Why 3D is a bad idea.

Avatar image for belonpopo
Belonpopo

2142

Forum Posts

-1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 12

#1  Edited By Belonpopo

  3D is on the rise, and it will soon fail. My reasoning behind this is because when I (and assuming most people do this too) don't like periphals(sp?). Adding more clutter to my already bursting supply of Guitar Hero, and Rock Band stuff is not my cup of tea. 3D may also take a visual elemnts away from game devolopment, Devs will focus on how they can make their 3D look better and possibly neglect the basic graphical non-3D gamplay. Movies are a nice way to use 3D, but please keep it away from my video games. This won't stop third parties form releasing slews of them on the Wii sometime before the go ka-p00t

Avatar image for infinitegeass
InfiniteGeass

2150

Forum Posts

446

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 11

#2  Edited By InfiniteGeass

I think it's dumb because I don't think I can see things in 3D.

Avatar image for emilio
Emilio

3581

Forum Posts

1268

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 6

#3  Edited By Emilio

Unless Nintendo does it, it won't sell consoles! bahahaha

Avatar image for cube
Cube

4410

Forum Posts

1677

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 5

#4  Edited By Cube

Yes let's just stay in the past woooooo

Avatar image for nekroskop
Nekroskop

2830

Forum Posts

47

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#5  Edited By Nekroskop

LEAVE METAL SLUG ALONE! LEAVE IT ALONE!

Avatar image for akeldama
Akeldama

4373

Forum Posts

28

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

#6  Edited By Akeldama
@ahaisthisourchance: Evile \m/
Avatar image for haltiamreptar
HaltIamReptar

2038

Forum Posts

7

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#7  Edited By HaltIamReptar

Hey, I just listened to the latest Bomcast, too!  Maybe I should make a thread...
 
Oh, wait.
 
 
Sorry, just teasing you.  The timing IS a bit suspicious, though.

Avatar image for buzz_killington
buzz_killington

3674

Forum Posts

5319

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 2

#8  Edited By buzz_killington

My main reason is that it just gives me headaches and my eyes hurt after a while.

Avatar image for agentj
AgentJ

8996

Forum Posts

6144

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 31

#9  Edited By AgentJ

Played Resident Evil 5 in 3D at PAX, and I honestly thought it was pretty cool. Probably won't be for everyone, but I'd probably use it if it was an option right now.

Avatar image for duhqbnsilo
DuhQbnSiLo

2241

Forum Posts

975

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

#10  Edited By DuhQbnSiLo

I don't like motion-sensor, and don't care for 3-D.

Avatar image for penguindust
penguindust

13129

Forum Posts

22

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

#11  Edited By penguindust

From what I understand you need to be in front of the 3D monitor/TV set for the image to properly combine.  That means no laying on the couch at an angle playing games lazily like we sometimes do.  3D is a gimmick.  It may work in the theaters to get folks in the seats, but few of us are going to want to watch normal TV or play games that way.  When they figure out a way where people won't need the glasses, that's when it becomes a viable technology.

Avatar image for diamond
Diamond

8678

Forum Posts

533

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

#12  Edited By Diamond

Yea I don't think 3D will ever kick off in any significant way until they can eliminate the glasses need, especially expensive shutter glasses.  There is no chance of that being a mass market item.

Avatar image for citizenkane
citizenkane

10894

Forum Posts

29122

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 106

#13  Edited By citizenkane
@InfiniteGeass said:
" I think it's dumb because I don't think I can see things in 3D. "
That is true actually.  You see things in 4D.
Avatar image for mikkaq
MikkaQ

10296

Forum Posts

52

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#14  Edited By MikkaQ
@CitizenKane:
  
You can SEE TIME?!  
 
You operate within 4Ds, but you can perceive only 3 with your eyes. 
 
Also the OP is missing the main thing that sucks about 3D and that it's no one wants to wear ugly effing glasses when mellowing out to some TV. Really, it's just TOO engaging for TV. Also it's not very social if it's all glasses based. Also it'S expensive, and no one wants to buy one. Like not everyone has purchased an HDTV at this point, so why go even further? It's nuts.  
 
