if this is true, i still don't think many would like it.

uno said: Why would you need the video to be on the lenses of the glasses? The video shows how all you need are two cameras on either sides of your head. He puts on a pair of regular glasses with cameras mounted to the sides. This is MUCH cheaper than an old school Virtual Boy.

but that doesn't give you true 3D in any meaningful way. It would certainly make a game more immersive...but it relies upon you moving your head to get any effect. Still..it would be pretty cheap.

The best way to get true 3D to the masses is a pair of glasses with a different inbuilt video screen for each eye (although that technique  also has the drawback of not allowing you to see your surroundings unless you take the glasses off).

 The major problem would be getting a decent quality product at a mass market price. I can't see it taking off unless it's priced under $100 including software..and for a half decent quality you'd likely be looking at double that.

Personally I don't think it will happen...but it wouldn't be a bad idea...especially if Nintendo could encourage movie studios to release Wii 3D specific versions of their movies. It would be a good way of of countering Natal/Arc hype with the mainstream media.

uno said: Why would you need the video to be on the lenses of the glasses? The video shows how all you need are two cameras on either sides of your head. He puts on a pair of regular glasses with cameras mounted to the sides. This is MUCH cheaper than an old school Virtual Boy.

Why with display on the lenses you would be able to look at any direction and the device would react picture this , you are in the temple of time and to look around you just move your head as you would do in real life without the limitation of the TV screen its real virtual reality ... this + WM+ would be 2006 all over for the wii , and the glases itself should be cheap once that all that it would input is the head tracking and output the image being processed by the Wii it self... 

@bluelava

I dont think glasses with video screens built in is a viable option. If Ninty does anything its done affordably. With this method you dont need a TV to play but who would drag around a Wii with their glasses?

Personally I think the new 3D movies, etc. are just a bunch of who-ha. Ninty wouldnt go that way. Ninty does things that change the way you interact not change the way the visuals look. That is something Sony or MS would do.

@Shonen

Again, cost drives everything. The Wii is successful because the console was cheap tech. The controller's cost was rolled into it. Video screen goggles would be very costly guys. That is the bottom line.

uno said: @bluelava I dont think glasses with video screens built in is a viable option. If Ninty does anything its done affordably. With this method you dont need a TV to play but who would drag around a Wii with their glasses? Personally I think the new 3D movies, etc. are just a bunch of who-ha. Ninty wouldnt go that way. Ninty does things that change the way you interact not change the way the visuals look. That is something Sony or MS would do. @Shonen Again, cost drives everything. The Wii is successful because the console was cheap tech. The controller's cost was rolled into it. Video screen goggles would be very costly guys. That is the bottom line

I dont think that would coast that much in fact i think nintendo could sell it at 79,99 no more than a balance boar i mean how much coasts a 2 lcd screens of 4x5 cm ? i think very little for the main problem with that idea is that this would make turn the wii into a very single player experience ,cuz onle one person would see the game , and nintendo sad that they dont like the idea of using 3d glasses cuz for other people not using the glass the image would become blurry , if they dont like blurry they will certainly not like no image at all...

Just because the first VB failed doesnt mean a new one will fail and suck. Its been many years so technology has advanced enough to make something a lot better. On the other side I'm pretty sure nintendo learned from their mistakes with the first one.

uno said: Why would you need the video to be on the lenses of the glasses? The video shows how all you need are two cameras on either sides of your head. He puts on a pair of regular glasses with cameras mounted to the sides. This is MUCH cheaper than an old school Virtual Boy.

How many times did we discuss this, really?

Real 3d means having separate images for your left and right eye, there's no way around that. That's what even the old Virtual Boy did.

In the video you're seeing head tracking that is an entirely different beast, i.e. adjusting the perspective of the monitor image according to the position of your head. Still, it's a single image for both your eyes.

It's actually more impressive in video than in reality (we built such a thing at work) because a viceo is taken with a single camera (a single eye) so the window-effect is great. In real life your eyes (two of them) can't be fooled to the same effect because the world surrounding the display is in real 3d when you move your head around, but the monitor image is flat and looks slightly out of place by contrast.

