3D is a fad. Sony and Nintendo are wasting their time with it.

I read a very good article about the state of 3D, how companies are over-investing in it, and why it is probably not going to be around much longer.

http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/news/nobody-will-admit-3d-is-a-fad-colea.php

I have no idea whether or not 3D makes the gaming experience better, but from some comments I've read by industry professionals there is a big concern about eyestrain. What we think of as "3D" is not actually 3D at all, but rather an optical illusion created by placing two alternate 2D images of the same subject in front of each eye to create the illusion that each eye is looking at the same image in 3D. Over long periods of time, this can cause headaches and even motion sickness. When I saw How To Train Your Dragon in 3D, it was a beautiful film, but near the end I got a really bad headache that didn't go away for hours. The only reason this didn't happen during Avatar was because James Cameron is a 3D expert and avoided making any rapid cuts and carefully guided the viewer's eye throughout the whole movie to prevent us from focusing on the wrong thing at the wrong time.

How does all this relate to gaming? Well, if extended play sessions in 3D causes eyestrain, motion sickness or headaches, then it's not something that gamers will be using in the long term. It will be a gimmick that they'll occasionally bring out to show their friends, but not something that is used for serious gameplay. Also, the success of 3D is largely driven by content. Franky, for the most part 3D movies have been pretty bad. Sure, you've got your Avatar, Up, and Toy Story 3, but then you've also got tons of other films that are nothing more than a crappy diigital filter slapped on at the last minute to increase ticket prices. This is a bad thing. There are also films like How to Train Your Dragon which look very good, but are not properly arranged for 3D and end up causing headaches.

This lack of quality content and oversaturation of bad, gimmicky content is going to kill the 3D format in movie theaters, and when that happens there will no reason to invest in it at home. Sony's plans to sell $200 Bravia 3D glasses is not going to go anywhere if there's no content that people want to invest in them for, and video games probably will not be enough due ot the eyestrain concerns I mentioned. As for the 3DS, the problem it will face is that once the 3D fad dies out, Nintendo will be stuck with what many may view as a gimmicky toy that gives kids headaches. The reason Nintendo is using 3D on the 3DS is because they didn't think the improved graphics and controls would be enough to sell it with, and if the novelty of 3D has worn off within a year, Nintendo will look like a Johnny-come-lately.

To sum up, Sony and Nintendo are wasting the time and money of the consumers and themselves by investing so heavily in 3D. 3D is not the next technological revolution-- it hasn't been for the last 100 years since it was first introduced. Sony would be better off putting a split screen multiplayer mode in Killzone 3, and Nintendo would be better off making sure that the 3D runs games as smoothly as possible, without bothering with the 3D gimmick (and speaking of gimmicks, I still don't even get why the DS has two screens).

"and Nintendo would be better off making sure that the 3D runs games as smoothly as possible, without bothering with the 3D gimmick (and speaking of gimmicks, I still don't even get why the DS has two screens)" and i'm suppose to believe what this guy says about 3D when he can't even comprehend two screens on the DS?VideoGameGuy

motion controls were a fad too at one point.

And the 3DS will have a slider, allowing you to lower and eventually turn off the 3D.

KTHXBAI

Yeah and Motion Controls were a fad too... Oh wait :o

motion controls were a fad too at one point.

Animal-Mother

Why is everything diluted down to being simply a "fad"?

Things can progress without being a fad. This is one of the biggest pushes for 3D we've seen in a long time, or possibly ever. Is the technology perfect? No, because some of the population still cannot use it, but it's taking off.

[QUOTE="Animal-Mother"]

motion controls were a fad too at one point.

Timstuff

... A) Thousands of dollars now.. It will reduce in price as time goes on, just like HDTVs..

B) your first point we really can say for almost anything, hell video games can give people headaches to begin with..

It might be a fad but Nintendo sure does have some interesting technology in the 3DS. The technology is called Autostereoscopy, and while I still don't have a clue of how this works, I'm still pretty impressed. :)

The TVs aren't that expensive, it's the glasses that are expensive. Just go to your local Best Buy and you'll see a 3DTV is only a $100 or $200 over the regular price. But the glasses prices are ridiculous. It's $120-$150.