Also let's not forget it's a total gimmick. It's straining on the eyes and will never feel natural, or right. 
Avatar image for iam3green
iam3green

14368

Forum Posts

350

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#15  Edited By iam3green
@Emilio said:
" Unless Nintendo does it, it won't sell consoles! bahahaha "
ha, motion controls and 3D images popping out. it will sell even more. 
 
i don't care for 3D it will look cool for a while but then it will get old. i've watched a movie in 3D it was cool but after watching it, i thought it wasn't that special anymore.
Avatar image for hitmanagent47
HitmanAgent47

8553

Forum Posts

25

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#16  Edited By HitmanAgent47

Well motion control, 3d and digital distribution is the way of the future, it's all going to virtual reality anyways. I'm all for the technology 3d technology.

Avatar image for habster3
habster3

3706

Forum Posts

1522

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#17  Edited By habster3

Companies should just stop making games 3D and should just make the game look good; we don't need any special crap.

Avatar image for zajtalan
Zajtalan

1261

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#18  Edited By Zajtalan

i love 3d

Avatar image for kermoosh
kermoosh

919

Forum Posts

187

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#19  Edited By kermoosh

i  saw avatar in 3D and thought it would have been better in 2D 
 
as much as i hate to say, most future movies are gonna be in 3D 
 
i called it, remind me about it in 10 years

Avatar image for citizenkane
citizenkane

10894

Forum Posts

29122

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 106

#20  Edited By citizenkane
@XII_Sniper: Wait, you guys can't see time?!?  No wonder everybody has been telling me that I'm crazy.
Avatar image for handlas
handlas

3414

Forum Posts

18

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

#21  Edited By handlas
@InfiniteGeass said:
" I think it's dumb because I don't think I can see things in 3D. "
so I'm not the only one eh?  Rarely did anything in Avatar look 3D to me.  So I get none of the benefits but still walk out of the theater with bloodshot eyes.
Avatar image for inkeiren
inkeiren

976

Forum Posts

2

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#22  Edited By inkeiren
@handlas said:
" @InfiniteGeass said:
" I think it's dumb because I don't think I can see things in 3D. "
so I'm not the only one eh?  Rarely did anything in Avatar look 3D to me.  So I get none of the benefits but still walk out of the theater with bloodshot eyes. "
Do you wear glasses or have vision a bit less than say 20/40?
Avatar image for adtr_zero
ADTR_ZERO

1122

Forum Posts

6

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#23  Edited By ADTR_ZERO
@Cube said:
" Yes let's just stay in the past woooooo "
What a stupid post and a dumb way to contribute. 
 
Hehe.
Avatar image for handlas
handlas

3414

Forum Posts

18

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

#24  Edited By handlas
@inkeiren said:
" @handlas said:
" @InfiniteGeass said:
" I think it's dumb because I don't think I can see things in 3D. "
so I'm not the only one eh?  Rarely did anything in Avatar look 3D to me.  So I get none of the benefits but still walk out of the theater with bloodshot eyes. "
Do you wear glasses or have vision a bit less than say 20/40? "
I have bad vision.  I wear contacts.  Only thing that ever really looked 3D during the movie was when there was a plant really large, close to the camera, on the screen. The trailers looked 3D however.  The thing that really really popped out from the screen was the text during previews. But Avatar never looked 3D for me.  I could say maybe the movie was so long that it just stopped...working...for me I guess. But I did go to the bathroom halfway through and when I got back it still didn't look 3D.
Avatar image for seriouslynow
SeriouslyNow

8504

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

#25  Edited By SeriouslyNow
@Diamond said:
" Yea I don't think 3D will ever kick off in any significant way until they can eliminate the glasses need, especially expensive shutter glasses.  There is no chance of that being a mass market item. "
Lamborginis and Porsches aren't mass market items yet they stay in business.  I believe the assumption that 3D will not sell successfully because it isn't cheap or simple enough is an incorrect one.  Back in 1990, when Wing Commander was released, it was prohibitively expensive to be able to put together a PC with all the right bits (386 CPU, VGA graphics card, SoundBlaster soundcard, nice joystick, MS DOS 5, QEMM386) to properly experience the game and yet people literally bought 100s of thousands of properly specced machines almost overnight and Wing Commander literally changed almost the entire focus of the home PC industry.   People are always willing to buy into a new technology IF it's attractive enough regardless of cost.
Avatar image for diamond
Diamond

