Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
3D gaming: Five reasons it wont work
firefly2003
Member UncommonPosts: 2,527
To hear some people tell it, 3D gaming is the wave of the future. In just a few years, you’ll be bobbing and weaving in your living room as you play in an environment that’s more realistic than anything you’ve ever experienced.
Bull.
Sure, 3D can be a cool feature in games, but is it something that will take over the industry? We don’t think so. And we’ve got five good reasons why the pundits are wrong.
It’s too expensive!
While the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 are best experienced on a high definition TV, it’s not a mandatory piece of equipment. Both consoles, in fact, work just fine on older sets.
For 3D gaming, that’s not an option. Want to see Kratos’ Blades of Chaos fly off the screen and almost hit you in the face? You’re going to have to pony up for a 3D TV – and those aren’t cheap. Prices vary by manufacturer, but consider $3,000 a fair starting price for the sets.
“In order to participate in console 3D gaming, you need to trade-in your TV,” said Electronic Arts CEO John Riccitiello during a conversation at E3. “Who’s going to do that?”
Good question, John. Also, if you’re planning to game with a friend, you’ll need a couple hundred more for a spare set of 3D glasses. Speaking of those…
Dorky glasses!
Gaming’s not the hippest of hobbies, but even the least fashion-conscious player knows that clunky, heavy 3D glasses are couture “don'ts” -- and fashion statements are just the start of the problems with those persnickety specs.
Core gamers often play for multi-hour stretches. 3D isn’t meant to be consumed that way -- at least in its current form. A marathon session of Halo 3 or Modern Warfare 2 wearing the 3D glasses that come with today’s sets is the recipe for a migraine and, for some, nausea. Sony has even gone so far as to update their PS3 Terms of Service with a 3D warning.
Worse still, most of the glasses are battery powered – and the battery life isn’t great. Imagine the frustration of being in a close game, only to have the screen image go askew as you close in on the kill. It would redefine rage quitting.
Low framerates!
Because most stereoscopic 3D TVs work with a shutter lens system, the set is basically showing one frame to your right eye, then a different one to your left, which creates the 3D effect. It’s an easy thing to do from a development perspective, but it cuts the game’s framerate in half.
For some titles, that won’t matter much, but as you get into triple-A games and fast-paced shooters, it’s going to be noticeable. The chips powering this generation’s systems weren’t built with 3D in mind – and they’re not going away anytime soon.
No must-haves!
If there was a title that truly incorporated 3D into its gameplay -- that made it an essential, integrated component of the experience -- we might have a little more faith in 3D gaming. The fact is, though, that nothing currently released -- and nothing that’s on the horizon -- fits those criteria. Sure, there are a few games that look cool in 3D (Crysis 2 and Killzone 3 spring to mind), but they’re going to be nearly as good in 2D.
Simply put, there’s no “Avatar”-like 3D game being pushed right now, no single title that will unify the industry around the technology. And until there is, game developers are going to follow the model that film studios did before James Cameron’s blockbuster hit theaters: Offer 3D selectively to hedge bets and hope that the audience comes around eventually.
Shovelware galore!
New technology inevitably means a flood of games from companies trying to capitalize on it. The majority of those aren’t worth the DVDs they’re stamped on.
We saw it with the Wii. (Heck, we still see it!) Some publishers are so desperate to jump on the bandwagon that they’ll rush out just about anything that takes advantage of the unique qualities of the technology. We’ll see plenty of examples of this same trend with PlayStation Move and Microsoft’s Kinect in the next year. Do we really need a flood of bad 3D games on top of that?
http://videogames.yahoo.com/events/plugged-in/3d-gaming-five-reasons-it-won-t-work/1408254
Comments
It's been a while since I've seen a 3D movie. But I really don't see how it could be such a vast improvment over what they were ten years ago. Which was nothing more than a gimmick of no real entertainment value. I don't get what all the hype is about.
Wake me when the Matrix style head jacks are ready. 3D TV? Yawn.
I think one of the biggest hurdles 3D gaming has before it even gets off the ground is generating hype. I remember when they were showcasing that 3D Gameboy, every TV and Internet news group covering it had the same reaction: "Wow this is amazing, but you'll pretty much have to take my word for it because it's scientifically impossible to show it to you on a monitor at home. You can't even look over someone's shoulder to get it, you have to play it yourself." So, unless they can come up with a marketing solution to this problem I don't think it's going anywhere. I imagine really advertising it would involve setting up alot of displays. That seems to be how they got HD TVs going, they couldn't really show them on TV so they set them up everywhere they could.
I remember them using similiar parallels with the Online Newspapers back in the early 90s
People who have to create conspiracy and hate threads to further a cause lacks in intellectual comprehension of diversity.
Just wait and see, Nintendo DSi 3D is full 3D Gameing with no dorky galsses.
DSi 3D is just the start of things
March on! - Lets Invade Pekopon
Yea have to agree here. From what i understand it gives a 3D 'effect' with just using a different way of displaying graphics that is not dependent on glasses. Not saying it will be as good but its a way of getting some depth without paying a lot for a new screen and expensive glasses.