Plus the 3DS isn't going to be expensive, at most it'll cost $250. Nintendo never charges alot.

Just like HDTV, what will make 3DTV popular is videogames, porn, and sports. Except for super tech geeks, nobody bought HDTVs until ESPN HD and sports were in HD or when the 360/PS3 were released and of course Blu-Ray porn. Samething is happening with 3DTVs, ESPN 3D is help pushing it. Next will be 3D games. When 3D porn arrives, you know 3DTV has made it.

[QUOTE="VideoGameGuy"]"and Nintendo would be better off making sure that the 3D runs games as smoothly as possible, without bothering with the 3D gimmick (and speaking of gimmicks, I still don't even get why the DS has two screens)" and i'm suppose to believe what this guy says about 3D when he can't even comprehend two screens on the DS?Timstuff

[QUOTE="Timstuff"]

[QUOTE="Animal-Mother"]

motion controls were a fad too at one point.

sSubZerOo

... A) Thousands of dollars now.. It will reduce in price as time goes on, just like HDTVs..

B) your first point we really can say for almost anything, hell video games can give people headaches to begin with..

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

[QUOTE="Timstuff"]Motion controls don't give you headaches or potentially cost you thousands of dollars, though.

Timstuff

... A) Thousands of dollars now.. It will reduce in price as time goes on, just like HDTVs..

B) your first point we really can say for almost anything, hell video games can give people headaches to begin with..

i disagree with the article.

eye strain may be a problem for very extended gameplay. some people on here, who play games for more than 3 hours at a time, may need to be concerned about that.

but 3D movies have been proven successfull for a while now. that shows us that eyestrain is not a serious issue for showings of big screen 3D movies that are 2-3 hours long. how will eyestrain be an issue for mass audiences beyond that timespan? not so sure. but 2-3 hours of gameplay at a time is more than enough for the casual gamer.

[QUOTE="Timstuff"][QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

... A) Thousands of dollars now.. It will reduce in price as time goes on, just like HDTVs..

B) your first point we really can say for almost anything, hell video games can give people headaches to begin with..

Animal-Mother

[QUOTE="Animal-Mother"][QUOTE="Timstuff"] There are only two times when I got a gaming headache: when I played Mario 64 for 3 hours straight when I was 12, and when I played the Virtual Boy at Wal-Mart. The virtual boy may as well have been called "The blindness machine" due to its awful red display and bad graphics, and I'm sure the 3DS will not be anywhere near as bad. But still, if a carefully constructed experience like a movie can give me a bad headache that lasts for 2 hours, then imagine what something as chaotic as a video game could potentially do.Timstuff

and for the record, there were similar comments about the wii when it was released - how will motion control work for extended gameplay periods? people's wrists are bound to get tired. it won't have lasting appeal.

[QUOTE="Animal-Mother"][QUOTE="Timstuff"] There are only two times when I got a gaming headache: when I played Mario 64 for 3 hours straight when I was 12, and when I played the Virtual Boy at Wal-Mart. The virtual boy may as well have been called "The blindness machine" due to its awful red display and bad graphics, and I'm sure the 3DS will not be anywhere near as bad. But still, if a carefully constructed experience like a movie can give me a bad headache that lasts for 2 hours, then imagine what something as chaotic as a video game could potentially do.Timstuff

Except we have the technology for 3d.. Its not going any where, 3d earlier was primitive and didn't look really good.. And yet again just because YOU have headaches does not some how mean thaat every one does.. Nor does it mean automatic failure.. Yet again i was pointing out how ridiculous your argument it is when I have pointed out I had headaches when playing games at times, but long and behold my very narrow view of such things does not account for every one.

[QUOTE="Timstuff"]

[QUOTE="Animal-Mother"] So because you can't tolerate it means it's a fad?sSubZerOo

Except we have the technology for 3d.. Its not going any where, 3d earlier was primitive and didn't look really good.. And yet again just because YOU have headaches does not some how mean thaat every one does.. Nor does it mean automatic failure.. Yet again i was pointing out how ridiculous your argument it is when I have pointed out I had headaches when playing games at times, but long and behold my very narrow view of such things does not account for every one.

