
 

rampantandroid

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 14, 2006
Messages
1,962
You must be getting a massive discount then as, assuming you have the 50", I see the vt25 for around $2600 which equates to £1638 going by the current exchange rate. The same set will most likely be £2500+ here but afaik it isn't out yet. The 50" VT20 (for comparison) goes for around £2000 ($3150ish)......with one pair of butt ugly 3d glasses. Period.

That's the thing with comparing cross atlantic prices. It's retarded. You will always get more bang for your buck and yes he included tax on his price.

I 100% agree on bigger screen size means better for 3d, but the thing also has to sit in your house......this BS 'I need to have it fill my vision 100%' is laughable! Do you often get distracted whilst watching tv?

At the end of the day we are all different, but Motorstorm is fuckin impressive. Shame Pain was utter toss :D

I can grab a VT25 right now for around 1800 USD; the July 4th sale helped the price a little bit.

As for the size...distracted? In 2D gaming? No, but I do see the wall behind my TV all the time. In 3D anything, that will just throw me off. Again, Avatar was cool to watch 3D IMAX. Where all I could see was the screen, and I had to turn my head some to look at the far end of the screen. That worked. Sitting in a theater that is non-IMAX to watch 3D...annoys the HELL out of me.

Aside from all of this, to me, 3D is a gimmick. It never feels quite right, doesn't look right, doesn't feel right. I'll take 2D, no glasses (I already wear glasses, don't need more on top of that) any day. Games should focus on gameplay, not graphics...movies should focus on story, not trying to use James Cameron's camera system.
 

Tigerblade

2[H]4U
Joined
Jul 23, 2004
Messages
2,423
I can grab a VT25 right now for around 1800 USD; the July 4th sale helped the price a little bit.

As for the size...distracted? In 2D gaming? No, but I do see the wall behind my TV all the time. In 3D anything, that will just throw me off. Again, Avatar was cool to watch 3D IMAX. Where all I could see was the screen, and I had to turn my head some to look at the far end of the screen. That worked. Sitting in a theater that is non-IMAX to watch 3D...annoys the HELL out of me.

Aside from all of this, to me, 3D is a gimmick. It never feels quite right, doesn't look right, doesn't feel right. I'll take 2D, no glasses (I already wear glasses, don't need more on top of that) any day. Games should focus on gameplay, not graphics...movies should focus on story, not trying to use James Cameron's camera system.

Fair do's, I'd probably be irritated by an extra pair of glasses too if I wore a normal pair, my Mrs isn't overly happy but they seem to fit around hers pretty neatly. They really don't bother me in the slightest, very light. Only issue I have is when you go back to a 2d pic there are a few flickers but I can live with that.

Regarding gameplay over graphics....110% agree, but 3D enhances MS. If you've ever played Pacific Rift you'll know how confusing it can be route wise, 3d actually opens up the game, you can literally see the road running thru the trees way out in front of you etc, that's a pretty big game enhancer IMO!! Pain on the other hand is gimmicky, it doesn't really add anything....ironic really considering the gameplay mechanics.

Flatly refusing to see that 3d can enhance games is a tad OTT. It can. Simple. Not all games will be obviously, but it can. I'm really looking forward to see what Black Ops is like.

Oh football is awesome too :)
 
Last edited:

Domingo

Fully [H]
Joined
Jul 30, 2004
Messages
20,814
Not 100% sure about how different TV's work with glasses and 3D sensors, but Sony has a pretty nice pack of 2 sets of glasses, a 3D sensor, an HDMI cable, and the 3D version of Alice in wonderland for $260 on Amazon.
At places like Best Buy the sensors are $50 and classes are $150'ish. Seems like a really good deal to get the bundle, IMO.
With a new Sony 3D TV you get coupons for 4 3D PS3 games and 2 3D Blu-Rays.
Not to be a shill, but I found those things to be one of the (many) reasons I went for a Sony instead of another Sammy.
 

