1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

News Nintendo dismisses usefulness of 3D gaming

Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by CardJoe, 1 Feb 2010.

  1. CardJoe

    CardJoe Freelance Journalist

    Joined:
    3 Apr 2007
    Posts:
    11,343
    Likes Received:
    292
  2. MitchBomcanhao

    MitchBomcanhao New Member

    Joined:
    21 Jan 2010
    Posts:
    20
    Likes Received:
    0
    yes, makes perfect sense. people will look silly whilst using those glasses, but they look very cool and stylish jumping around with the wiimote punching the air XD
     
  3. EvilMerc

    EvilMerc Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    1 Feb 2010
    Posts:
    2,326
    Likes Received:
    79
    I can't help but think that waving your arms around like a loon and bouncing around the room holding a white vibrating stick is more embarrassing than wearing a pair of slightly tinted glasses.
     
  4. PureSilver

    PureSilver E-tailer Tailor

    Joined:
    16 Dec 2008
    Posts:
    3,152
    Likes Received:
    235
    I'm at least 95% sure that Nintendo's dismissal of 3D has nothing to do with the fact that their preeminent-with-no-sign-of-a-successor console barely has the graphical power to render games in three dimensions, let alone display games in them...
     
  5. StoneyMahoney

    StoneyMahoney New Member

    Joined:
    10 Jul 2009
    Posts:
    287
    Likes Received:
    13
    3D TV can't use the polarized light mechanism that cinema 3D double-projection uses, so anyone without glasses will see a fairly bizarre display on the screen. That kinda ruins the whole party crowd demographic for Nintendo.

    Also, IIRC, the stereo glasses you need for 3D gaming on the PC have been around for about a decade, along with tweaks for a lot of DirectX games that let you play them like that. Further, I believe the only reason the technology didn't take off at the time was that we were too busy moving to flat-panel displays and they didn't have fast refresh rates to handle the technology.

    3D gaming: big yawn, seen it before, still not interested, still a big fail.
     
  6. ChaosDefinesOrder

    ChaosDefinesOrder Vapourmodder

    Joined:
    6 Feb 2008
    Posts:
    706
    Likes Received:
    7
    ^this^
     
  7. crazyceo

    crazyceo New Member

    Joined:
    24 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    563
    Likes Received:
    8
    Funny how no one disagrees with his iTampax comments!

    I think Nintendos domination of group/family gaming does rule out any 3D developement.
     
  8. mclean007

    mclean007 Officious Bystander

    Joined:
    22 May 2003
    Posts:
    2,035
    Likes Received:
    15
    Actually, monitors can be made that produce polarised images for use with 'passive' 3D glasses. Using "micro-polarisers" it is possible to create an interleaved image where alternate rows of pixels are polarised in opposite directions. The disadvantage is obviously you halve the resolution of the display when in 3D mode. Conversely, with a scheme using 'active' shutter glasses, you interleave whole frames, so you halve the frame rate. Active systems therefore rely on a high (120Hz+) framerate to provide a smooth image to each eye, and there can be problems with fast motion, because the image presented to one eye is fractionally ahead of the other in time.

    Irrespective of the 3D mechanism used, the effect for a user not wearing the appropriate eyewear is that the left and right eye images appear to coexist on the screen, creating a very unpleasant ghosting effect, which is effectively unwatchable. This applies equally in 3D projection systems.
     
  9. [-Stash-]

    [-Stash-] New Member

    Joined:
    23 Nov 2005
    Posts:
    75
    Likes Received:
    0
    I've tried the 120Hz-based Nvidia 3d system at Insomnia, it looked fantastic running Left4Dead, but I had to take the glasses ff after about 90 seconds due to severe eye strain :(

    I've seen films using the Reald 3D system in cinemas and has no problem with them at all watching 2hr+ films.

    Given what's been written about the Reald tech on Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RealD_Cinema) I do wonder if a higher refresh rate would sort the problems I had with the nvidia shutter glasses? I also don't see (technically) why the Reald technology couldn't be added to regular LCDs since it says "A push-pull electro-optical liquid crystal modulator called a ZScreen is placed immediately in front of the projector lens to switch polarization."

    Would certainly be cool to see this tech on a consumer LCD - the mind boggles as to how they *circularly* polarise the light however...
     
