July 9, 2010

3D the next HD?

First off I would like to thank AceofNades69 and the­sound­man for the oper­tu­ni­ty to write here, and hope that I can bring some read­ers to the site. So, 3D who’s excit­ed for it? All I hear is a dense silence, so no one? The first sam­ple of 3D I digest­ed was Avatar. Sit­ting in a the­ater 4 rows from the screen try­ing to take every­thing in while wear­ing some redicu­lous pair of glass­es, all while try­ing to keep my eyes from pop­ing out of my head. It was not the most enjoy­able way to expe­ri­ence that movie.
Since Avatar it seems like every devel­op­er, man­u­fac­ture, and movie stu­dio wants in on a piece of the 3D pie. At CES this past year the big rave was 3D T.V.‘s and that every home would be replac­ing their HD sets that some of us just bought, until the price points were revealed. Three grand for the T.V., then on top of that three hun­dred for just two pairs of glass­es that need to be recharged? Ummm count me out, plus since I heard a fact that it does­n’t cost a dime to make T.V.s 3D enabled. Now Sony is on the band­wag­on and has con­vert­ed the PS3 to 3D. With games like Kil­l­zone 3 and Gran Tur­is­mo 5 com­ing in the 3D makes you won­der if this is next log­i­cal step.
I can see if 3D did more for a games as if it lead to devel­op­ing on the z axis instead of keep­ing most games based in a sin­gu­lar 2D plane. From what I saw at E3, this is not the case. It feels like 3D is being pushed on us like motion con­trol. It won’t effect your expe­ri­ence but if you want to get the most out of the sys­tem you need to have and use this. I don’t want to have to use this. I don’t have the great­est vision in the world and it’s slow­ly decreas­ing dai­ly, so on top of hav­ing to try to read the small print HD already is forc­ing on us, I’ll have things bounc­ing off my fore­head for hours at a time mak­ing my eyes strain even more. I just don’t see the advan­tages to 3D in the gam­ing world. The 3DS is a nov­el idea but when you issue a warn­ing that chil­dren under 7 should­n’t use the main fea­ture of your device, I think that is telling you some­thing. 
3D can work in movies. You pay a lit­tle extra, get some goofy glass­es, and watch a 2 hour movie on a screen the size of a house. In that gam­ing realm, you have peo­ple such as myself that have some­thing around a 37’‘ T.V. and play for hours at a time. I spent at least 8 hours play­ing Crack­down 2 the day it came out, if I was play­ing for that long in 3D I would have gone blind and had to have my glass­es fit­ted with the bot­tom of Coke bot­tles just to try to see straight. I under­stand 3D T.V.s come in noth­ing but 42’’ and up, but I just don’t see their direc­tion for using this tech­nol­o­gy oth­er than to have a WOW fac­tor. With games I think it will hin­der the expe­ri­ence, Killzone3 could look twice as good as the sec­ond but since we have to have it in 3D and ren­der every­thing twice, it looks just like Killzone2 if not a lit­tle less. There was an arti­cle that IGN post­ed on the 3DS and devel­op­ers said that if you don’t use the 3D on the devise that the graph­ic capa­bil­i­ty sur­passed any­thing we have seen on the hand­held so far. So why do we need this tech­nol­o­gy and who is demand­ing it?
With all of the 3D movies com­ing out I guess I’ll have to stom­ach it at the the­aters, when it comes to my home and the games I play I will stick the 2D HD. 3D has yet to prove it’s self to be more than a gim­ic. When it becomes a game chang­er then I might con­sid­er it, but like motion con­trols I don’t think that day will come until we get true force feed back. So until we have a holodeck, please Scot­ty, don’t beam me up.

10 comments

  1. thsoundman - July 10, 2010 10:13 am

    While I do think 3d is sort of a tran­si­tion piece to the next form of tech­nol­o­gy i don’t think it’s a gim­mick at least not entire­ly. I would not be surpised at all if it was a “no cost addi­tion” to the tv. Man­u­fac­tures have pulled this stunt for years to increase prof­its… case in point apple. There are a few movies how­ev­er in 3d that look real­ly damn cool… avatar being one of them. I’ve also seen few pre­views in the store with this tech that look real­ly cool. What real­ly throws me off how­ev­er is that the TV do cost over 3k and for the major­i­ty of con­sumers thats to much mon­ey… then on top of it if you want to get a fam­i­ly pack of gog­gles your talk­ing $200 per set of gog­gles and being the aver­age fam­i­ly is 4 peo­ple and then you bring 4 friends over you need 8 and your talk­ing $1600 in just acces­sories… bring you to about $4600 dol­lars. That’s to much mon­ey for the “3d” expe­ri­ence. Per­son­al­ly I’m going to going to wait and see if a. The tech comes down in price and b. how long it sticks around

    Reply
  2. DianaQ - July 10, 2010 4:47 pm

    You make a very impor­tant point about 3D need­ing to prove itself more and give us a rea­son to spend the amount of mon­ey on the TV and acces­sories. It is always bet­ter to not jump at the first “New” thing that comes out, and see the con­sumer reac­tion. The price defi­nate­ly needs to come down if they want to sell their prod­uct (3D TV) to the aver­age per­son or fam­i­ly.