Zelda Wii with the Virtual Boy would be pretty cool.

Shonen said: uno said: @bluelava I dont think glasses with video screens built in is a viable option. If Ninty does anything its done affordably. With this method you dont need a TV to play but who would drag around a Wii with their glasses? Personally I think the new 3D movies, etc. are just a bunch of who-ha. Ninty wouldnt go that way. Ninty does things that change the way you interact not change the way the visuals look. That is something Sony or MS would do. @Shonen Again, cost drives everything. The Wii is successful because the console was cheap tech. The controller's cost was rolled into it. Video screen goggles would be very costly guys. That is the bottom line I dont think that would coast that much in fact i think nintendo could sell it at 79,99 no more than a balance boar i mean how much coasts a 2 lcd screens of 4x5 cm ? i think very little for the main problem with that idea is that this would make turn the wii into a very single player experience ,cuz onle one person would see the game , and nintendo sad that they dont like the idea of using 3d glasses cuz for other people not using the glass the image would become blurry , if they dont like blurry they will certainly not like no image at all...

It really wouldn't be difficult to allow one person to play with a 3D headset and someone else to play/watch on a standard tv at the same time.

You'd just need to design a cable which would allow both the left and right eye images ito be sent to the 3D glasses..but  only broadcast the single left eye (or right eye) image to the tv. That would likely up the price of the hardware by a couple dollars at most.

I'm not convinced they could release a decent quality headset for $79...if you look at the video headsets on the market the most basic one is around $150...and average one is around $300.

Of course this sort of stuff was considered years ago. Sega had a VR headset in the works back in the Genesis days which they claimed would retail for "under $199"....they didn't release it as they claimed it was too realistic and caused some motion sickness (but the rumour was they were worried about it damaging eyesight in children and potential lawsuits).

 

Bluelava said: Shonen said: uno said: @bluelava I dont think glasses with video screens built in is a viable option. If Ninty does anything its done affordably. With this method you dont need a TV to play but who would drag around a Wii with their glasses? Personally I think the new 3D movies, etc. are just a bunch of who-ha. Ninty wouldnt go that way. Ninty does things that change the way you interact not change the way the visuals look. That is something Sony or MS would do. @Shonen Again, cost drives everything. The Wii is successful because the console was cheap tech. The controller's cost was rolled into it. Video screen goggles would be very costly guys. That is the bottom line I dont think that would coast that much in fact i think nintendo could sell it at 79,99 no more than a balance boar i mean how much coasts a 2 lcd screens of 4x5 cm ? i think very little for the main problem with that idea is that this would make turn the wii into a very single player experience ,cuz onle one person would see the game , and nintendo sad that they dont like the idea of using 3d glasses cuz for other people not using the glass the image would become blurry , if they dont like blurry they will certainly not like no image at all... It really wouldn't be difficult to allow one person to play with a 3D headset and someone else to play/watch on a standard tv at the same time. You'd just need to design a cable which would allow both the left and right eye images ito be sent to the 3D glasses..but  only broadcast the single left eye (or right eye) image to the tv. That would likely up the price of the hardware by a couple dollars at most. I'm not convinced they could release a decent quality headset for $79...if you look at the video headsets on the market the most basic one is around $150...and average one is around $300. Of course this sort of stuff was considered years ago. Sega had a VR headset in the works back in the Genesis days which they claimed would retail for "under $199"....they didn't release it as they claimed it was too realistic and caused some motion sickness (but the rumour was they were worried about it damaging eyesight in children and potential lawsuits).

I dont know about the cable solution does not look that simple for me , now about the price , we must consider that this kind of head set you are talking are not mainstream products once that you manufacture anything in millions of units it become cheaper the same happened with SD cards a couple of years ago , and we must focus people like to talk about this new VB as if the tec had not evolved since than, i think it can happen i would like to see a thing like what we are talking here , but i dont think nintendo would do something that could in some way not be that social...