Sony want you to love 3D. So do Nintendo and Rupert Murdoch.
More importantly, they want you to love 3D enough to buy it. They want you, the same people who collectively earned $2,729,711,510 for James Cameron’s rather large back pockets, to spend $2,000 on a new TV, subscribe to new services and buy new hardware. They also want you to sit in your house with a pair of not-exactly-flattering glasses propped upon your nose in the same way you do at the cinema. Even for simple tasks such as watching a movie or playing a game. Not always in the dark either, so this time people will see you sat there looking silly.
Although still in its relative infancy however, 3D technology is already commanding much attention. Given the box office shattering success of Avatar, it’s probably not hard to see why. But what do you think? Are you sceptical of the long term future for 3D? Have you even experienced it yet? Will you become an early adopter, or wait for the technology to prove itself beyond the confines of the big screen first?
Following on from an E3 in which 3D commanded probably the most attention behind new motion controls, this seems as good a time as any to gauge initial interest in the technology. The Nintendo 3DS is real (and looks a lot like a regular DS) and although there are only 4 titles available for Playstation 3 with full 3D support, Killzone 3 heads up a list of future releases that will support the technology out of the box. Away from gaming, 3DTV’s are starting to hit stores and Sky Sports are extending their reach of 3D football coverage to more and more pubs and clubs across the UK.
Despite all this apparent interest in the technology however, I remain sceptical about just how necessary it all is. In terms of my demographic, I tick many boxes in the early adopter category. I’m a young technology enthusiast and a keen gamer with a decent (ish) job, and although I’m not single, my fiancee is pretty understanding when it comes to my technology needs and wants. Perhaps most importantly, I’m also impatient. I’m the sort of person who buys an iPad on launch blindly hoping that it fits into my life rather than me requiring it for a specific need. I’m also the sort of person who queues up for a new console launch and has few qualms about replacing a system when a new version is released later. At a rough estimate, 9 out of 10 video games I buy are bought on their launch. For a company like Sony, I am the sort of person – a regular consumer with a little more gadget awareness than your “average joe” – to whom 3D should appeal.
At the moment though, there’s just something missing. Personally speaking, at least.
In my opinion, it almost feels like a new technology is being asked to run before the existing one can walk. High Definiton is, in relative terms at least, still young and wide eyed. Many homes are still yet to invest in a HD set, while many of those who do will be comprised of regular consumers who have waited for the price to drop to a reasonable level before investing. At least here in the UK, High Definition TV is still far from the standard broadcast choice, with only a small smattering of channels being supported by companies such as Sky and Virgin. We still live in an age where neither the Xbox 360 nor the PS3, the leading lights of HD home entertainment, come bundled with a HDMI cable as standard. The Wii has no support for it all. I wonder if we’ll be asked to buy our own 3D specs separate in the same way?
As the aforementioned tech enthusiast and potential easy target for a new product launch, I’m also reluctant to ditch my current HDTV so soon after buying it. I’ve owned a HDTV for 3 years, putting me in neither the early adopter nor Johnny-come-lately camps in this particular scenario, but to me the idea of replacing it so soon is preposterous. 3 years falls well below my idea of a sufficient life cycle when buying a new TV. So what of your average consumer? The men and women out there who have waited for HDTV’s to fall below £500 before investing? How many of these are going to simply up and leave their HD sets after 1, 2 or maybe 3 years, in favour of a new, unproven and currently incredibly expensive format?
It’s natural for the introduction of new technology to be a slow process, starting with early adopters and gradually reaching mainstream consumers. However, there is a concern that companies like Sony and Murdoch are too eager to force 3D technology onto a consumer base that may not be ready for it yet. While Nintendo’s 3D vision is contained within its 3DS unit, Sony’s emphasis on 3D gaming may face challenges due to the small user base. As a gamer and technology enthusiast, it may be another 3-4 years before 3D in the home becomes relevant on a daily basis. If you want to learn more about 3D animation companies, visit www.fuseanimation.com/3d-animation-studio/. As such, lengthy presentations about the benefits of 3D gaming are currently irrelevant.
These are of course little more than my own thoughts and ideas, bouncing around the vast cavernous space between my ears like a ping pong ball. Feel free to leave your own below in the comments section.
Email the author of this post at matc@tap-repeatedly.com.
I think you hit the nail on the head with the self contained nature of Nintendo’s 3D. It’s a standard of its own and can perpetuate the tech, Sony and co. can’t create the sort of content to justify buying the tech. They won’t be able to keep it up unless everybody makes the move and we all know that isn’t going to happen. Will I give up my £800 HDTV? No fucking way. I’ve got more respect for my finances.
Charlie Brooker has recently written about this topic, and although I haven’t read it, he is rarely incorrect. 3D is bullshit in my opinion. I saw Avatar twice presuming that the first time I watched it I was sat in the wrong place, from the wrong viewing angle but it was arguably the same, only with slightly less ghosting in darker scenes. 3D is great for floaty and pointy bits but bollocks for everything else. Not to mention I predict widespread splitting headaches and a surge in spectacles in 10 years time if this technology soon takes off domestically.
