News Sony: Games will set the standard for 3D

Frankly I don't want a dong seemingly floating in my face.

I'm one of the minority of the population who gets bad headaches and nausea from 3d, maybe I haven't tried all the types, but by the end of Avatar, I felt sick. I watched it again in 2D and enjoyed the experience much more.

that being said i welcome it for gaming. It's very easy to implement since they already have the Z buffer information so it doesn't take much more processing power or programming. I just rather the industry as a whole starts setting standards so that we don't get a 3d blu-ray vs 3d hd-dvd thing going.

 

There are a lot of negative nancys on this site. They are against new tech until it becomes standard and then they pretend they were for it all along.

 

3D would be great if you didn't need the silly glasses, something about the polarisation that makes motion feel choppy to me...

 

Not that long ago many web sites were claiming that HD-DVD would win because the porn industry had decided to back that.

Oddly enough I can't play FPS games because of motion sickness but I was fine watching Avatar in 3D.

I do have to agree though that games are a more natural fit for 3D since the content is being created in 3D. With movies some old tricks like matte paintings and relatively shallow sets could quickly kill the immersion - CG is getting better but it still often looks too fake to me. One issue, however, is that large TVs aren't generally the best monitors and gaming setups have to change to use them.

Also - for several reasons already mentioned by others - there should always be the option to turn it off and us 2D.

 

Sony aren't claiming that at all. They said games would set the standard.

 

/me looks up and shakes head

I bet hardly any of you have played a game in 3D so the truth is you don't actually know if you'd like it or not, your just guessing based of the hearsay of others who probably haven't played in 3D either.

If everyone had this sort of attitude we'd still be playing pong.

 

the problem is you need to render 2 images where in 2d you can get away with one. just getting away with crysis on 60fps now? well with 3d turned on your gonna get 30. hardware isnt keeping up with software so either spend twice as much or see twice as bad.

and as for the whole premise in life you FOCUS on what you want to see so the foreground and background are blurry, in the movies etc. the filmaker decides that for you so
NO ITS NOT 3D let me know when you crack that chestnut and ill be the first to buy

 

3D needs to be developed sooner or later. It's the next big step in graphics. Soon we will have nearly photo-realistic graphics, the only thing left after that is to give true stereo depth.

I do believe 3D should always be optional. Some people just can't tolerate the effect, or, like me, wear regular glasses and thus find it impractical. Even if they perfect the technology it will still be impractical for certain kinds of games.

3D isn't so great now. I see that. But we need to be working on it. The first cars sucked, the first planes sucked, but if it weren't for those early strides we wouldn't have our F-22s and high-performance cars, would we.

 

I remember seeing an animated 3D movie at IMAX at while back and it was a great experience. 3D would probably work well with games as long at it is done well. The current 3D market is quite fragmented and full of incompatible solutions and equipment so once the market matures I probably would look to try out 3D.

 

Try it then, Z-Buffer based 3D with shutterglasses has been available on all NVidia graphicscards for over ten years.
The source-engine games for instance run like this.

Haven't heared of that? I'm not surprised...for most people, it sucked.
I agree though that you have to try before you talk. I tried and was not impressed.

Try it, shutterglasses shoud be loitering around ebay and the likes, remember this is relatively old tech...the drivers are freely available from NVidia. (don't know about ATI)

 

I like the way Nintendo are approaching 3d with a version of their DS console due out.

 

My eyes -freaking- bled after an hour when I tried to watch Avatar.

And it also gave me the grandmother ancestor of all headaches, and effectively crippled me for the rest of the day. At least other improvements didn't try to raep my brain.

 

I've seen a few 3D movies now and I honestly don't think that it has added anything to the movie. There was only one point in one movie where I was immersed in the experience enough for it to trick my brain into thinking 'holy crap what's a bird doing in the theatre??'
Each time I tend to walk out with a headache. Maybe it's one of those things you get used to, I got motion sickness the first few times I played 'Timesplitters' on the PS2 - but I doubt it.

The cynic in me thinks this technology be it in games or normal TV's will be quite slow to be adopted. A lot of people have only just been convinced to upgrade their old CRT TV's, now they're being told how great 3D is and that they need to upgrade again. It's like the upgrade from VHS to DVD to Blu-Ray. DVD was jumped on when it was new and there were a lot more early adopters of the technology then there has been with Blu-Ray.

