Rage, Doom 4 May Not Support Stereoscopic 3D

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
Rage, Doom 4 May Not Support Stereoscopic 3D
Click to expand...
Oh no, I'm absolutely crushed I tell you, crushed!

Hollenshead said that the "uber end of the videophiles" will adopt 3D without hesitation, but that won't be enough for the whole industry to make a shift.
Click to expand...
True enough, they also adopted Laserdisc, and we all know where that ended up.

I went to Best Buy the other day just because I wanted to see what one of the 3D TVs was like. It made my head hurt, but that could have been because the glasses were welded to a giant steel frame that kept them right in the sweet spot, and I had to bend over at a slight, yet uncomfortable angle to see through them. Of course, I'm sure the experience will be MUCH better once I get that $2500 TV and $500 BluRay player into my apartment (plus an extra, what, $70-$100 per pair of glasses?).

As long as no one makes it mandatory, I'll be happy, cause I won't have to care.
 
"And, also, the TVs are f***ing expensive. Is there enough content to justify?"
Click to expand...

... Wait, don't you realize what you're doing yourself? You're saying it's not worth it to buy a TV because there's not enough content for it, thus you yourself are not going to make content.

This is exactly the spiraling hole that traps so many new technologies and sucks them down the drain.
 
[citation][nom]Kelavarus[/nom]... Wait, don't you realize what you're doing yourself? You're saying it's not worth it to buy a TV because there's not enough content for it, thus you yourself are not going to make content.This is exactly the spiraling hole that traps so many new technologies and sucks them down the drain.[/citation]

They are not worth it and neither is the tech. If a 3d capable TV was similar in price to others than it would be considered.
 
Good! id obviously knows what should be a priority in making good games. i.e. NOT 3D! I'm glad they aren't following the gimmick crowd.
 
[citation][nom]Stryter[/nom]Good! id obviously knows what should be a priority in making good games. i.e. NOT 3D! I'm glad they aren't following the gimmick crowd.[/citation]
God is answering my prayers......"Please God let 3D go the way of the dinosaurs, disco, and leg warmers..."
 
I have the fast cards and 3D glasses and stuff and the whole thing is pretty cool but it is all still pretty clunky in my opinion (the glasses) and the requirements are still way to high and expensive for most. Eventually it will be common as prices for both fast cheap cards capable sustaining high FPS on 120Hz monitors and cheap 120Hz monitors.
 
Good, sick of all the 3D hype. Since "3D" first appeared in the fifties every 15 years they've been trying to push it on us. Or give it to Steve Jobs, he has a talent for turning crappy concepts into viable products.
 
3D is not the next thing... it is a gimmick, a fad, the hula hoop, pogs, the wii(any motion controller) i don't want things flying at my face in 3D and i don't want to move around when playing games. if i wanted that i'd go bowling or actually play golf(two hobbies i actually do).
 
[citation][nom]XZaapryca[/nom]When I can play Doom9 on a holodeck, then I'll worry about 3D. Till then, meh.[/citation]
That would be a terrifying game but totally and completely AWESOME!
 
I'd hazard a guess that everyone saying 3d is a gimmick has yet to see a 3d vision ready game. The 'gimmick' is expecting things to come out of the screen at you. The real draw is the feeling of depth and definition you see.

The supported games list is still on the short side. And id's remarks don't make that any better. But 3d and gaming are a mix made in heaven. Way better than any 3d movie I've seen.
 
[citation][nom]XZaapryca[/nom]When I can play Doom9 on a holodeck, then I'll worry about 3D. Till then, meh.[/citation]

You'll be doing more than playing DOOM9 on a holo deck... 😉 Man, her breasteses are huge..!!! Playing Laura Croft will be very different. :)

Serious thou, I doubt we'll ever get a HOLODECK like in StarTrek - remember that is supposed to be a modified transporter, so it allows you to FEEL, swim, taste things, climb up mountains, etc. It will be EASIER to do VR transmissions directly into your skull. As we already have some abilities to do this, like sending an external image to a blind person.

So, while laying down, you can play a game or be IN the movie... that is far more realistic of our future. But do we REALLY REALLY want Microsoft or Apple in our Brains?
 
3D is finally NOT a gimmick. The OLD days of RED and BLUE cardboard glasses are gone, those ALWAYS sucked... and they still suck.

But not all movies or videos NEEDS to be in 3D. It costs a lot more money to produce and it has to be done right.

RIGHT) Avatar - puts you into the movie
WRONG) Jaws-3D or most 3D movies, in which SHOTS are set up to specifically give you a 3D effect. An example: Planet 51 (a good kids flick) the opening of a guy with a ball toy bouncing at your face.

3D Tech is new and movies production people are learning how to work with it. Like when COLOR was new to film, Hollywood went WAY overboard with Technicolor - either designed to make you gay or burn your eyes out, they were horrible.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom