I love how nobody cares about 3D

I mean I get why theyve done it, I dunno if over in America its always been th case, but here in the UK Odeon are really plugging the 'cinema experience' thing. Obviously as a response to piracy they had to think of something cinema does that cant be replicated, and so here we are! Avatar was a fun rollercoaster ride and I'm sure Clash of the Titans will be a barrel o monkeys aswell. I dunno if its jus me but I think watching something in 3D doesnt really add to any thematic or narrative quality of a film, its just that every now n then you might blink at something 'comin at ya'.
Anyhoo my point is that now its spilling over into games....aaaaand I dont think anyone really cares do they? Like 'ooo a bit more depth perception to my games'! I'm not particularly having a go here, I just think of 3D as a fad or temporary push that is ultimately not going to pan out.
What dyu guys think? What games could it be implemented into, what would be a cool use of this technology that would sell you on it? I personally would love a combination of 3D and Natal tech to recreate the Heavy Rain office in real time, so you can do all the hand motions jus like Mr Jayden (you'll know what I mean if you've played it :D) 

Seems like a gimmick to me. Clearly I fear change in that I'd rather sit there with a controller/K&M and just play the game looking at a screen normally. Not with any shitty 3D glasses or having to wave my arms about at a camera or using a dildo to interact with my games. Now I'm just talking about motion sensitive gaming...

I care. The concept of 3D is good. The ultimate goal - the holographic projection of objects - is one used in many references in popular culture.
 
Perhaps this generation of 3D hardware won't reach most peoples' expectations for stereoscopic 3D, but I can't see how people can deny the huge potential of this application.

" I care. The concept of 3D is good. The ultimate goal - the holographic projection of objects - is one used in many references in popular culture.  Perhaps this generation of 3D hardware won't reach most peoples' expectations for stereoscopic 3D, but I can't see how people can deny the huge potential of this application. "

I would probably watch another 3D movie at the cinema but I don't really care that much about 3D ... especially when it comes to 3D at home. As long as those glasses are necessary, 3D will not conquer the living room.

I love it too. Because it sucks balls and the sooner they realise it, the quicker that shit goes away.

As far as film goes, it's the same here in the US.  Box office receipts dropped so the theater chains installed all these new 3D projectors to lure customers back by offering them something they couldn't get at home (yet).  And, it seems to have worked because profits rose for film studios and regional theater groups.  In fact, this last week, the whole lot of them raised prices 8%-26% which is a couple of bucks depending on what you were paying and if you are seeing it in IMAX, too.  The problem I see it is there is too great a margin for quality between theaters.  My cineplex might have crappy 3D which distracts from the experience by being blurry, dual-imaged and full of motion trails;  your theater could be rock solid, crystal clear and in sync.  Over time, I hope that type of disparity will correct itself, but right now I think chains are happy just raking in the bucks.  I agree that so far it doesn't add anything to a narrative, but I've come to realize that isn't what it is supposed to do.  A film will stand on its merits story wise regardless of tacked on 3D effects.  In my opinion, Avatar failed miserably on that count, but Coraline succeeded.  The question that is still unanswered though is does 3D make a bad film bearable?  As horrible as they were, I could sit through the Transformers movies because they had some pretty good special effects.  Can 3D itself do the same?  I don't know.  What I do know is that I saw that 3D trailer for the next Shrek movie and I decided right then and there I would never see that movie ever.  
 
As for 3D in games, I'm not sure most of us have experienced it so we can't really make a credible decision.  It could be cool to have a strong 3D feeling while exploring some underground tunnels in Fallout 3 or getting a realistic table-top miniatures effect while playing Warhammer 40k Dawn of War.  Few of us are going to make the investment into proper TVs and computer monitors and then the added cost of special glasses to play a few supported games in this manner.  However, the gaming industry is usually at the forefront of new technology, so before the end of the decade I could see it being commonplace.  Well, provided there are some improvements in the technology.  The glasses thing is the biggest hurdle and head-tracking 3D isn't "true" 3D to me.  It's more like those stickers we had as kids where if you moved them it looks like some sort of animation was going on.  The second impediment is viewer headaches.  If motion sickness was upsetting for some in 2D games, can you imagine it in 3D?  Even watching 3D movies, people who never had a problem with a game complain about vision headaches.  Finally, there is the price.  This will fix itself over time, but right now it's just not cost effective to invest in special 3D hardware for the number of games out there. 
  
When it does go mainstream for games, I want a Dead or Alive volleyball game because 3D boobies are kwel! :-D

1080p many years ago was a gimmick too, same with blue ray over dvds, however over time, it's going to be the standard.  
 