Tigerblade

2[H]4U
Joined
Jul 23, 2004
Messages
2,423
Not 100% sure about how different TV's work with glasses and 3D sensors, but Sony has a pretty nice pack of 2 sets of glasses, a 3D sensor, an HDMI cable, and the 3D version of Alice in wonderland for $260 on Amazon.
At places like Best Buy the sensors are $50 and classes are $150'ish. Seems like a really good deal to get the bundle, IMO.
With a new Sony 3D TV you get coupons for 4 3D PS3 games and 2 3D Blu-Rays.
Not to be a shill, but I found those things to be one of the (many) reasons I went for a Sony instead of another Sammy.

Different markets different deals.

In the UK the best deal is the Sammy.....comes with 4 pairs of glasses and a 3d bluray player (that most seem to be selling therefore subsidising the deal) for under a grand. That brings it under the realms of affordability for this particular market when comparing the competition. My Sony a2000 rptv pretty much swandived last week so I had to buy a tv, couldn't have hoped for a better deal!

I need to pick up some 3D bluray movies, but for the most part what I've played and seen (mostly played) I'm really happy.

I take it the sensor is a separate unit in the Sony TV? Does it have 2d>3d conversion? If so try it on SSF4 and turn the depth up....it's actually pretty good!
 

Domingo

Fully [H]
Joined
Jul 30, 2004
Messages
20,814
Yup - the sensor's are separate on most Sony TV's over here in the US. Some models have it built-in, but most don't. The reasoning was to keep costs down and allow for different glasses/sensors from other brands...at least that's what they told me at the store. They do have 2D to 3D conversion, though. I'll have to give SF4 a go with it. I know the game looks crazy with 240hz on...but in a good way.
 

merlin704

The Great Procrastinator
Joined
Oct 4, 2001
Messages
11,964
I don't buy into the 3d Technology fad. It's overpriced for what it really offers. Also it shows up as new tech every 10 years, stays strong for about 2 years and then fades away just to return in 8-9 more years.
 

kilgore777

Gawd
Joined
Sep 12, 2005
Messages
896
I have a question aout 3D technology. If you are (partially) color-blind (like me), will you be able to see 3D the way it is meant to be seen? The goofy "old-school" version worked for me, but I demo-ed (sp?) a new TV set and while it looked like there was some depth...I wasn't blown away. Is the effect more subtle now or am I gimped? It was some cartoon I was watching (can't remember which one).

I may be SOL on this. If so, I'll have to be a hater!!:D
 

oqvist

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Dec 24, 2001
Messages
8,936
Your going to get lots of hate very very soon! But it's good it works for you, seriously, after finding out how fun the motion games were like I don't mind saying I play them anymore (even though I felt totally unhardcore! But 3d, as long as it isn't gimmicky, can be a great thing.

why would 3D be gimmicky... In real life we have stereoscopic vision which give you much better sense of depth then what you get on 2D monitors?

For gaming where it´s all about interactivity and breaking the third wall 3d does help immerse you in the game world.

I have always missed stereo 3d since I went for a bigger LCD widescreen over my old CRT :(
 

Domingo

Fully [H]
Joined
Jul 30, 2004
Messages
20,814
I think 3D is the future...but probably not the implementation we have at the moment. The glasses are a definite annoyance, but I really don't think the monitors that work without them will work much better since they're VERY viewing angle limited. From what I've read, there isn't much way around that for the time being.
If anything, some kind of hologram effect will be what eventually becomes that standard that everyone will use.
I *do* think that the current implementation is a hell of a stop gap and comparing it to the red/blue glasses or any previous attempts is doing it a disservice.
As long as things are created with it in mind, it can be pretty amazing. I think it gets a bad name because of garbage movies with gimmicks flying at you just for effect.
 

Tigerblade

2[H]4U
Joined
Jul 23, 2004
Messages
2,423
I don't buy into the 3d Technology fad. It's overpriced for what it really offers. Also it shows up as new tech every 10 years, stays strong for about 2 years and then fades away just to return in 8-9 more years.