Another great example of Moore's Law. Give people access to that much space (developers and users alike) and they'll find uses for it that you can never imagine. "640K ought to be enough for anybody" - Bill Gates 1981
From the few who have seen it say it works really well but you have to be looking down directly at the screen...if you look from the side it does not work.
Still not bad for the first full 3D console system.
March on! - Lets Invade Pekopon
The new 3D thing is a fad that was engineered to pull in a few extra bucks. It'll pass in time, just don't pay it any attention and it'll go away.
I don’t get why we have so many critics ... in 10 years time 3D will probably be the normal medium.
March on! - Lets Invade Pekopon
Have to say i hope 3D succeeds and becomes afordable because Avatar shows just how good 3D can be.
Another great example of Moore's Law. Give people access to that much space (developers and users alike) and they'll find uses for it that you can never imagine. "640K ought to be enough for anybody" - Bill Gates 1981
Ten years is about right, I think. Provided our species doesn't manage to off itself before then, we'll move further and further into virtual landscapes that more closely mimic reality. Look at our present day graphic whores who spend thousands on the latest computers so they can max graphics settings and then gripe about their game's unrealistic looking trees. When given the option, they're going to jump at this technology as soon as it's good enough. And it will be.
I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.
~Albert Einstein
I really don't understand why so many people are against 3D gaming because the "glasses" look silly.
I mean...really? There are gamers talking into headset on their head and looking silly swinging around with a white stick attached to another white device with a wire between them or standing on white plastic board in front of a tv, and now suddenly there is a problem with wearing glassess because it makes you look..silly?
Seriously?
The thing I don't understand, is that nearly everyone that has bashed the idea of 3D gaming, has at one point said, "I don't need something popping out of my screen." They just don't seem to get it. 3D doesn't have to be about something popping out of the screen. It's all about depth perception. I don't remember Avatar having anything jumping out of the screen at you, and everyone waving their hands in front of them trying to touch it. It was about the depth that you could see in the world. That's why I liked the movie, and every other 3D thing I've seen. It looks more real. If games can be made to take this into account, then wow, just think of the possibilities.
3D Gaming: 5 Reasons Why it Won't Work:
1. 3D makes me sick. It's terrible.
2. I'm sick of 3D.
3. Did I mention I'm sick of 3D?
4. I'm not sure if I mentioned this or not, but I'm pretty sick of 3D.
5. I can't think of anything to put here. But, I'm pretty much sick of 3D.
Until they can generate actual 3D images inside of a screen w/o the need of glasses, then 3D can shove it as far as I'm concerned. I like it on Avatar, but hated it on the other 2 movies I watched in 3D. When I played a 3D racing game at the Sony store in Atlanta, I felt dizzy for about an hour afterwards.
3D just really isn't that great. I can't understand they hype.
Like Trading Card Games? Click Here.
Health problems associated with stereoscopic 3D.
Lack of developer support.
Loss of visual quality.
Atleast doubling system requirements.
$$$
I think its more the case of the cost of the glasses.
Another great example of Moore's Law. Give people access to that much space (developers and users alike) and they'll find uses for it that you can never imagine. "640K ought to be enough for anybody" - Bill Gates 1981
What in this day and age does not cost $$$
March on! - Lets Invade Pekopon
The 3D rage is just ridiculous. 3D long term in my opinion is not very profitable considering the drop off prices and the technology that's going to be set towards this trend. No doubt once interactive holographic technology becomes commercial, those people who jumped on 3D will jump on board and start saying 3D is total waste of your time. Example being the Blu-ray/HD-DVD argument. But it comes down to which side each industry would take. Commercial advertisement would likely stay to the more profitable and long term, so they might stay mostly 2D excluding the high end companies selling products like Apple and Microsoft. The gaming industry is focusing on more into photorealism so likely the better approach would be going 3D but they would want the most of the demographic as possible so they would likely keep 3D as a optional support function.
So far we have 2 groups staying partially neutral in 3D technology. But we're forgetting one large industry focus on Internet distribution, pornography. So whatever pornography backs is what's going to be the next best thing for computer technology, 2D or 3D.
But that's just my opinion, currently industries are really pushing this. However they are forgetting one thing about the human condition; humans are flawed both physically and mentally. By moving 3D right across the proverbial board, you out people with visual disorders or conditions such as seizures and epilepsy.
Just wanted to mention, games have been "3D" for quite a while now. I wish someone would explain the advantage of graphics that jump out of the screen at you in some little way. Its not like the players senses are going to be overwhelmed to such a degree that its anymore like "being inside the game". So whats the big deal? Whats so revolutionary about going from 3D presented on a 2D screen, to 3D presented on a 2D screen that has some elements popping out a bit? Will it be like the commercials, where I instinctivly duck because I think Bowser is going to hit me IRL? I really doubt it. Sounds to me more like the difference between a pop-up book and a normal one. The pop-up doesn't really add much, unless you are 4 years old.
Anyone remember Jaws 3D and Friday the 13th 3 in 3d? :P
Yep, I heard the announcement about the 3D pr0n flick. Personally I don't understand why anyone would be excited about that. Imagine, you'll frantically duck out of the way any time a dude drops his pants.