There's no doubt that 3D is a cool, high-tech feature. And for certain games, it can be impressive. Amazing even.
But this doesn't appear to be something that has caught on among hardcore gamers. I mean, I can only speak from personal experience and what I read in articles and communities on the Internet, but most fans don't seem to think 3D is a critical upgrade.
Some say the drop in high-definition is the reason they don't like 3D. Others say it gives them headaches. Still others say it remains too expensive; i.e., the cost of a new 3D-enabled HDTV if they don't already have one, plus the cost of the glasses. But the majority seem to agree that for whatever reason, 3D doesn't always add the expected intensity and immersion one might expect. I've even heard people say the immersion level drops because they're too aware of the technology before their eyes; too aware they're involved in something that is, for all intents and purposes, fake. It's a fantastical experience, after all.
Now, that may not make much sense but in some ways, I understand it. Plus, we have to remember that 3D isn't exactly new; people have been going to the theaters to check out 3D movies since the 80s. Of course, things have advanced since then and the technology is better but even so, the concept is the same. The bottom line is that unless we're talking total immersion, as in virtual reality, I don't think 3D is going to have any significant impact. Then again, there are a select few who will swear by 3D gaming and wonder why it hasn't become more popular.
Maybe we just need to take the next step, and when the tech gets a little better and we don't need glasses, and it's seamlessly implemented in the gaming experience, with no resolution cut, 3D will become more popular. That's just a guess, and perhaps a hope. For now, though, 3D gaming doesn't appear to be this amazing revolution it was purported to be.
It feels like 3D is just a cheap halfway point between 2D screen images and holographic technology.
For me, the price doesn't justify the thrills of seeing an image with some depth. I bought a 3DS cos it was cheap and has Mario and Zelda games, not for the 3D.
I work at the cinemas, and there are a lot of people who ask for the 2D sessions of movies instead of 3D. Many people seem to be over the gimmick, and the cost of glasses that go with TV purchases is a little outrageous.
Yeah, I pretty much feel right now 3D is in it's infancy and will take some time to hit it's stride. There's so many strings attached. A special TV, special glasses, loss in graphics detail and performance etc. I'll be interested in 3D moreso after it's become more approacheable and better implemented.
I do suspect a Vita revision down the line that boasts a 3D display. Probably some years from now, but I expect it.
Last edited by Temjin001 on 2/20/2012 9:48:08 PM
No… 3D has ALL the earmarks of a fad. Not to mention the HUGE percentage of the population that cannot handle 3D experiences due to headaches, nausea etc…
3D is a neat gimmick but the price is still not in that "sweet spot" for me yet. I just upgraded from LCD to LED less than a year ago and I'm not prepared to make that next jump yet.
after playing through all of uncharted 3 in 3D i have to say that yes I do care about 3d gaming. And I really wish there were more games that supported it.
and for those who think that it is too expensive, there are good 3D tv's out there that have a good price tag. Case in point, I am currently using a 43" Samsung 3D tv that I picked up for $500 at best buy, and I know that there are other good ones out there for similar prices
Nice deal!
I am wondering, so are there not a lot of games that support 3D? I counted the ones I had once and I remember it being a significant amount of the games I own
Funny after playing Shadow of the Collosus in 3d I was hooked thinking it would make every experience better.
Then I tried Uncharted 3 and could not get the 3d to look good. I think it was all the lighting effects going on cause it was ghosting so bad I just couldnt see what was going on and it gave me a headache.
I still have high hopes for 3d but I dont think all the tv,s are working the way the developers think they are. Some day it will be standard and engrossing.
Last edited by Havoc on 2/21/2012 7:43:19 AM
I want 3D to flourish. I'm contemplating getting that Sony 3d TV bundle deal but reading articles like this make me hesitant. I don't want to invest in technology that isn't going to last, but I do enjoy the 3D touch.
Is it safe to get a 3D TV? Will it thrive through the next gen?
43" 3D for that price, awesome deal.
At P.C. Richards I got a an Ipad 2 and what I think is the same Samsung 43" as BTNwarrior – I spent more $$ on the IPAD!?!?
