The "Sony Games" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
This year at the Consumer Electronics Show in America, the main theme that seemed to weave its way through the entire event was 3D. Company after company started to tell of their plans to bring 3D into your home.
3D has been around a while. I remember it back when I was a child and thinking back to that time, it didn't seem to work that well to me. My last exposure to 3D was probably about 10 years ago when I went to Thorpe Park. They had an attraction there called Pirates 4D and the 3D seemed to work quite well there.
The recent 3D explosion seems to have been brought on by the release and acclaim of the film Avatar or should I say brought 3D to the forefront of peoples minds. Games have also been given the 3D treatment. G-Force by Disney springs to mind which I believe shipped with 3D glasses.
So, will 3D become a standard? I'm not so sure. For the movie theatre, it works quite well on an optional level. But what will it take to get 3D into your home? It will probably require a purchase of a new TV.
That brings to mind the change to HD. HD took a long time to be considered a 'must have' but the benefits of HD are clear. The benefits of 3D are less clear.
Thinking of it from a games perspective, what could 3D give you that you would really need? 3D only really gives you a depth of field that may be useful or brings explosions or scares a little more in your face but is that enough for expenditure?
3D is being seen by TV manufacturers as a saviour of the industry but I fail to see how that could be the case. 3D, to me, is a gimmick. The fact that you will probably need a new TV and still have to wear the 3D glasses to see the full effect of 3D just seems puzzling and pointless. There are some companies trying to develop TVs that allow you to view them in 3D without glasses but will still cost a lot of money when they do arrive.
So, is 3D worth it? To me at this time, no. It will prove to be an expensive venture for little benefit. As a novelty at a cinema watching a film, it can be a nice touch but everyday? Just doesn't quite sit right with me.
(I've read through this again and it seems to be all over the place. Feel free to tear it apart. I might think and express myself clearer later.)
3D has been around a while. I remember it back when I was a child and thinking back to that time, it didn't seem to work that well to me. My last exposure to 3D was probably about 10 years ago when I went to Thorpe Park. They had an attraction there called Pirates 4D and the 3D seemed to work quite well there.
The recent 3D explosion seems to have been brought on by the release and acclaim of the film Avatar or should I say brought 3D to the forefront of peoples minds. Games have also been given the 3D treatment. G-Force by Disney springs to mind which I believe shipped with 3D glasses.
So, will 3D become a standard? I'm not so sure. For the movie theatre, it works quite well on an optional level. But what will it take to get 3D into your home? It will probably require a purchase of a new TV.
That brings to mind the change to HD. HD took a long time to be considered a 'must have' but the benefits of HD are clear. The benefits of 3D are less clear.
Thinking of it from a games perspective, what could 3D give you that you would really need? 3D only really gives you a depth of field that may be useful or brings explosions or scares a little more in your face but is that enough for expenditure?
3D is being seen by TV manufacturers as a saviour of the industry but I fail to see how that could be the case. 3D, to me, is a gimmick. The fact that you will probably need a new TV and still have to wear the 3D glasses to see the full effect of 3D just seems puzzling and pointless. There are some companies trying to develop TVs that allow you to view them in 3D without glasses but will still cost a lot of money when they do arrive.
So, is 3D worth it? To me at this time, no. It will prove to be an expensive venture for little benefit. As a novelty at a cinema watching a film, it can be a nice touch but everyday? Just doesn't quite sit right with me.
(I've read through this again and it seems to be all over the place. Feel free to tear it apart. I might think and express myself clearer later.)
It seems the 3D that everyone is trying to produce will require HDMI 1.4 which was only shown off in the middle of last year and at least a 120hz TV. You will also still need 3D glasses although Philips are developing a TV that does 3D without glasses. It still means a big expensive TV to buy just for 3D.
As for the HD thing, the difference is very noticeable particularly in games. I was playing 360 games on a 19 inch TV with a standard scart cable. Switched to HD on a 40 inch TV and the difference was incredible, in particular the different shades of black instead of just black everywhere in dark places.
Also, if you have standard ITV and then switch to ITV HD, the difference is the biggest I've seen. ITV is one of the worst standard feeds I've seen. Also, TV HD is 1080i for the most part I believe and in some cases that is just upscaled to make it look clearer. True HD is 1080p at this point, which is what PS3 and 360 can put out.
As for the HD thing, the difference is very noticeable particularly in games. I was playing 360 games on a 19 inch TV with a standard scart cable. Switched to HD on a 40 inch TV and the difference was incredible, in particular the different shades of black instead of just black everywhere in dark places.
Also, if you have standard ITV and then switch to ITV HD, the difference is the biggest I've seen. ITV is one of the worst standard feeds I've seen. Also, TV HD is 1080i for the most part I believe and in some cases that is just upscaled to make it look clearer. True HD is 1080p at this point, which is what PS3 and 360 can put out.