I don't remember 3d 10 years ago.....especially anything like its current implementation. Think I had a 28" widescreen Phillips crt at the time and paid a fair whack for it, if 3d was being introduced (in whatever form back then) like it is now then I'm pretty sure I'd remember something.

I do remember people being just as aggressive towards widescreen tv's back then tho.....they weren't the future either if I remember correctly ;)
 

4saken

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Sep 14, 2004
Messages
12,091
I do remember people being just as aggressive towards widescreen tv's back then tho.....they weren't the future either if I remember correctly ;)

Pretty sure everyone knew they were the future, and it made sense.
3d just isnt a natural evolution, at least in its current form, to our 2d entertainment.
 

Rash

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 3, 2005
Messages
2,557
I don't remember 3d 10 years ago.....especially anything like its current implementation. Think I had a 28" widescreen Phillips crt at the time and paid a fair whack for it, if 3d was being introduced (in whatever form back then) like it is now then I'm pretty sure I'd remember something.

I do remember people being just as aggressive towards widescreen tv's back then tho.....they weren't the future either if I remember correctly ;)

Yer 3d was shit back on the sega master system in the 90s on a 14" tv so its bound to be shit now!!:D
 

merlin704

The Great Procrastinator
Joined
Oct 4, 2001
Messages
11,964
I don't remember 3d 10 years ago.....especially anything like its current implementation. Think I had a 28" widescreen Phillips crt at the time and paid a fair whack for it, if 3d was being introduced (in whatever form back then) like it is now then I'm pretty sure I'd remember something.

I do remember people being just as aggressive towards widescreen tv's back then tho.....they weren't the future either if I remember correctly ;)

Gives a decent timeline:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3-D_film
 

JBark

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 13, 2002
Messages
2,048
I don't remember 3d 10 years ago.....especially anything like its current implementation.

Elsa Erazor III, baby! :) I bought one of those back in '99, used shutter glasses that you plugged into the video card. It actually worked pretty decently, though needing double the normal FPS was tough with those level of cards. nVidia support died soon after, so didn't really hear much until recently. They pretty much use the exact same shutter tech, just a bit more in sync now.

I actually just started working for DDD/TriDef, they do a whole bunch of work related to 2D->3D conversion and 3D gaming, and it's pretty damn cool. Especially on the PC side, where they can intercept D3D calls and do all sorts of interesting stuff.
 

theNoid

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 23, 2003
Messages
7,441
I don't remember 3d 10 years ago.....especially anything like its current implementation. Think I had a 28" widescreen Phillips crt at the time and paid a fair whack for it, if 3d was being introduced (in whatever form back then) like it is now then I'm pretty sure I'd remember something.

I do remember people being just as aggressive towards widescreen tv's back then tho.....they weren't the future either if I remember correctly ;)

3D is not the future, its a fad the manufacturers are using to try and convince you that you need to now buy another new tv after your already expensive HDTV within the past few years. Thats all it is, and the average consumer isn't going to rush out and replace their fandangled HDTV with some 3DHDTV, trust me.. they're cheap as fuck and the economy isn't really screaming 'blow cash now!'. If every geeky guy I know isn't on board in the slightest, thats a pretty good sign in my eyes.

Fad.

edit. One of my friends got a 3DHDTV on the cheap a few months ago, has a PS3 and he doesn't give a shit about 3D gaming. Like I said earlier, at E3 we both played 3D gaming on a PS3 and it was pretty much ... meh. It was a gimmick layered in, wasn't that great at all and hardly worth the investment. The only people who looked excited were the Sony reps demo'ing the tech.

The only way I see 3D tech expanding is when it no longer requires glasses. And even then, it will start to be adopted into most homes until after people start replacing their current HDTVs. So if somehow 3D outlives the fad stage, I would think it would take upwards to 5-10 years before ever really catching on.

