|
Hey guys, I've been blogging about computersfor a while on my own website, but I came upon something rather interesting. And I'm hoping for some constructive criticism on how I"m thinking about this.
NVidia released 3D Vision Glasses in Taiwan a few days ago, and I've been researching up on it.
So far, they have Sony, Panasonic, LG, Samsung, and a few other big-name electronics companies preparing 3D-enabled TVs
Acer and Asustek Computers is preparing to release 3D Vision laptops.
But I don't really see the point of this.
I mean, they're bringing 3D to home and it's good and all, but how are you going to get a 3D home theater in a typical household?
It's weird enough watching 3D movies and shows in amusiment parks and theaters when you don't have a screen that fills up your vision completely; if you look away, the 3D looks kinda iffy, at least to me.
This means you might need an LCD TV with great quality that takes up the whole wall of your home theater, and maybe some good speakers to go with that. That seems expensive to me at the moment.
I see the point of having 3D in games, but we can't say much right now since there are no 3D games, and games are pretty freakin realistic without the 3D at this point in time.
What do you guys think about this?
Also...
Poll: Do you want 3D in Starcraft?
(Vote): Yes
(Vote): No
And with either option, please comment on why you picked that option.
Icarus
 
|
On September 14 2009 06:00 Icarus wrote:
Icarus
... now one more.
|
On September 14 2009 06:03 Alur wrote:... now one more.
NERDRAGE
It's terrible that people are starting to do this. Seriously.
No offense to your OP, by the way.
|
They were giving 3d glasses away at Blizzcon this year, and they had a thing on display playing WoW in 3d. It was kind of neat but still pretty gimmicky and not really usable. Granted, the guy who explained it to me said it works with any 8-series or higher nvidia card so at least it wouldn't cost anything if you were interested in checking it out.
|
I think it would be fun to play starcraft in 3d :D
I have no idea why people don't want starcraft to have a 3d option. Why would you want to take away potentially fun options? It may not be great for competitive games but it would sure as hell be fun for a lot of people!
|
I honestly don't get the point of starcraft in 3d. Will scraps of metal fly at you when a siege tank dies? Will blood splurt out when a ling dies?
|
To be honest this just seems like another retarded trend to make people buy overpriced hardware just to feel they are using the most advanced technology or whatever.
Maybe 3D is really great, i have no idea, but to me it just seems totally unnecesary.
|
On September 14 2009 06:43 dhe95 wrote:
I honestly don't get the point of starcraft in 3d. Will scraps of metal fly at you when a siege tank dies? Will blood splurt out when a ling dies?
possible some side boob action from medics in a ums game?
|
Uhh... I don't quite get what's wrong with my username... but I guess there's something wrong with it seeing as two people wasted one reply each to talk about it.
I honestly don't think there's any point in having 3D in Starcraft II. It'll probably distract the player and block the vision of the player... unless 3D is only used in the cinematic parts i.e. intros, stories, etc.
Coming from that perspective, I think that it'd be a good option to have 3D in the cinematic parts of Starcraft II, but only in those parts. And there should be an option of whether or not you want it enabled.
But other than having 3D in cinematic parts of games, I don't see the point of having 3D in games. Especially in competitive, popular games, it may take away from gameplay more than giving it quality.
3D is awesome in theaters though... 3D + IMAX in a movie... that would be heavenly.
|
I got to try these things out on WoW at blizzcon and it was pretty cool. Didn't detract from the game or anything.. in fact I would suppose that it would make some of the harder things to do in that game (high end raiding, etc) easier.
I definitely wouldn't spend money on it though... it's just not as cool as you might think for the price.
|
Oh that is true. With 3D, maybe it'll be easier to see other players in WoW if you have a lot of players in one small location? I wouldn't know, since I've never played WoW. But it sounds like a good idea.
Yea the price is a big problem here. You need to buy a monitor that has 3D Vision, the glasses, and you'd need to wait for the games to get 3D, and that'd probably cost more and take a lot of time too.
So, I guess it's up to the consumers...
|
Eh would almost certainly make raiding harder (granted I have not yet played WoW in 3D) just because of the extra information to process, which will almost certainly delay reaction time.
|
I think the people were commenting on signing your post with your username, which has started to become sort of a trend.
|
You can even game in 3D with some Nvidia card, some free software, and those blue and red glasses, but that's going out of style.