I don't really know the difference in all fairness about HD - I never really paid much attention, bar the fact it was a flatscreen. Obviously if I compared them side-by-side I am certain I'd spot the difference.
Is this new Avatar 3D effect different to the one we already have pumped through our screens (such as through C4's recent attempts) or is it exactly the same?
I'd love to see the new 3D and if it was easily reproduceable at home, I think "why not?". Obviously if it were more expensive and a big jump, I'd happily wait for a few yeards like I did with HD.
And good report GP, didn't seem too muddled :) Very good topic to bring up as well!
Is this new Avatar 3D effect different to the one we already have pumped through our screens (such as through C4's recent attempts) or is it exactly the same?
I'd love to see the new 3D and if it was easily reproduceable at home, I think "why not?". Obviously if it were more expensive and a big jump, I'd happily wait for a few yeards like I did with HD.
And good report GP, didn't seem too muddled :) Very good topic to bring up as well!
My friend was adamant all the difference in HD Xbox Gaming was is the sound. Had to explain to him that the Xbox still used the exact same ports as normal for audio, it's just for visuals the yellow wire is replaced by a red, a green and a blue wire.
I still can't really see much difference between HD and standard definition. It only seems to look really good in gaming.
This year at the Consumer Electronics Show in America, the main theme that seemed to weave its way through the entire event was 3D. Company after company started to tell of their plans to bring 3D into your home.
3D has been around a while. I remember it back when I was a child and thinking back to that time, it didn't seem to work that well to me. My last exposure to 3D was probably about 10 years ago when I went to Thorpe Park. They had an attraction there called Pirates 4D and the 3D seemed to work quite well there.
The recent 3D explosion seems to have been brought on by the release and acclaim of the film Avatar or should I say brought 3D to the forefront of peoples minds. Games have also been given the 3D treatment. G-Force by Disney springs to mind which I believe shipped with 3D glasses.
So, will 3D become a standard? I'm not so sure. For the movie theatre, it works quite well on an optional level. But what will it take to get 3D into your home? It will probably require a purchase of a new TV.
That brings to mind the change to HD. HD took a long time to be considered a 'must have' but the benefits of HD are clear. The benefits of 3D are less clear.
Thinking of it from a games perspective, what could 3D give you that you would really need? 3D only really gives you a depth of field that may be useful or brings explosions or scares a little more in your face but is that enough for expenditure?
3D is being seen by TV manufacturers as a saviour of the industry but I fail to see how that could be the case. 3D, to me, is a gimmick. The fact that you will probably need a new TV and still have to wear the 3D glasses to see the full effect of 3D just seems puzzling and pointless. There are some companies trying to develop TVs that allow you to view them in 3D without glasses but will still cost a lot of money when they do arrive.
So, is 3D worth it? To me at this time, no. It will prove to be an expensive venture for little benefit. As a novelty at a cinema watching a film, it can be a nice touch but everyday? Just doesn't quite sit right with me.
(I've read through this again and it seems to be all over the place. Feel free to tear it apart. I might think and express myself clearer later.)
3D has been around a while. I remember it back when I was a child and thinking back to that time, it didn't seem to work that well to me. My last exposure to 3D was probably about 10 years ago when I went to Thorpe Park. They had an attraction there called Pirates 4D and the 3D seemed to work quite well there.
The recent 3D explosion seems to have been brought on by the release and acclaim of the film Avatar or should I say brought 3D to the forefront of peoples minds. Games have also been given the 3D treatment. G-Force by Disney springs to mind which I believe shipped with 3D glasses.
So, will 3D become a standard? I'm not so sure. For the movie theatre, it works quite well on an optional level. But what will it take to get 3D into your home? It will probably require a purchase of a new TV.
That brings to mind the change to HD. HD took a long time to be considered a 'must have' but the benefits of HD are clear. The benefits of 3D are less clear.
Thinking of it from a games perspective, what could 3D give you that you would really need? 3D only really gives you a depth of field that may be useful or brings explosions or scares a little more in your face but is that enough for expenditure?
3D is being seen by TV manufacturers as a saviour of the industry but I fail to see how that could be the case. 3D, to me, is a gimmick. The fact that you will probably need a new TV and still have to wear the 3D glasses to see the full effect of 3D just seems puzzling and pointless. There are some companies trying to develop TVs that allow you to view them in 3D without glasses but will still cost a lot of money when they do arrive.
So, is 3D worth it? To me at this time, no. It will prove to be an expensive venture for little benefit. As a novelty at a cinema watching a film, it can be a nice touch but everyday? Just doesn't quite sit right with me.
(I've read through this again and it seems to be all over the place. Feel free to tear it apart. I might think and express myself clearer later.)