What you see today is pure entry level, fad material.
 
Last edited:

Ocellaris

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 1, 2008
Messages
19,074
One thing to keep in mind is that these TVs use shutter glasses which work differently than the polarized glasses you get in theaters. I am not impressed by anything I've seen in a theater, however I think the shutter glasses 3D works great.

Main problem is that I wear glasses already and not contacts. If they had some cheap prescription inserts I would probably have a 3D TV right now.
 

Tigerblade

2[H]4U
Joined
Jul 23, 2004
Messages
2,423

Nice one, didn't see anything like that at the time.

EDIT - lol at Final Destination 5, 4 was so fuckin bad in 3d, they need to give up!!

3D is not the future, its a fad the manufacturers are using to try and convince you that you need to now buy another new tv after your already expensive HDTV within the past few years. Thats all it is, and the average consumer isn't going to rush out and replace their fandangled HDTV with some 3DHDTV, trust me.. they're cheap as fuck and the economy isn't really screaming 'blow cash now!'. If every geeky guy I know isn't on board in the slightest, thats a pretty good sign in my eyes.

Fad

All I can do is lol

tbf I couldn't give a shit if you thinks it's a fad, the fact is I think on most games I've played so far it's awesome......and so have those who have played, but then because all those geeks have chosen not to buy we must all be mental I guess :rolleyes:

Oh my kids love it too and that makes it worth every penny in my book.

Now, where are my glasses....it's 3d gears time!
 
Last edited:

rampantandroid

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 14, 2006
Messages
1,962
All I can do is lol

tbf I couldn't give a shit if you thinks it's a fad, the fact is I think on most games I've played so far it's awesome......and so have those who have played, but then because all those geeks have chosen not to buy we must all be mental I guess :rolleyes:

Oh my kids love it too and that makes it worth every penny in my book.

Now, where are my glasses....it's 3d gears time!



Geeks are the people with the money. They fund new crap like BluRay, HD DVD, 3D, LCDs, Plasmas, DLP,Surround sound theater systems, new PC stuff - things that were new expensive tech in years past, they funded and allowed it to continue it's existance long enough for the tech to mature....if they won't buy it...

It's a gimmick - admit it - DVD got everyone in the movie industry a taste of what selling everything a SECOND time was like; Everyone owned their VHSes, and then when DVDs came out, they bought their entire collection again. BluRay is an attempt to repeat that - can we sell everyone their movies a THIRD time? 3D is an attempt by the TV industry to make everyone buy a new TV...and for what? 5 released movies? 5 games? PC games have been trying shutter glasses for years - when did nVidia first release it? Didn't Voodoo try it too? Until 3D moves to working for everyone - everyone on the same couch, everyone not getting a headache from it....EVERYONE - it cannot and will not catch on.

Let's raise hands - how many people got a headache from avatar? See, here's the problem: my eyes at n centimeters apart. Your eyes are n + x cetimeters apart. Everyone is different; now what games and movies are doing is showing you pre-recorded content (or rendered content) that is configured to be percieved by someone with their eyes y centimeters apart. And for some people, their eyes are close to being that, their brains can handle it. Some people are anatomically different, and it looks wrong to them. They get a headache, it doesn't look like real 3D...etc. Games can deal with that by changing how far apart the two viewports are - since it's rendered on the fly...but you then need to calibrate it for EVERY DIFFERENT PLAYER.

See what I'm getting at here? 3D is an attempt to simulate something that is not simple or trivial. There are serious roadblocks to getting it right. Just like I'm giving BluRay a pass, I'm giving 3D a pass. Am I being archaic? I don't think so. I mean, the 3DS is the closest to a cool 3D idea I've seen, I might nab it to encourage people to think outside of the box like nintendo did. But for the most part, 3D is a gimmick in it's current presentation - a fad that needs to die.