Point being that a savvy consumer can find a good deal on new tech.
The TV is great for normal HD stuff and 3D stuff is good too and it's only 720p.
There may not be much but what I play in 3D I Love…
Dungeon Defenders is AWESOME in 3D
WIPEOUT is GREAT although I think they disable splitscreen when playing 3D, so I'm only playing online or the campaign.
It's gotta be the right game I guess. Many games won't require it. Let's hope the devs can know the difference so it never feels slapped on.
Also 3D movies are cool, My wife and I watched the last Harry Potter flick and the 3D set pieces (dragon escape) were thrilling. but the whole film didn't demand a 3d effect to tell the story.
I've been tempted to pickup Sony's PS3/PC 3D Display, however, I figured my money would be better spent on a Vita. But, I'm sure I'll be playing Uncharted 3, Killzone 3, and Resistance 3 again at some point in 3D.
I WANT HOLOGRAMS!!! TY
I really want one but being out of work, I can't justify getting one yet.
Hopefully within the next couple of years, a name brand 55" LED)with 2 pairs of glasses)will drop to under $800 & I can use a tax refund to pay for it. Sorry, this years refund went for my bills & a pre-paid Vita.
Now all I've still got to do, is find some money somehow to buy a game for it.
I recently bought a 50" plasma to replace my still working 32" LCD. I came close to getting a 3D tv, but decided against it.
I would like to 3-D game but it costs a lot of money. I'm fine with the normal non-3D gaming.
But if I could I would.
I own a 3D TV. While I haven't tried any game with it, I've put in some Blu-Ray movies in 3D.
I hate it. For two reasons:
1 – It hurts my eyes;
2 – I know why it makes my eyes hurt;
It's not only a physical discomfort to me, but also a psychological one.
I probably will never adhere to a full-3D experience in gaming.
Should of tested it out in the store first before making a 3D tv purchase. Now u wasted money on the 3D part of the tv.
Last edited by AcHiLLiA on 2/21/2012 2:16:15 PM
I had tried it several times before, but the girlfriend liked it and wanted one, so it's all good.
Last edited by wolfsinner on 2/21/2012 3:26:13 PM
The thing that made me want a 3D tv the most was.
simulview
Yes. Simulview is a great feature, and about the only reason I would ever buy a 3D TV. Other than that, all the actual 3D I've managed to see (when display units were actually working) was tacky and unimpressive. I'll take a crisp 2D image over a nausea-inducing half-rez image with the background a little further back any day.
Ben the 3D in movies was at least since the 60s.
50's.
1915, actually, but Jawknee is right in terms of frequent usage.
I'm fairly certain 3D movies didn't receive any widespread mainstream attention until the late 70s and 80s.
It wasn't exactly all the rage in the 60s according to history. Not until drive-ins were out and enclosed theaters were in.
Last edited by Ben Dutka PSXE on 2/21/2012 9:36:26 AM
Sure I care about 3D gaming because if done well enough games could possibly immerse you in a way I haven't experienced before, so for that I'll continue to keep an open mind.
Where this technology goes wrong is when they have mindless Pop all the 3D bubbles, or jump over the 3D hurdle games. Thats what Kinect is doing right now and I'm not interested in any of that stuff.
Last edited by Amnesiac on 2/21/2012 12:39:31 AM
I was one of those who said stop making 3D and concentrate on making decent games!
BUT, I too recently picked up a 3D TV that was roughly £700 off the asking price, obviously i bit their arm off, because its a pretty decent 2D telly, so I figure the 3D was free 🙂 came with two pairs of glasses too.
my take on all of this is that I was wrong, 3D gaming is awesome, but its awesome in a certain way. take killzone 3 for instance, the graphics do take a hit, that's true, but we come back to the old argument that starts with "is graphics everything, what about atmosphere?"
because if there one thing 3D gaming does amazingly well.. and thats add depth you never ever thought you would see from the game you had played half to death before. and that to me is worth the drop in res, because youre not looking at the finer details any more, you are in the game.. and I dont mean tron-esq, lol.. its just a depth thing.