I'd love to try 3D, but it would have to be through some black lens glasses, that are inexpensive, and the 3D functionality can be turned on and off at will through some sort of menu in the TV.
|
Okay, I just spent the last 20 minutes trying to figure out what these damn things were called
EDIT: AHA! YES, I FOUND IT! The Elsa Revelator shutter-based 3D glasses: http://www.stereo3d.com/revelator.htm
I tried the shutter-based 3D glasses tech back in the dark ages, on my Geforce 256 around '99-'00. It did indeed make everything 3D, but it gave you a severe headache roughly 20 minutes into play time. Anyone remember the Visual Boy Advance? Like that.
One of the biggest problems was actual "3D" games like FPS games were never meant to be 3D. You can't effectively aim a gun in real life with a stereoscopic view (both eyes open), and you can't on a 3D screen, either. I had to close one eye to make shots in quake.
I can't imagine it will be any better now, and no I don't want it in starcraft.
|
Haha oh man. Sorry, I would've been... 8 years old when you were using those. But I understand what you're saying.
You know that old "Honey I Shrunk the Audience" show at Disneyland in Anaheim, California? They still use the same 3-D glasses except now the show's in 4D. The glasses gave me headaches after every time I watched it.
Yes, I can't imagine having to deal with 3D especially in FPS games. You'd literally have to be in 1st person, not like how we are now, but literally making each movement on your own. I hope that makes sense... what miseiler said. Xp
What about other games though, where 3D might come in handy? And what about having 3-D just for the cinematic parts?
|
There seems to be some misconceptions about how this 3D stuff works. The red/green glasses thing is a historical artifact. That technology sucks because it changes the color of what you are watching and your mind tends to solve it really quickly.
The new technology they use is shutter based technology. Basically your tv is 3D enabled if it can show 120 frames per second. Some of you may already fit that requirement. The shutter will freeze one frame for the duration of two for each eye alternating and so the tv shows one point of view for one frame and the other point of view for the next, back and forth. This works well because the color is no longer an issue, your mind can't "solve" it. There's little eyestrain because the frame rate is 60/sec per eye, same as you are probably getting right now on your monitor. And it works with commodity hardware.
Movies have to be retrofitted to work with this technology. And there are a few in the pipe that will be 3D but it will never catch on. Games use 3D technology internally so theoretically any directx or opengl game can be made 3D, simply by querying the graphics drivers underneath to find out what depth everything is at and then redrawing the screen slightly differently every frame from a different eye pov. In reality, many game makers take short cuts, and so games like GTA work perfectly except for the things like headlights which are drawn on top of the screen and do not have depth information, so it breaks the illusion. These problems are becoming less common in big budget games.
Starcraft seems like a piss poor use for 3D because of its control scheme, and the benefits are what, colossus stand out on map? But it is an interesting technology and I hope it takes off. It might be good for a sim game, or an FPS, but starcraft 2 is not that game.
|
Pokebunny: oh ok now I get it. Well... maybe I won't do that next time then. Haha :p
onmach: I found a Youtube video that had a preview of the new 3DTV that Sky TV in Great Britain is going to use soon to debut its 3D services to the public. I see what you mean now. The video(obviously without the 3D glasses) showed the TV while it was showing some show.
From the perspective of the camera, I saw 2 of one image, with one overlapping the other. I think that with the 3D glasses, it would look absolutely fantastic. Though this is just from the POV of a camera so I don't know how accurate this is...
Thanks for the information though, I had some misconceptions too.
What about 3D in cinematic parts of games? Any takers?
|
It would be great for a casual gamer of sc2.
|
onmach gives a really good description of the technology. I've actually tested out the 3d glasses/monitor that Nvidia has out right now. 3D FPS games are really cool. I'm not sure if 3D will become standard but for casual games like L4D, it's a blast.
Price is currently C$500 for monitor+glasses. The price will most likely drop drastically in the next year once ATI gets a comparable product.
|
Hmm good points...
I've never actually tried 3D games before, but now I definitely want to try it out. Maybe I will write a further report once I get to try some games out in 3D. It sounds like a lot of fun!
That's probably true. And seeing as AMD is coming out with brand new DX11 cards, I think that they will also come out with 3D on standard desktop games too, hopefully...
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