Agree: it does seem rather premature. After Sky dragged their heels over HD for years to now suddenly jump up and claim that 3D is the future and what’s more the future is now, does makes me wonder what happened to the HD future which seems to be in the past. Even better – pimping all of this in the middle of The It’s-a-recession-oh-no-it-isn’t End Times.
I wonder if they will have to come up with yet another proprietary interface to lock down content transmission. Welcome, H3DMI.
The glasses are what will kill it. No one wants to put on glasses to watch TV, or a movie, or to play a game. At the cinema it’s okay, because that’s a Special Occasion – plus, as Mat notes, you’re in the dark and no one can see how absurd you look. At home, it’s all about convenience. I think the 3DS is a great step forward, but from what I’ve heard so far the technology still has a very long way to go.
What happened to the days of buying a display – TV, monitor, whatever – and knowing you’d be staring at it for 12 years? My 40″ LCD HDTV is less than four years old and already I’m jealous of stuff it can’t do. Forget 3D, I want more inches! Not that size matters!
Excellent article, Mat. Good arguments. Also, Gregg’s “3D is bullshit in my opinion.” quirp is on the money. It’s extremely expensive, it’s saddles the user with glasses AND ruins it for everyone else in the room who might NOT have glasses. And it’s just not necessarry. I mean. I don’t need to watch movies in 3D at home. I don’t want it in the theatre either, but perhaps it can be tollerated there. But when I sit in front of my TV and want to watch I dunno… Bergman, Houston, Shinya Tsukamoto, Von Trier or any of my fave authors, not only I don’t need 3D, it’s that I don’t want it, it’s distracting, it doesn’t add anything to the experience and it actually subtracts from it.
For games it is arguably more justified as it might make them more immersive and shit, but again, the barrier is too high. I only bought my HDTV last year to complement my Xbox360/ PS3 combo and it cost me some 700 Euro. No way I am giving three times that money for a Bravia TV this or the next year. Killzone or no Killzone, thank you very much. Not to forget: Killzone 2 is already somewhat of an uncomfortable presence in the living room, whatwith all the noises, loud explosions, men shouting and violence and stuff on screen. If I add 3D to it, meaning that whoever looks at the screen but me will only see a smudge of images and that I will be isolated by having specs on my face, well, I can safely say that it becomes totally unwelcome in my living room.
3DS is another story and I am positively excited about it. Less about 3D and more about the enhanced specs. Of course, stronger hardware means more expensive development so it might actually lose the exciting nature that DS has due to low barrier of entry and a lot of great ideas developed for cheap, but I hope it will actually pull through. And 3D, whatwith it being self contained (and possible to turn off!!!) sounds like less of a gimmick and more of a smart addition to an already great package. Not to mention that Miyamoto keeps repeating that it’s not about the looks only, but about new gameplay possibilities. And Miyamoto is someone you want to listen to.
I don’t mind the glasses themselves, it’s the bloody indentations they leave wherever they come into contact with my face. I’d rather wear a bear trap in front of my HDTV.
@harbour master: thanks for visiting and welcome, I recognise you from Tom’s blog. What makes me laugh is the application of the term ‘High Definition’. It’s sort of backed itself into a corner and peaked too early because sooner or later there’s going to be ‘Higher Definition’ – after all PC monitors have been higher all along – and what the hell will they call it then? And how will they justify buying it after years of trumpeting HD? Maxi-Powered High Definition? Non-More High Definition? Your Life Will Finally Be Complete High Definition? I know most 720p games look a little ragged on my ‘small’ 32″ LCD screen so I should think that 1080p has similar issues when the screens start getting super massive. Not that I wouldn’t want a bigger screen. And indeed, not that size matters.
3DS 3D is cool, the rest sucks simply because it costs too much.
I must confess that wearing the glasses themselves doesn’t particularly bother me, either. In my experience from talking to people about this though, the glasses issue is one that the industry are going to have to work hard to overcome. Whenever I see the issue raised amongst my friends and/or family, the first question (almost without fail) is always “Will I have to wear those silly glasses to watch it?”. That takes precedence over cost or even the point of actually using 3D technology in the first place.
For me 3D is just a different experience totally to HD. I genuinely struggle to watch football in Standard Definition now, such is the gap in quality between them. I’ve watched around 2 or 3 films in 3D now (and probably the 2 current showcase examples of 3D at that – Avatar and Up) and to be honest I’ve not exactly “caught the bug” for it yet so to speak. I’ve watched Avatar on my own humble HDTV since and can’t say I missed the 3D effects.
@Gregg B: Thanks for the welcome. I feel the introduction of HD has been a debacle in the UK – it’s taken far too long and too many technology iterations to get here, considering how long Japan has been on the scene – and spitting out 3D seems like a quick-buck revenue-generating effort based on the current 3D buzz (“Thank You James Cameron!” said in the voice of Sterling Archer).