Uncharted 3 is also flipping good, i cant actually play that 2D now, I tried last night and it just didnt have that depth feeling any more, so after half an hour.. i switched back.
Crysis 1 looks fantastic too, apparently Crysis 2 looks even better. But although there are plenty of 3D games out there now HD Super StarDust is a blinding game in 3D, really good.
I do think that 3D will stay at the level it is now, I obviously want every game in 3D now, but that wont happen, but there will probably be some devs that will always use 3D for some games and those who dont, its an option that probably doesn't cost 'that' much more do so.
I have tried watching some films too, but the only really impressive ones have been the iMAX 3D stuff, they have been pretty cool, so I will probably stick to gaming in 3D rather than using it for films. Also most now can turn 2D in to 3D, and on some games gives it that extra depth, but i dont usually bother.
lastly though, there was one game I was disappointed in, but might give another go to.. and that was Resistance 3, where as Motorstorm, GT, KZ3, UT3 etc etc ..gave you a feeling of amazing depth and involvement to the game, which I believe enhanced the enjoyment, I found R3 to cheapen it. you know how some stage plays demonstrate waves of the sea by moving the cut-out scenery from left to right, it seems to be like that in R3, it just didnt feel like the 3D I had say in Black Ops, which was a real shame. im tempted to pick up R3 when its pretty cheap as I only tried 3D on the demo, but I wasnt impressed.
anyway, to those who haven't tried it and think its a fad, if you ever get a chance to sit down for an evening with some of those games you previously played, I think you might come away with a positive outlook.
for those who have played it and dont like it because its not face slapping 3D, I'll see you in 15 years.
and for those who find eyestrain using the glasses, imo its not worth the pain, but then within the next 10 of so years we will have 3D TVs in some form that will not need glasses, and im sure the experience will be far better as the 3D will most likely be in far higher def than it is now.
but im very impressed with 3D, I have changed my opinion totally.
It seems I am the only one in the entire world who look forward to try those new Sony 3D goggles w/surround sound, "personal 3D viewer" or what they were called again.
If they are as good as I picture in my head then that will be my introduction to 3D gaming. Thing is, I don't want the 3D world just on a relatively small square field in front of me, I want it around me. Those goggles enables me to experience that.
Yes, you can add me for wanting those too!
Last edited by BikerSaint on 2/21/2012 1:58:06 AM
personal 3D viewer they call it, or HMZ-T1 its model name.
absolutely not id kill for a set of those!
however you would need to, there BLOODY expensive!
Well we are three then!
If – and that is a big if – but IF these goggles are as good as I hope they are, then this will be bought instead of a new TV. And from that perspective I can defend its price.
yea, but 2 problems.
1 no one can watch with ya, so you still need a TV if you ever have anyone else in the house.
2 your going to look like a total burk when your next door neighbour comes to borrow a pint of milk!
when they first started talking about those goggles, they said they'd be about $799 to $899.
So has anyone heard about them dropping in price yet or not???
Yeah but I'll still keep my TV! This way I can game while my girlfriend can watch TV – it's a win/win! 🙂
so far they have only released in jappan.
playstation AU actually has a competition going for 2 lucky winners to win a pair!
oh the possibilities…….
I don't care about 3D and probably won't for a good long while. As it stands right now, I'm not interested in dropping a significant amount of money on something that gives me headaches and makes me nauseous.
I love it though I don't use it as much as I thought I would on my TV. However, I never play without it when using my 3DS.
How does the 3D on the 3DS compare to TVs or 3D movies, Jawk? I've never actually seen it in person.
I'm a fan of 3D, but I opted for a new LED TV this past summer because I thought it was a better deal (supposed better picture and bigger TV).