8678

Forum Posts

533

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

#26  Edited By Diamond
@SeriouslyNow: Well laserdisc stuck around for a while too.  It's not really comparable to high end cars because those don't devalue as fast but they also are way more cost prohibitive.  Like high end gaming PC hardware, this tech moves fast enough that shutter glasses with a 120Hz LCD will be obsolete in 10 years if not a lot less time.  Unfortunately, unlike a gaming PC which could run Wing Commander relatively cheaply a few years later, shutter glasses and 120Hz LCDs won't become really cheap before they're obsolete.
Avatar image for captain_clayman
captain_clayman

3349

Forum Posts

10

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#27  Edited By captain_clayman

it gives me headaches 
i wish it didn't because it's cool. 
 
also how the eff is 3d without glasses possible?

Avatar image for turambar
Turambar

8283

Forum Posts

114

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#28  Edited By Turambar
@Belonpopo: The peripheral argument is very technology based though, isn't it?  If the proliferation of 3D televisions increases to the degree HD has, I don't think this would be a problem.  As for game design, balancing emphasis on graphics and game play is a constant issue for any game developer.  Given enough time and practice, I'm sure 3D games can find a proper one as well.  Ultimately though, this is still all pie in the sky pondering.  We are still years and years away from 3D technology getting far enough ahead, and design learning to adequately work with it (if that ever happens).
Avatar image for symphony
Symphony

1933

Forum Posts

284

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 33

User Lists: 0

#29  Edited By Symphony

Retinal implants. That's all we need! Just some little nano machines in there that let us perceive 3D images without the need for special glasses.
 
One day it'll be a reality. One day.

Avatar image for nekroskop
Nekroskop

2830

Forum Posts

47

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#30  Edited By Nekroskop
@Symphony said:
"Retinal implants. That's all we need! Just some little nano machines in there that let us perceive 3D images without the need for special glasses.  One day it'll be a reality. One day. "


NANOMACHINES?!
NANOMACHINES?!
Avatar image for inkeiren
inkeiren

976

Forum Posts

2

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#31  Edited By inkeiren
@handlas said:
" @inkeiren said:
" @handlas said:
" @InfiniteGeass said:
" I think it's dumb because I don't think I can see things in 3D. "
so I'm not the only one eh?  Rarely did anything in Avatar look 3D to me.  So I get none of the benefits but still walk out of the theater with bloodshot eyes. "
Do you wear glasses or have vision a bit less than say 20/40? "
I have bad vision.  I wear contacts.  Only thing that ever really looked 3D during the movie was when there was a plant really large, close to the camera, on the screen. The trailers looked 3D however.  The thing that really really popped out from the screen was the text during previews. But Avatar never looked 3D for me.  I could say maybe the movie was so long that it just stopped...working...for me I guess. But I did go to the bathroom halfway through and when I got back it still didn't look 3D. "
To me, Avatar did not pop out of the screen, but rather, into the screen. It's hard to explain.
 
In other 3D movies, the screen was the middle of your sight, and stuff came out to show what the front of the depth was. To me, in Avatar, the screen was the very front of your view, and farther into the screen was the middle. Again, it's hard to explain.
Avatar image for seriouslynow
SeriouslyNow