  10. StoneyMahoney

    StoneyMahoney New Member

    Joined:
    10 Jul 2009
    Posts:
    287
    Likes Received:
    13
    The problem you have to deal with is quite obvious - you have to project two images. That means either you double the frames rendered or halve the resolution. The latter option is preferable IMHO, ghosting / interleaving is far easier to be in the same room with than alternate frame occlusion.

    Many years ago I saw a demonstration of 3D running on a 120Hz CRT monitor using alternate occlusion. It was quite stunning and pleasant to watch without causing any strain at all, but I suspect that had more to do with the glasses than the screen. From what I gathered from the bloke doing the presentation, the actual frame rate was only 30fps each eye, but they used a parallel frame buffer so when the next rendered frame wasn't ready it didn't matter because the previous frame was still buffered and ready to pump to the monitor again. Do "modern" 3D products do that? It's not something I've really looked at much since I was a chief projectionist at a cinema.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: 3 Feb 2010
  11. Xir

    Xir Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    26 Apr 2006
    Posts:
    5,250
    Likes Received:
    88
    +1 been there, done that, wasn't nice
    If it didn't work on 150Hz CRT's, will it be better on LCD's?
     
  12. l3v1ck

    l3v1ck Fueling the world, one oil well at a time.

    Joined:
    23 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    12,945
    Likes Received:
    17
    What he means is:
     
  13. MitchBomcanhao

    MitchBomcanhao New Member

    Joined:
    21 Jan 2010
    Posts:
    20
    Likes Received:
    0
    a bit like sony saying "rumble" effect was old-gen, but then after solving its legal problems with the rumble effects company, immediately reintroduced rumble in its PS3 controllers? XD
     
  14. Grape Flavor

    Grape Flavor New Member

    Joined:
    23 Sep 2009
    Posts:
    81
    Likes Received:
    3
    lol, exactly.

    And since when is a gamer's top priority looking fashionable to non-gamers while enjoying our hobby?
     
  15. metarinka

    metarinka New Member

    Joined:
    9 Feb 2003
    Posts:
    1,844
    Likes Received:
    3
    I think it will catch on when the technology is mature and the price point is favourable to the gaming demographic. With the lack of high refresh flat screen monitors and an agreement on any sort of standard it has no hope of being picked up. Also there's that small minority of the population ~2% who find 3D vision of any artificial nature causes eye strain and head aches. unfortunately I'm one of them. Watching avatar was painful. Can't imagine these will be any better.
     
  16. Xir

    Xir Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    26 Apr 2006
    Posts:
    5,250
    Likes Received:
    88
    I hab no problems with Avatar-3D but half-life (one) with shutterglasses made me nauseaous after about 30 mins. (120Hz CRT)
    Of the five guys testing this, on did allright, two got sick (after about 30 mins to 1 hour) and two couldn't play for more than 5 minutes.

    Hope it's matured in the ten years since then. :eyebrow:
     
  17. Saivert

    Saivert New Member

    Joined:
    26 Mar 2005
    Posts:
    390
    Likes Received:
    1
    I still can't wrap my head around why stereoscopic 3D is so hard to get right. We got two eyes. You feed one image to the left and one image to the right. This should give you perfect depth effect like what we perceive in reality every day. It's the only reason we got two eyes to begin with. Two images slightly shifted apart due the the distance between the eyes. Yet people still struggle with "motion" sickness or whatever they complain about when trying the latest Stereoscopic tech.
     
  18. Xir

    Xir Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    26 Apr 2006
    Posts:
    5,250
    Likes Received:
    88
    Yep, and Headaches.

    You've got two eyes...and two innerears.
    As soon as these start sending competing information (I see movement but I don't feel movement) trouble starts.
    This is strengthened by the 3D motion for each eye beeing "just" not right, and by too low a refreshrate.
    We may think 24 pics/sec is motion, but our brain doesn't.
     
  19. mclean007

    mclean007 Officious Bystander

    Joined:
    22 May 2003
    Posts:
    2,035
    Likes Received:
    15
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_polarization
     
  20. Hex

    Hex Paul?! Super Moderator

    Joined:
    11 Jan 2002
    Posts:
    4,172
    Likes Received:
    110
    Not everyone is lucky enough to have two working eyes. It was bad enough when everyone went on about 'magic eye' pictures that I'd never be able to see, but now I am truly sick of hearing about 3D cos I'll never be able to see any of it (not to mention the fact that no depth perception makes everything difficult anyway) :waah:

    Cyclopsist. The lot of it :grr:
     
Tags: Add Tags

Share This Page