I'm all in favour of new tech, this is just one that I'm not interested in yet as I cannot see any real benefits.

 

i really dont like this 3d thing a bit either, if they want 3d , give me something like holograms , 3D on a 2D screen is really a puke a magnet imo

 

I was one of those people, and I think it was a valid point at the time. Fortunately for Blu-ray, Sony recanted an earlier decision and ultimately recognized the reach of the pr0n industry. Regardless, I'm still skeptical that Blu-ray is here for the long-haul. Seeing as how the adult video industry has fully embraced web video technologies, I can see it's popularity helping determine web video standards and driving the eventual wider adoption of direct download as opposed to physical media. The adult film industry is kind of like Apple in that regard; they're always a step ahead of the technology game.

Many televisions, consoles, and - funny enough - Blue-ray players are starting to include built-in wi-fi and internet access. There's still a part of me that sees Blu-ray as an intermediary format between DVD and direct download, with media PCs used for content storage.

Will 3D be the next big thing? I'm inclined to believe no - at least not yet in the home. The economy is depressed, too many consumers just dropped several grand on HDTVs due to to misinformation about the DTV transition, as well as heavy industry marketing that HDTV was the next big thing. Now, consumers are being told the go out and spend a $2-3K more on a 3D set, plus expensive glasses for each member of the family. Consumers grew tired of the HD-DVD/Blu-ray format war and the inevitable confusion it brought, and another is looming between passive polarized and active shutter lenses.

I think the 3D gimmick will make in-roads in the cinema, where the theater experience is more conducive to gimmickry. As well, the movie industry can better control theater standards because you don't have millions of consumers selecting from a myriad of choices of TVs, players, and accessories.

As for gaming - I'm still skeptical when it comes to the home market. YouTube offers some pretty cool 3D options, so maybe there is some hope for 3D penetration in the home computer market. On another note, while 3D does provide technical challenges, it's actually pretty easy to pull off. Pulling off 3D effectively, and doing so in a non-gimmicky way, is much more difficult. It really requires the art director to think about the 3D environment ahead of time, and design the game or movie with 3D in mind. Adding 3D as an afterthought can lead to poor execution, and that will guarantee that nobody adopts the technology.

Interestingly Playboy offered a 3D pictorial in this month's issue, complete with a complementary set of red/blue anaglyph glasses. Perhaps pr0n will help popularize 3D after all!

 

games in 3d.... hmz let the motionsickness/headache begin?!

 

It's all fake 3D just like the first, first person shooter. Before that it was all 2D then with the introduction of wolfenstein (or whatever depth perspective game) it was called 3D. So what is this called then 3D3D, 3D Enhanced, Ultra 3D?

I remember back in the days (1996?) they had these shutter classes. I was playing Descent with those classes. Although it somehow worked if you where concentrating and ignore the headache. And now they magically re-invented 3D for games. It almost soundss like a washingpowder add. first they had liquid washing, then a few years later you could wash your clothes better with powder, then few years later they had washing baskets and then 'pearls' and now its back to liquid washing again in about two years they introduce washing powder as the new best washing thing. Amazing!...


I will NOT call "anything they claim to be 3D" until the day I can physically walk around it and look at it from all angles.

 

It's currently the only way of getting full-HD into your house in large parts of this country.
Germany isn't the slowest technology market, but not very fast either.
There is no current TV station broadcasting in Full HD (1080). (nor is it planned)
The transition to "HD-Ready" (720) for TV broadcasting only started on a wide front this year, but still is far from the standard (PAL).

This is going to take some time. I see even sharper pictures as desirable over 3D (japanese have what? 2000something as opposed to 1080) as this means you could put a bigger screen up closer.

 

I get motion sickness on some games in 2D ,what would i be like in 3d

 

yeah. some singleplayer games when I forget to turn on vsync cause nausea. probably also related to me sitting up way past bedtime playing them. fatigue coupled with heavy concentration and lots of movement on the screen may cause that.

also I would enjoy 3-D (please add a dash at least when you mean the stereoscopic thingy) but cant afford any of it. I need to buy a 120Hz LCD then I have to buy the emitter + shutter glasses kit from NVIDIA. Costs just way too much atm. I would rather upgrade my GPU instead of getting that.


But I'm sure most of you guys are filthy rich and can afford to both upgrade the GPU and get a 3-D set. Damn I envy you guys. Bastids!