I am also near sited in one eye (and not in the other- weird, I know) so I already have depth perception problems. I don't wear contacts because its just one eye, so for me to get the full 3D effect I'd have to wear 3D glasses on top of my perscription glasses. Another reason why it didn't make sense for me to buy a 3D TV
Hmmm, it depends on the game. GT5, Uncharted 3, Killzone 3 and Super Stardust HD look pretty amazing in 3D although there is some ghosting. Using 3D on my TV can give me a headache after awhile but overall the experiance is pretty awesome. As for the 3DS, it has less depth than the TV but as you know it requires no glasses and if you hold it right there is zero ghosting. Only problem with the 3DS is you can't really use the gyro controls without losing the 3D image. They are both great but they both have their minus' as well.
LED's do indeed have a better picture than LCD's. My 3D TV is an LED. Has better color too.
Last edited by Jawknee on 2/21/2012 12:14:37 PM
Sony could learn a thing or two from Nvidia support for 3D on the pc, its amazing~ almost every game have 3D support, even if the game doesn't come with its own 3D features, one can still enable it on the pc and most of the time with some tweaking you can get a decent 3D experience. Its not just the new games, I can even play old games with 3D and that's great~
I'd say 3D is great and all, but not worth the current price in my opinion. I still didn't try it yet, but if I were to try it, I would start with car racing games.
allot of people do, it just comes with far too many drawbacks!
first of the medical issues, so many eye specialists saying it rots your optic nerve, and can seriously damage your eye sight.
not to mention allot of people getting sick from it.
then theres the picture quality it ruins.
it makes everything so dark, its like your playing your game with 20 pairs of glasses on!
thats why i refuse to use it, it just makes a awesome looking game look bad.
so bad in fact nvidia have had to release new glasses, and monitor manufactures new tech, to try eliminate this.
which has not really worked, and has pissed off allot of people because of the little time it just started.
cant blame them, dropping 200 on the glasses and receiver, then 800+ on the monitor, to only have it replaced in a few years?
that sucks!
then theres the lack of effects.
thats whats disappointing me the most, if we had pop out and depth like what avatar the movie offered then i would put up with the dark image.
but we dont, the most pop out ive ever seen is from motorstorm 3D rift where the rocks and smoke slightly overflow from the screen.
they dont come flying out to your face like movies, just slightly out of the screen maybe a inch or 2.
thats whats killing it the most for me.
you have to put up with uncomfortable glasses, darker worse image, and for what?
a small depth addition?
not really worth it!
if im going to spend 100 bucks, then i expect 100 bucks worth of value.
thats the problem with 3D ATM, it requires you to sacrifice so much, and in return its giving you so little.
once they fix the darkness issues, and bring the depth and pop out to avatar levels, then ill be all over it!
till then no thanks!
Until the tech works without glasses/having to sit bolt upright in the same position, it's not for me.
There's just too many caveats surrounding it at the mo, for it to be taken completely seriously.
Last edited by D1g1tal5torm on 2/21/2012 3:42:34 AM
It does not appear that 3D gaming is a drawing a lot of interest from gamers. There are just too many barriers/downsides to it right now.
Nope. Don't care in the slightest. Give me my high def games and I'm perfectly happy without the 3D tomfoolery.
That TV cost is a really big detractor for me. Plus I don't want to have to wear glasses every time I game, especially when the glasses themselves give me headaches, much less the 3D. No, I'll stick with regular ol' gaming, thankyooverymuch.
forgot to mention horsepower too, consoles today just are not strong enough to do the tech justice!
I personally LOVE it, after playing UC3 in 3D when in the desert i just stood on top a sand dune an looked around an was amazed by the depth. I too used to get sick after an hr or so, but now i'm good for 4-6hrs straight with no discomfort. I think personally its just getting used to it that is the problem.
Uncharted 3 in 3D was amazing. Being in the jungle and having butterflies look like they were outside the screen as one example.
I love gaming in 3D. Yes it has it's backwards, but the whole experience feels great IMO.
I bought a LG 3D Cinema HDTV for less than a 1000 USD (very cheap for the mexican prices) and has a few advantages: the glasses are pasive, so a pair costs a mere 5 bucks, and the image is like viewing a window, intead of having everything coming out of the screen. This reduces significantly the headache factor.
I highly recommend playing on 3D. In my experience, so far so good