    Reply
  3. ZarikX - July 10, 2010 7:38 pm

    The only thing 3D that looks appeal­ing to me is the 3DS. I’ve nev­er been a fan of 3D, and I can’t even sit through a whole 3D movie with­out feel­ing like my eyes are bleed­ing. But then again I’m just one indi­vid­ual.
    The suc­cess or fail­ure of 3D enter­tain­ment will make or break with­in the next 2 years. Until then it’s an uphill bat­tle of peo­ple mak­ing the tran­si­tion, and the mass­es prefer­ing it.
    I’m more wor­ried that the enter­tain­ment indus­try is try­ing to push this, out of some fear that they must con­stant­ly upgrade such things out of a fear peo­ple may loose inter­est.
    Take the cur­rent sys­tems we have at the moment. The Wii, 360, and PS3 show­ing very few signs of new mod­els appear­ing, mak­ing them obso­lete. Instead, the com­pa­nies are work­ing on bet­ter games, improved online, inno­v­a­tive con­trol schemes. Some, bet­ter then oth­ers. Improve what we have before try­ing to build new­er and shinier things. As said, time will tell bet­ter then we can guess.

    Reply
  4. thsoundman - July 10, 2010 8:27 pm

    I sus­pect that 3d is just a tran­si­tion piece. Per­son­al­ly I believe that we aren’t far off from the “holodecks” we see in the movies.
    I like the idea of eye­fin­i­ty and 3d sur­round then i like 3d glass­es. I will nev­er be buy­ing a 3d tv, well i might if the price is right but oth­er­wise I won’t be. I don’t think the tech is going to stick around that long. I think it’s a tran­si­tion piece.
    Wel­come to the site by ZarikX. I hope you con­tin­ue to come and par­tic­i­pate! Wel­come as well Diana nice to have you here!

    Reply
  5. ScrotusKilmystr - July 11, 2010 3:27 pm

    it’s already been proven that with exisit­ing tech and a reg­u­lar hd tv the 3d effect is pos­si­ble there’s a guy that went to CMU and for his the­sis he hacked a wiimote and did some pret­ty amaz­ing stuff one of which is sim­u­lat­ed 3d envi­romets using a wiimote and ir sen­sor attached to you head his name is johny chung lee and he did get scooped up by microsoft to work on natal well Kinetcs now so for about 60 bucks you can have a 3d set­up if the big three would work with it!

    Reply
  6. thsoundman - July 11, 2010 3:55 pm

    Wel­come to the site Scro­tus! Thanks for post­ing. Do you hap­pen to have alink to what this guy did?

    Reply
  7. ScrotusKilmystr - July 11, 2010 5:09 pm

    Sure sound­man its: http://johnnylee.net/
    look at his project page real­ly slick stuff

    Reply
  8. CABXYZ - July 12, 2010 11:07 pm

    I just saw the oth­er day that there is a 3D T.V. at Best Buy going for $999.99, but that does­n’t include the eye wear. It just seems more like this tech is being cho­sen for us instead of the con­sumer ask­ing for the tech. We are sev­er­al years into the HD effect but there are still alot of peo­ple out there that don’t own HD T.V.‘s. Blu Ray has been a for­mat now for about 4 years and many peo­ple don’t even use the tech. I love blu ray and won’t go back to DVDs unless what I want is not offered in that for­mat. We are at a point in time were the con­sumer is not ready for new tech and is not ask­ing for it. Just as in the con­sole indus­try we should be get­ting a look at 3 new con­soles this year but we are not, the 360 and PS3 are only hit­ting their mid life strides. This isn’t a proven tech and I would like to see how it pans out, maybe it will be around for a year or two, or maybe it will be the next HD. Right now we just have to wait as well as con­sumers should.

    Reply
  9. thsoundman - July 12, 2010 11:16 pm

    I hate buy­ing into new tech. Gen­er­al­ly new tech costs a ton of mon­ey and does­n’t offer that many new ben­e­fits. I was one of the unfor­tu­nate casu­laties of the BLU vs HD-DVD war as I sided with HD-DVD after­words I was stuck with tons of dead tech which would have no future use and now that my HD-DVD play­er has died i have 20 or so movies with no way to play them 🙁 I don’t believe I will be invest­ing in any 3d TV in the forsee­able future.

    Reply
  10. T8 - July 13, 2010 12:36 am

    nev­er have a fol­low­ing. its far to expen­sive to stand up, and does­nt put out that much more of an expe­ri­ence. Its alot dif­fer­ent going to see Avatar in 3D on an IMAX screen then it would be watch­ing it on a 30 inch tv. Ill stick with my 3x24” mon­i­tors and be hap­py to have them.

    Reply

Have your say

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Archives - Powered by WordPress - A theme by cssigniter.com