Whatever I stand by 3d and in a few years, my opinion will make more sense.

Well right now there isn't really anything to care about, it's not very good quality or very cheap. But that will change over time, give it a few years and the technology will catch up to the demand.

"

1080p many years ago was a gimmick too, same with blue ray over dvds, however over time, it's going to be the standard.

"

" @HitmanAgent47 said:

"

1080p many years ago was a gimmick too, same with blue ray over dvds, however over time, it's going to be the standard.

"

At least 1080p makes the image better. 3D is garbage. "

The 3D in Avatar was great because it was more like a window into a world

Meh, I'm cool with 3D. I find even when the scene doesn't show a lot of depth, I still get this wicked clarity off of the effect.
A shame everybody gets "motion sickness" and "headaches" I guess - but I don't so that's not a complaint for me.
If the movie comes out in both 2D and 3D I'll go see the 3D version every time.
 
When I see people talk about this it reminds me of me talking about the Wii when it first hit. "It's a silly fad that will fail and disappear". 
 
Anyone see any other similarities between Avatar and the Wii?

I dont care that much. What really interests me is virtual reality. Did you guys see the video of the recent game conference (forget its name) where Ryan got into the giant sphere? That was pretty cool.

The major problem I have 3D (other than the glasses and gimmickyness of it) is the fact that you can only really focus on one part of the screen at a time, everything else that you are not focusing on becomes blurred and difficult to properly process. It's fine in Avatar when I'm looking at 'HOLY SHIT MECHWARRIOR TYPE THING!!' but would fucken suck arse for games and indeed for any at home TV or film viewing.

I totally disagree. I think alot of people seem to care about 3D. And I find it scary how much it's starting to catch on.

I still don't really get what it adds.

It's useless. Time and money can be better spent elsewhere.

Can't say I'm real excited for 3D games, but I also don't have a 3D-capable TV. 

I tried playing Crysis, Dawn of War 2 and Batman Arkham Asylum in 3D, it was nearly impossible, the 3D simply screwed up pointing and aiming. It's unviable just from a gameplay standpoint. Everyone who plays in 3D will also be at a gameplay disadvantage for competitive online games since they'll be at a slower framerate, and will have to play with those awkward 3D glasses bugging them every second. The equipment to get it is prohibitively expensive as well; you pretty much need GTX 480 SLI, 3 120hz monitors and an Nvidia 3D kit in order to play 3D surround at good settings and performance, and that's about $2,000. 3D TVs have the same problems.

3D don't matter to me.

3D TV is going nowhere until it's #1 cheaper and #2 Doesn't require glasses. Looking like a douche for two hours, in the dark of a theater, once a year is one thing. Sitting at home doing it? Hell no!

I'm not a big fan of 3D.

I am an early adopter and salivate at most home theater tech.
 
3D just looks to be a giant clusterfuck. The effect is gimmicky and often more distracting than it is cool. Definitely not interested unless they develop an elegant solution that does not require glasses and an entire update of my system.

I still haven't seen anything in 3D so obviously I'm not that interested in it. Give me my holodeck and we'll talk.

  @Geno said:

    " I tried playing Crysis, Dawn of War 2 and Batman Arkham Asylum in 3D, it was nearly impossible, the 3D simply screwed up pointing and aiming. It's unviable just from a gameplay standpoint. Everyone who plays in 3D will also be at a gameplay disadvantage for competitive online games since they'll be at a slower framerate, and will have to play with those awkward 3D glasses bugging them every second. The equipment to get it is prohibitively expensive as well; you pretty much need GTX 480 SLI, 3 120hz monitors and an Nvidia 3D kit in order to play 3D surround at good settings and performance, and that's about $2,000. 3D TVs have the same problems. "

As someone who has a 3d vision kit I disagreed with your statement. Crysis is not supported by 3d Vision and the kit shows a huge notice that tells you so when you boot up the game. The frame rate takes a hit, but, its not as bad as everyone says it is, I am running a Core 2 Duo E6850, SLI 8800gt's, 4 gig of ram and I can play everything at 1680x1050 with everything turned on (Just Cause 2 and Metro 2033). As far as price is concerned, at Future Shop (the local electronics store in Canada), I payed just under $500 for the monitor and 3d vision kit, so it is pricey, but not too much, because I needed a new monitor anyways. As for eye fatigue, its the same as any other exercise, the eyeball is attached to a bunch of muscles and if your muscles are weak it takes a couple of days of using it for an hour or two till you are used to the strain. I would say it is the same kind of strain as when I first upgraded from a 16" 4x3 CRT to a 22" 16x10 LCD monitor and trying to fit the whole viewing angle into my peripheral vision. 
 

