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.


  1. 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 3×24″ monitors and be happy to have them.

  2. 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.

  3. 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.

  4. ScrotusKilmystr - July 11, 2010 5:09 pm

    Sure soundman its: http://johnnylee.net/

    look at his project page really slick stuff

  5. 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?

  6. 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!

  7. 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!

  8. 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.

  9. 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.

  10. 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


Have your say

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