selnor said:
Solid_Snake4RD said:
superchunk said:
LOL to anyone who thought only PS3 could do it... lol, you know your out there.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, PS3's 3D (as all home 3D at this point) is a huge flop of shit and needs to be skipped by the consumers. The manufacturers need to realize we won't pay $100's for each pair of glasses just to watch 3D at home.
If costs prevent glassless 60" tvs, then at least utilized the passive system theaters use. Worked just fine for Avatar and every other 3D movie and would only cost a few bucks, if that for each pair of glasses. Then I wouldn't mind my 4yr old wearing them or buying 20 for the big sporting events. |
wtf are you talking abt?
Only PS3 can do 3D IN THE CONSOLES SECTION.
This 3D that LG and MS are touting is not real 3D production.This is only how 3DTV's can convert 3D in 3D,they can do this with any media.Even with PS1.
Originally developed and converted 3D will have big differences
|
BuZZZZZER UNH UNH.WRONG!You better go listen to Corrinne in her interview. She tells of the problems that arise when developing a game from scratch for 3d gaming on 360. The changes that they have to do graphically. There is no driver issue or anything. It's simply a case of changing the way we see the graphics particles and depth perception. The 360 is every bit as capable as the PS3. And we will see Natal 3d games to. She definately pointed to that. I know it doesnt compute with many peoples perception that the 360 was all but finished. But sorry, the 360 has plenty of power left according to her ( and she is a very very knowledgable person in the industry who has worked with T Sweeney and J Carmack.
|
i didn't say 360 has more or less power.
also 360 has HDMI 1.2 and PS3 has HDMI 1.3.
If 360 were to put out games in 3D,they would have to be SD.