Also, we're in a damned recession. Wrong time to introduce a tech that costs multi-thousand dollars to buy into: $3000 for the TV; ($2000 if you are OK with plasma) $400 for the game system or BD player. $100 or more for every extra pair of glasses. $50 for that brand new HDMI cable. How much extra will 3D movies and games cost?
 

theNoid

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 23, 2003
Messages
7,441
How much extra will 3D movies and games cost?

Shit, they're already $15-20 in the theatre! Its all a fucking ploy from the movie industry to charge you more money to make up for a decline in attendance/revenue. Nobody I know is falling for it, same can be said for 3D in the home.
 

Rash

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 3, 2005
Messages
2,557
Geeks are the people with the money. They fund new crap like BluRay, HD DVD, 3D, LCDs, Plasmas, DLP,Surround sound theater systems, new PC stuff - things that were new expensive tech in years past, they funded and allowed it to continue it's existance long enough for the tech to mature....if they won't buy it...

It's a gimmick - admit it - DVD got everyone in the movie industry a taste of what selling everything a SECOND time was like; Everyone owned their VHSes, and then when DVDs came out, they bought their entire collection again. BluRay is an attempt to repeat that - can we sell everyone their movies a THIRD time? 3D is an attempt by the TV industry to make everyone buy a new TV...and for what? 5 released movies? 5 games? PC games have been trying shutter glasses for years - when did nVidia first release it? Didn't Voodoo try it too? Until 3D moves to working for everyone - everyone on the same couch, everyone not getting a headache from it....EVERYONE - it cannot and will not catch on.

Let's raise hands - how many people got a headache from avatar? See, here's the problem: my eyes at n centimeters apart. Your eyes are n + x cetimeters apart. Everyone is different; now what games and movies are doing is showing you pre-recorded content (or rendered content) that is configured to be percieved by someone with their eyes y centimeters apart. And for some people, their eyes are close to being that, their brains can handle it. Some people are anatomically different, and it looks wrong to them. They get a headache, it doesn't look like real 3D...etc. Games can deal with that by changing how far apart the two viewports are - since it's rendered on the fly...but you then need to calibrate it for EVERY DIFFERENT PLAYER.

See what I'm getting at here? 3D is an attempt to simulate something that is not simple or trivial. There are serious roadblocks to getting it right. Just like I'm giving BluRay a pass, I'm giving 3D a pass. Am I being archaic? I don't think so. I mean, the 3DS is the closest to a cool 3D idea I've seen, I might nab it to encourage people to think outside of the box like nintendo did. But for the most part, 3D is a gimmick in it's current presentation - a fad that needs to die.

Also, we're in a damned recession. Wrong time to introduce a tech that costs multi-thousand dollars to buy into: $3000 for the TV; ($2000 if you are OK with plasma) $400 for the game system or BD player. $100 or more for every extra pair of glasses. $50 for that brand new HDMI cable. How much extra will 3D movies and games cost?

Works

Yer lets all stick with vhs, cassette walkmans, nokia 7110s and 20" crt Tvs, commodore 64s, windows xp, and massive 2.0 stack systems with huge speakers you grumpy old shit!!:p:p You sir are being archaic when it suits!!

Not everyone can use a games controller/ smartphone/ mouse/ handheld consoles etc.

Heck theres probably morebluray players out there than nintendo wiis and 360s combined.

You stick with the old shit, ill enjoy new technology and get a better experience out of high def, 3d tv, mobile phones etc......i wanted a bigger tv so i got a 50" 3d one that cost a couple of hundred more than the 2d equivalent, now im all set for 3d and it wont cost me anymore at all!!


3D is an attempt by the TV industry to make everyone buy a new TV...and for what? 5 released movies? 5 games?
Come on thats a silly point, the same could have been said about the current gen anything in its infancy!!

Shit, they're already $15-20 in the theatre! Its all a fucking ploy from the movie industry to charge you more money to make up for a decline in attendance/revenue. Nobody I know is falling for it, same can be said for 3D in the home.
holy shit what theatres do you go to??!!
 
Last edited:
Top