8504

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

#32  Edited By SeriouslyNow
@Diamond said:
" @SeriouslyNow: Well laserdisc stuck around for a while too.  It's not really comparable to high end cars because those don't devalue as fast but they also are way more cost prohibitive.  Like high end gaming PC hardware, this tech moves fast enough that shutter glasses with a 120Hz LCD will be obsolete in 10 years if not a lot less time.  Unfortunately, unlike a gaming PC which could run Wing Commander relatively cheaply a few years later, shutter glasses and 120Hz LCDs won't become really cheap before they're obsolete. "
Laserdisc stuck around for as long as it did for the simple reason that Dolby Digital AC3 5.1 didn't become cheap enough quickly enough to overcome Dolby's own Pro Logic spatial audio technology so consumers who had heavily invested in their home theatre systems using Pro Logic just coudln't justify replacing the entirety of their laserdisc collection with DVD.  Once Dolby Digital Amps supported both technologies and Pioneer released their DVD and Laserdisc combo players (I have one right here) consumers didn't feel threatened that they would lose their library value, even thought it clear that DVD was better in all aspects.  I know that the high end care comparison isn't an entirely comparable scenario but it and the Laserdisc definitely reflect a similar place in all markets : the high end.  3D will picked up in the high end and as you yourself just said, all technology devalues pretty quickly, so in effect 3D will not stay at the high end for long.  Not only that but 3D will move from being a goggle and display driven technology to being a solely display driven technology.  There are already displays that can render useful 3D depth without the need for glasses to match.  They are limited by field of view and distance to the screen but they do work quite well.  This is something that the major display manufacturers will eventually take on and improve as they bring out more sets with 3D capabilities.  3DVision is not the only approach and so I think the discussion isn't served properly by centering our focus on it.
Avatar image for diamond
Diamond

8678

Forum Posts

533

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

#33  Edited By Diamond
@ChristOnIce: I don't think not buying every single new technology within a year of release qualifies as being a Luddite.  Right now the tech for gaming is really only on high end PC hardware and requires extreme premium prices, and very very few people are actually using those features.  There's no problem in having a high end unique and 'gimmicky' market, but most people will naturally balk at the idea until it matures.
 
We balk at shutter glasses, and they absolutely are the betamax of 3D tech.  For that matter, the uprising of 3D games in the next 10 years might not happen.  3D movies were a big thing in the past and it's a fad that constantly rises and falls over the years.  In the 90's everyone thought we were all going to be playing VR games in the 2000's, that never became a reality.
 
Long term I think stereoscopic 3D games are inevitable to be widespread but until they are proficient without the use of any headgear or body modification it's not going to become popular at all.
Avatar image for demonbear
demonbear

1943

Forum Posts

7

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 13

#34  Edited By demonbear

Oh no, new stuff, change? I don't like change. I'm on the internet. 
 
Lets make a petition!!!

Avatar image for barrock
Barrock

4185

Forum Posts

133

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#35  Edited By Barrock

3D is here to stay. Why? 
 
  $445,768,203 domestic.
 
Mmm money.

Avatar image for twoonefive
TwoOneFive

9793

Forum Posts

203

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

#36  Edited By TwoOneFive

i like it and guess what, its here to stay.  
AVATAR is well on its way to reaching Titanics epic worldwide gross.

Avatar image for diamond
Diamond

8678

Forum Posts

533

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

#37  Edited By Diamond
@ChristOnIce: There is no 3D TV standard yet like HDTV existed all those years ago.  The HDTV standard was also concerned with OTA transmissions among other things, which leaves me to believe that 3D TV won't ever have such a strong initiative behind it.  I agree with most of your points, but I still think 3D in the home might be seen as an 'aside' rather than a product many people truly want because it's a drastic improvement.  Not as dumb of an idea as smellovision or biometrics controlled games but similarly non-imperative.
 
The 'everyone' is important to making these technologies truly widely used and important.  While TVs/monitors have been gaining resolution steadily for decades, it required an 'everyone' standard of HDTV to truly make the technology widely used and widely applied.
 
Just like VR, we know that we can do it, and we have done it well.  That really doesn't mean anything to the popularity or inevitability of any technology.
 

@ChristOnIce

said:

I don't know if you're old enough to remember, but the early 90s were a great time for forward-thinking.  The World Wide Web was still in its infancy, and the average consumer perhaps knew someone who knew someone who could pay by the hour to do something on the computer with their phone line.  
 
