Quantcast
Bad news for Sony, good News for Nintendo

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Bad news for Sony, good News for Nintendo

axt113 said:


again, most people won't know this, most people are not tech savvy, they will see it happening on Nitnendo's 3DS at a fraction of the cost, and wonder why their bigh TV can't do the same thing


Most people will be totally unaware of the 3DS' existence.  Plus, I don't think people are as dull as you think they are.  They don't see two completely different, unrelated objects, and wonder why one can't do what the other can.



Around the Network

do you even know how 3D without glasses is made and how hard is to do for multiple viewers at the same screen? 3DS is easy because there will be only one viewer at the same time and the screen manufacturer could look the 3D effect for a limited view distance and angle of the viewer is always in front of the screen (imagine the screen has a 180º view angle, in a handheld you are always in the 90º position, get it?)... in a living room that is not possible to do, TV would need a 3D camera (like kinect) to do, in real time, head tracking and adjust the screen setup for your point of view... if that ain't easy for one person... imagine for multiple viewers... PC gaming have only one viewer per screen and even nVidia didn't go that path and would be expecting to much and is a HUGE stretch for anyone to believe that glasses free would be the path for home 3D now...



Proudest Platinums - BF: Bad Company, Killzone 2 , Battlefield 3 and GTA4

 As it currently stands I think 3d TV's aren't even aimed at anyone like us, they're priced and positioned in such a way as to just cater for an 'elite' group of early adopters with more money then they know what to do with. Sure enough it's  not the mass market but there is a significient nishe who will simply pay whatever the hell Sony, Samsung, Panasonic et all choose and it wouldn't make sense for the TV companies not to take as much from these people. 

 Once that's done prices will be come reasonable and I'd imagine we'll see greater adoption. For me I see 3d being a success, simply because HD was, and joe average doesn't really even understand what 720p or 1080i or what HD actually was, not to mention really see a clearer imagine. On the other hand 3D is tech you can tell is 3D, that imo is a much easier sell then HD was.

 As for these survey results, I'd say they're extremely good results. Baring in mind 3DTV's went on the market only months ago to have a 20%-30% interested userbase on something that will be rolled out over the next 8 years isn't something to be snuffed at.



Nomad Blue said:
axt113 said:


again, most people won't know this, most people are not tech savvy, they will see it happening on Nitnendo's 3DS at a fraction of the cost, and wonder why their bigh TV can't do the same thing


Most people will be totally unaware of the 3DS' existence.  Plus, I don't think people are as dull as you think they are.  They don't see two completely different, unrelated objects, and wonder why one can't do what the other can.

People don't need to be dull. Most people are just not interested in technical stuff.

After Wii being nearly 4 years on the market, a lot of Wii owners still don't know there's two different sensor technics in the remote.

About the glasses: Are there currently any 3D TVs with polarisation glasses, or is it only shutter tech? Is there a big difference in comfort? I only saw one 3D movie, which was with polarisation glasses, and I don't think they were that bad. I was positively surprised.



Nomad Blue said:
axt113 said:


again, most people won't know this, most people are not tech savvy, they will see it happening on Nitnendo's 3DS at a fraction of the cost, and wonder why their bigh TV can't do the same thing


Most people will be totally unaware of the 3DS' existence.  Plus, I don't think people are as dull as you think they are.  They don't see two completely different, unrelated objects, and wonder why one can't do what the other can.


ROFL, everyone will know the 3DS, if not through kids and grandkids, then through the people they meet on a daily basis.

 

Never said people are dull, I said thy aren;t tech savvy, what they will see is 3DS able to pull it off for a few hundred dollars, they will then go into a store and see the glasses one for thousands and ask why can't the big TV's do what Nitnendo does for a fraction of the cost



Around the Network
Wagram said:

I don't like wearing a set of glasses on my face over a set of glasses.

and I don't like flimsy technology.

Verdict: I HATE 3D

Hooray for contacts!



 Been away for a bit, but sneaking back in.

Gaming on: PS4, PC, 3DS. Got a Switch! Mainly to play Smash

sergiodaly said:

do you even know how 3D without glasses is made and how hard is to do for multiple viewers at the same screen? 3DS is easy because there will be only one viewer at the same time and the screen manufacturer could look the 3D effect for a limited view distance and angle of the viewer is always in front of the screen (imagine the screen has a 180º view angle, in a handheld you are always in the 90º position, get it?)... in a living room that is not possible to do, TV would need a 3D camera (like kinect) to do, in real time, head tracking and adjust the screen setup for your point of view... if that ain't easy for one person... imagine for multiple viewers... PC gaming have only one viewer per screen and even nVidia didn't go that path and would be expecting to much and is a HUGE stretch for anyone to believe that glasses free would be the path for home 3D now...


I'm pretty sure this technology already exists, and is being shows at tradeshows as we speak. In 5 years, are you seriously telling me it won't find its way into a mainstream market? Are you willing to take the chance that I'm wrong, and spend 4000 dollars on a 3DTV with glasses today?



I don't need your console war.
It feeds the rich while it buries the poor.
You're power hungry, spinnin' stories, and bein' graphics whores.
I don't need your console war.

NO NO, NO NO NO.

"In 5 years, are you seriously telling me it won't find its way into a mainstream market?"

Introduced tech does not get mainstream that fast.



A flashy-first game is awesome when it comes out. A great-first game is awesome forever.

Plus, just for the hell of it: Kelly Brook at the 2008 BAFTAs

kowenicki said:

and not only that...  once you pay out for the new TV and the glasses how much content is there available?

next to none.

How many 3d movies are actually worth watching again?  less than a handful.

many will

how many of those are out now on a 3d blu-ray? none.

many will

how many tv channels are broadcasting 3d regularly right now or soon?  none.

many will

how many 3d games are out right now and will be out within the next 6 months?

many will

 

IN SHORT,its for the future.every new tech has shortage of content at first





Solid_Snake4RD said:
kowenicki said:

and not only that...  once you pay out for the new TV and the glasses how much content is there available?

next to none.

How many 3d movies are actually worth watching again?  less than a handful.

many will

how many of those are out now on a 3d blu-ray? none.

many will

how many tv channels are broadcasting 3d regularly right now or soon?  none.

many will

how many 3d games are out right now and will be out within the next 6 months?

many will

 

IN SHORT,its for the future.every new tech has shortage of content at first




But the push for it now it not wise. This is the issue many of us have. DVD worked because it was low key and upmarket until the price went down and the content went up. This is just pushing too much too fast.



A flashy-first game is awesome when it comes out. A great-first game is awesome forever.

Plus, just for the hell of it: Kelly Brook at the 2008 BAFTAs