I haven’t experienced the New 3D stuff yet, and it may all be good. But considering the expense of filming 3D, the rollout of technology to the consumer and the undeniability that many 3D efforts are shit (a la HD TV), I can’t see it taking off for some time.
people i might get alot of hate for this comment but i still don`t have a hd tv. i am perfectly fine watching stuff in standard resolutiuon. but this is not about high def it is about 3d. i agree with most of the people on here the whole 3d thing just seems like a way for companys to try and make extra cash. it while be atleast a other 5 or 6 years before it becomes part of the norm. i am not spending between 3-4 thousand on a new tv and glasses. also what about the effects on your eyes adn brain. sorry but watching stuff in 3d all teh time can`t be healthy.
All of our Free To Air broadcasters in Aus currently broadcast in HD (of one form or another), and everyone will be required to swap over to HD in… well the date keeps changing. In Aus as of March, around 68% of the population have switched to digital terrestrial reception.
I’m neither pro- or anti- 3D per se, but fear that it is an intermediary technology, so won’t get too caught up in it yet. In the not-too-distant future, convergence will bring us a communication pads, that work as our wireless netbook (touchscreen), our mobile phone, our games platform, and our media playback device.
Or we’ll just plug a cable into our heads a-la The Matrix.
lakerz says no to 3D (at least for now)
Sean, you’ll get no hate for that at all. If anything it helps to illustrate the point. In the grand scheme of things, full take up of HD content is still quite modest (when I say full take up, I’m talking those who have a HDTV, a HD games console, a HD subscription TV service, 5.1 surround, Blu-Ray etc – the works). Many of those that do have waited years for the prices to become competitive enough to do so. Especially with times the way they are, are people going to leap to 3D anytime soon?
Out of interest, as someone who doesn’t have a HDTV, would you ever consider skipping HD altogether and jumping straight in at 3D in a couple of years time?
I love 3d and I’ve been enjoying it for many months right now, and cheap. You can get an Acer h5360 projector for about 500-600 euro, 3d vision kit for 125 and with my 9800gtx+ 1gb that took me 100 euro, for about 800 euro you get full 3d experience on a 100 inch proyected screen, or go for some of the 250 euro monitors compatible around for a total of about 400-500, that look amazing in 3d with LOTS of your currently owned pc games.
You really have to see Dragon Age, Modern Warfare 2, Assasins Creed I and II, Bad Company 2, Metro 2033, etc. in perfect 3d are completely mindblowing. Right now it’s hard for me to play anything 2d anymore, so if you’re worried with the price barrier, 3d vision is the way to go.
1-I just bought a 52″ HD TV last year for $1,300.
2-I have yet to see a 3D movie in which the 3D enhanced my experience. Most of the 3D movies I’ve seen are terrible and the 3D was added as a gimmick to laughably hide the crapfest.
3-Games would potentially benefit most from 3D, but my first point and the fact I’m unwilling to spend even more money on several pairs of glasses so I can play games with my friends or watch them play makes it cost-prohibitive.
4-3D sucked in the 80s and it sucks now. Remember Jaws 3? Friday the 13th, Part You Keep Buying It and We’ll Keep Shoveling It? I resent being made to endure this fad again and being asked to pay for it. Good movies will be good without 3D, and bad movies won’t be better for it. I will enjoy God of War III and Battlefield Bad Company 2 without wondering how much better it would be for the price of the upgrade.
Dear sir,
My name is n.kumar ,am from tirunelvely(south side of tamilnadu .india).I am from poor family. Am working as a carpander.
I invented one mechanical device. It is used for cinema Industry to make glass free 3d cinema in big screen. It is a world first 3d concept now I published all the details in my website.www.natural3dbigscreen.com .
In my family situation am not able to exposing in my concept.Due to financial problem .So am going to sell my concept in any foreign contry. So can you help for me how can I cantact who and where.
Please guide me what can I do?
Thanyou and Anticipation.
AND
Here I have to explain same this to you.
In my concept consists of moving action. It is used to create BIGSCREEN 3D CINEMA(glassfree).
Lenticular method is used for only two or three picture to make a 3d effect. Already I know in this method we cannot make a 100% 3d effect.
In my concept speed is more than 6000 fps .One more advantage of my concerting we can project in front and back side of the screen.
Now a days the OSIRIS3D trying in this same concept. But still now they did not find . I am verymuch confident to say ,the OSIRIS3D dream is going to possible in my invention.
In my mechanical device only one high speed projector is enough for centralized the screen.
In the projector speed above is 6000 fps . the distance of the frame 0.1 degree .So the glassfree 3d picture display in the screen.
Do you want more clarification see my websit now.www.natural3dbigscreen.com
Some spam is too awesome to just delete.
What if he is a poor man with a great idea and that by treating him as spam we’re essentially destroying his dreams? Destroying his dreams in 3D?
Oh lord, how I laughed! 😀