@Boostergold

" 3D tv has a quick Depreciation value. Going to go see a 3D movie, like Avatar, once a year or less, is in its' own right a novel and fun experience. The fact that we are exposed to it in such limited quantities is what makes it such an attention and money grabber but once you bring 3D into the household it becomes overused and its novelty wears off and slowly it begins to depreciate. Put it this way you watch the sunset once in awhile and its a beautiful sight, watch the sunset everyday and sooner or later it becomes "just another sunset" and loses its special quality. Thats why 3D will be great for a year or two but soon people will get over the fad and get back to regular television. . "

I'm alright with the idea of 3d.  Only because I see it as the next step towards things like holographics and projected 3d images.  And then once it becomes interactive projected 3d objects in games and such. Thats when my mind explodes.  For now its pretty and all but I'm not getting into all the extreme hype about it.

I  am moderate on the idea of 3D, I've seen a few movies and I like them, but I am not quite sold on its use for gaming.  I would imagine a game like WipeoutHD would be really cool with 3D. The HUD popping out of the screen would be pretty cool . I don't see it as something that should be used for every game.

Well, it's a step closer to getting a holodeck, where I can act out my sickest fantasies. But I think the movie theaters just see this as an excuse to charge $15 a ticket.

Thanks for all the replies guys!! I guess the price is also a HUGE turnoff, which is another factor, do you think we're going to get new consoles soon aswell? Just like with the PS2/Xbox/Gamecube, you could tell graphics could be better y'no? Like we hadnt reached photorealism yet. Well I guess we still havent, but games like Fight Night and and God of War are extremely impressive.  
So do you think ANYBODY would go for a new system where the main attraction is the 3D capabilities? What if the big franchises moved onto this new console??

Once 3D porn gets here, everyone will come around.

there have been efforts to popularize 3D in the past (more than you might think) and it's always failed. 
 
the only sign that this movement won't fail is how many hardware manufacturers are jumping on-board (Sony, etc)

" I tried playing Crysis, Dawn of War 2 and Batman Arkham Asylum in 3D, it was nearly impossible, the 3D simply screwed up pointing and aiming. It's unviable just from a gameplay standpoint. Everyone who plays in 3D will also be at a gameplay disadvantage for competitive online games since they'll be at a slower framerate, and will have to play with those awkward 3D glasses bugging them every second. The equipment to get it is prohibitively expensive as well; you pretty much need GTX 480 SLI, 3 120hz monitors and an Nvidia 3D kit in order to play 3D surround at good settings and performance, and that's about $2,000. 3D TVs have the same problems. "

" @ShalashaskaUK666: Being exposed to 3d for a long amount of time over time cant be good for your brain and eyes "

" @HitmanAgent47 said:

"

1080p many years ago was a gimmick too, same with blue ray over dvds, however over time, it's going to be the standard.

"

At least 1080p makes the image better. 3D is garbage. "

All this 3D talk is like I'm reliving my Rad Racer days. Now that was shitty 3D.

I like 3D at the movies.  and once they figure out how do have projection 3D at home for TV and video games then i'll fully buy in to 3D

the glasses strain my eyes, so i usually go for the 2D counterparts of any movie

While it would be cool, I'm just not that into it right now because I don't know if I'd want my gaming to be in 3d as of now since they haven't even maxed out 1080p.  Very few games come out that support 1080p.  Also I think it will cause depression to people who game all day long for the obvious reasons.  The one thing that I do like about 3D is that a new console would have to come out.  It seems as if the PS3 and 360 are at a stalemate.  There have been no games as of late that are pushing the console to it's limits nor are they in 1080p.

I think the new type of 3d looks great. So I don't really care. Looks miles better then the old red and blue glasses.

this 2.5D needs to stop stealing the 3D name.

i don't either. i think it is only good with different movies. i don't think 3D will be good with video games. i can see it being distracting and getting motion sickness. a couple of times when watching avatar i started not feeling good.

3d has been a gimmick now for 40 years, comparing it to actual advances in technology is stupid.

This 3D shit can go right up my ass and stay there. At least then no one could use it anymore.

I think 3D in films is fine to a certain extent, however, I don't think I want to spend that kind of money to make all my games in 3D, buuuuuut...
 
I wonder what Giant Bomb would look in 3D?