Some kids who went to see Brainscan surely thought that we'd have virtual reality games by 2000, but that meant very little.  People with knowledge of technology had other predictions.  Seemingly far-fetched sci-fi concepts like these:

I don't think the forward planning in business or industry has changed at all, but the economic state of the world definitely alters the 'everyone' aspect of the spread of technology.  There are always many technologies that bring real significant change and I'm just not certain stereoscopic video alone is really that significant. 
 
Many people with an intelligent view of technology did think we'd all be using VR, and many home 3D goggles came out and some people thought that would be a permanent staple in the home.
Avatar image for deusoma
Deusoma

3224

Forum Posts

128696

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 4

#38  Edited By Deusoma

Maybe the technology will become standard, maybe it won't.
 
All I know is that right now, every 3-D movie is built entirely around the 3-D gimmick, and that that makes the rest of the movie suffer to the point where objectively, it sucks. 
 
Either it's going to become less obtrusive or it's going to die out. Either way, I can't wait until it stops compromising the quality of my entertainment.

Avatar image for jiujitsuka85
JiuJitsuka85

379

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#39  Edited By JiuJitsuka85

The effect is cool but having to wear glasses annoys me. As if gaming isn't geeky enough on its own.

Avatar image for barrock
Barrock

4185

Forum Posts

133

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#40  Edited By Barrock
@Deusoma said:
" Maybe the technology will become standard, maybe it won't.
 
All I know is that right now, every 3-D movie is built entirely around the 3-D gimmick, and that that makes the rest of the movie suffer to the point where objectively, it sucks.   Either it's going to become less obtrusive or it's going to die out. Either way, I can't wait until it stops compromising the quality of my entertainment. "
Did you see Up?
Avatar image for kojdog
Kojdog

83

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#41  Edited By Kojdog

Anyone play that kick ass hologram cowboy game (name eludes me) that was in casino arcades (Caesar's Palace Lake Tahoe, circa 1990 comes to mind)?   
 
That shit's the future.  We'll all have multi-thousand-dollar corner glass coffee tables in the future with Dragon's Lair - minus running on it with cowboys and geometrical shapes instead of Dirk and dragons.
Avatar image for seriouslynow
SeriouslyNow

8504

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

#42  Edited By SeriouslyNow

People who call 3D a gimmick remind me of people who called 3D acceleration a gimmick in the early 90s.  There are no gimmicks, only technology that while entertaining and possibly useful, is yet to find its solidified place in the pantheon.
 
@Kojdog said:

" Anyone play that kick ass hologram cowboy game (name eludes me) that was in casino arcades (Caesar's Palace Lake Tahoe, circa 1990 comes to mind)?    That shit's the future.  We'll all have multi-thousand-dollar corner glass coffee tables in the future with Dragon's Lair - minus running on it with cowboys and geometrical shapes instead of Dirk and dragons. "

That game was SEGA's Time Traveller
 
 
Avatar image for pj
PJ

1195

Forum Posts

705

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 3

#43  Edited By PJ
@InfiniteGeass said:
" I think it's dumb because I don't think I can see things in 3D. "
I see stuff in 3D all the time, and I don't need a TV or goggles to se it.
 
Also, 3D will fail because I dont want to ware stupid shit on my face when watching TV or playing games. I'm usually resting my head on a pillow or something when watching movies so the goggles will just get in the way.
Avatar image for willy105
Willy105

4959

Forum Posts

14729

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 1

#44  Edited By Willy105

I think 3D is awesome, but for it to work on the home, it needs the technology that allows for 3D without glasses, like those 3D Hallmark cards. Otherwise, it won't work. Glasses work perfectly on a movie theater, but you can't expect anyone to do it at home.
 
@Symphony said:

" Retinal implants. That's all we need! Just some little nano machines in there that let us perceive 3D images without the need for special glasses.  One day it'll be a reality. One day. "

You mean, like having two eyes?
Avatar image for ryoma122
ryoma122

729

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

#45  Edited By ryoma122

i may be the only one who thinks that 3D doesnt work it just makes the movie the colour of the 
stupid glasses the man makes you wear to watch the film