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

[QUOTE="Timstuff"] History will prove me correct. 3D comes and goes every couple of decades. It was big for a few years in the 50's, then it fizzled. They tried it again in the 80's to much success, but once again it fizzled due to many movies looking like crap and making poor use of the effects. Now, it's happening all over again. A couple 3D movies make tons of money and some others manage to sucker people in by putting "3D" on the poster despite the effect being crap, and sooner or later people are going to get bored or even fed up with it. The lack of good content is ultimately what makes 3D go away every time, and the fact that once the novelty wears off people stop caring when they see the words "3D."

Timstuff

Except we have the technology for 3d.. Its not going any where, 3d earlier was primitive and didn't look really good.. And yet again just because YOU have headaches does not some how mean thaat every one does.. Nor does it mean automatic failure.. Yet again i was pointing out how ridiculous your argument it is when I have pointed out I had headaches when playing games at times, but long and behold my very narrow view of such things does not account for every one.

times are different.

blue/red glasses limitted the user experience by limitting color from movies. a SIGNIFICANT limitation.

there is no such limitation with glassless 3D gaming. you can receive pretty much the same things from a 2D expereince, except with 3D. that is a very different circumstance.

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

[QUOTE="Timstuff"] History will prove me correct. 3D comes and goes every couple of decades. It was big for a few years in the 50's, then it fizzled. They tried it again in the 80's to much success, but once again it fizzled due to many movies looking like crap and making poor use of the effects. Now, it's happening all over again. A couple 3D movies make tons of money and some others manage to sucker people in by putting "3D" on the poster despite the effect being crap, and sooner or later people are going to get bored or even fed up with it. The lack of good content is ultimately what makes 3D go away every time, and the fact that once the novelty wears off people stop caring when they see the words "3D."

Timstuff

Except we have the technology for 3d.. Its not going any where, 3d earlier was primitive and didn't look really good.. And yet again just because YOU have headaches does not some how mean thaat every one does.. Nor does it mean automatic failure.. Yet again i was pointing out how ridiculous your argument it is when I have pointed out I had headaches when playing games at times, but long and behold my very narrow view of such things does not account for every one.

I think we will see it dissapear from flims and TV, but the 3DS is kinda in a vacuum. Developers will still make 3D games for it because you don't have to worry about adoption rates.

[QUOTE="Timstuff"][QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

Except we have the technology for 3d.. Its not going any where, 3d earlier was primitive and didn't look really good.. And yet again just because YOU have headaches does not some how mean thaat every one does.. Nor does it mean automatic failure.. Yet again i was pointing out how ridiculous your argument it is when I have pointed out I had headaches when playing games at times, but long and behold my very narrow view of such things does not account for every one.

Animal-Mother

i like 3d the tv's i have seen doing it look great the effect is neat and i can't wait to see it in games.

i have not bought the glasses that go with my tv yet because there is not enough software but i will in maybe a year or so when there is a decient 3d library.

it's not my problem that other people didn't like what they saw, i did and that is what is important.

I think we will see it dissapear from flims and TV, but the 3DS is kinda in a vacuum. Developers will still make 3D games for it because you don't have to worry about adoption rates.

goblaa

[QUOTE="Animal-Mother"][QUOTE="Timstuff"]People were pefectly happy with the crappy red and blue glasses they had in the 80's. The problem is that the films being released started looking more and more attrocious and were only using 3D as a gimmick like it was a theme park ride. The novelty is going to wear off again, just like it did in generations past. It does not matter if the technology has gotten better or not, because the content is still severely lacking and there's ultimately not much difference between 3D and 2D once the novelty wears off except for the ticket prices.Timstuff

Whatever the casual market wants, they'll see to it.
Easier than making a jaw dropping, real time cg game

here we go again :P

HD is a fad. Bluray is a fad, dvd is a fad.

Actually, Nintendo has a far BETTER approach to 3D gaming than Sony does.

Nintendo, with 3DS being the lead platform, are more focused on DITCHING 3D Glasses in favor of a practical approach with 3D displays on screen.

Sony on the other hand, seem more focused on using 3D glasses, which doesn't sound (at least to me)......cool, and likely to feel awkward.

These people that say that 3D and Motion Controls are fads just hate Nintendo. Anything Nintendo Does they call it a fad. Why won't they just say that Nintendo is a Fad?