Future of 3D gaming and media *spawn

[Silent_Buddha]

Would Sony make money on the sale of 3-D TVs, and content for said TVs?

In theory they would, but in practice it looks like they might lose money if there was any developement time invested in including and potentially delaying the release of certain games.

MS and Nintendo certainly have nothing to gain. And thus mandating 3D would only serve to make games more expensive to produce and develope.

Sony is the only one with a vested interest in 3D, since they would like people to buy REALLY expensive TV's. I've been looking at TV prices for comparable 3D and non 3D sets, and 3D sets from the same manufacturer are quite often twice as expensive as non-3D sets. That's just absolutely obscene and I can see why only 2% of TV's sold in November in the US were 3D capable.

Throw in having to wear glasses for each person and it just becomes more bother than any potential benefit.

Regards,
SB

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Here is a timely piece:

Poor journalism. The Nielsen report was only enquiring about buying intentions for the next year. The fact most people aren't interested in buying a new 3D TV within 12 months isn't shocking when you consider we've all been buying new HD TVs and it's a tight economy. If they didn't ask a control question such as, "do you intend to buy any new TV?" or "do you intend to spend $500 or more dollars on a single CE device?" the information would be much more revealing as little to do with the 3D aspect and more to do with just general attitudes towards shopping.

Not selling to a quarter of the public in the first 12 months is not DOA.

 

[Arwin]

Agreed. By the way I was just in mediamarkt and Sony is doing pretty well with TV demo setups that have 3D glasses tethered that are always charged up. I also got to see some Motorstorm Pacific rift footage and damn, I agree that that is a 3D tech selling thing. I now wish that they had a Playstation 3 3D game demo setup as well, though perhaps it is better they didn't, because if they had had Gran Turismo 5 in 3D playable, I don't think I'd have been able to resist - I can't wait to try driving the Nurburgring in 3D and see if I get the same sense of vertigo!

And the TV I saw it on was already only 999, and way better than my current TV. I really, really want one now. Yeah, the glasses are still a bit of a drawback (especially if you'd have visitors) but man, I would get it for gaming alone already.

*tries to erase this from his head as likely will take another 6 months at least before I can buy one*

I wish Arcades returned, so you could play this there again for a buck per go.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

And the TV I saw it on was already only 999, and way better than my current TV. I really, really want one now. Yeah, the glasses are still a bit of a drawback (especially if you'd have visitors)

You could still go 2D for visitors. And in the long run, at least if these idiot companies had had sense to come up with an interfrace standard, once everyone has glasses they could bring their own in the same way we move controllers around.

 

[Arwin]

You could still go 2D for visitors. And in the long run, at least if these idiot companies had had sense to come up with an interfrace standard, once everyone has glasses they could bring their own in the same way we move controllers around.

That's true, but as I'm generally an early adaptor in my group of friends and family, and I wouldn't be surprised to still be one by next year, that wouldn't help. But we're (very) rarely more than four people and to be honest I expect the price of these glasses to go down considerably.

And by the way, they've come up with that interface standard, so in the not to distant future all glasses should be compatible.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

And by the way, they've come up with that interface standard, so in the not to distant future all glasses should be compatible.

That's something,. And an important something as it'll allow people buy specific glasses to suit them from 3rd parties.

 

[NavNucST3]

Poor journalism. The Nielsen report was only enquiring about buying intentions for the next year. The fact most people aren't interested in buying a new 3D TV within 12 months isn't shocking when you consider we've all been buying new HD TVs and it's a tight economy. If they didn't ask a control question such as, "do you intend to buy any new TV?" or "do you intend to spend $500 or more dollars on a single CE device?" the information would be much more revealing as little to do with the 3D aspect and more to do with just general attitudes towards shopping.

Not selling to a quarter of the public in the first 12 months is not DOA.

Way to dismiss a report I am positive you haven't read, as far as the journalism goes the author clearly stated it was for the next twelve months. But hey, Arwin, saw 3D in MediaMarkt that is way better than a report that has media executives discussing the market or better than Sony discussing how their 3D targets were off...targets which were made during a "tight economy".

Given that it is essentially 2011 this takes us to 2012.

EDIT: You don't find it interesting that 3DTV interest DECREASES after someone views 3DTV...in a Sony test lab...ok?

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Way to dismiss a report I am positive you haven't read, as far as the journalism goes the author clearly stated it was for the next twelve months.

Yes, I saw that, but they shouldn't have led with 'DOA' which colours the interpretation of te results. The real story is, "current 3D purchasing intentions for the next 12 months aren't that high."

But hey, Arwin, saw 3D in MediaMarkt that is way better than a report that has media executives discussing the market or better than Sony discussing how their 3D targets were off...targets which were made during a "tight economy".

What has that got to do with this article, or my opinion on this article, or my opinions on 3D? I have not said 3D is doing well, nor 3D is doing badly.

EDIT: You don't find it interesting that 3DTV interest DECREASES after someone views 3DTV...in a Sony test lab...ok?

Huh? I already mentioned that in this thread:

Or perhaps more interestingly a much higher interest for the US, but this interest actually decreases after seeing 3D content! 25% of respondants who hadn't seen 3DTV video were interested in getting a 3D TV within the year, while after seeing 3D TV, that interest dropped to 12%.

Furthermore, this report was first mentioned here, and my intial response was:

Ummm...17% of Latin Americans will definitely be buying a 3DTV next year? Either there are some amazing deals in typically less CE strong markets, or these results are useless bunkum. Look at the results for the EU and NA, 6% and 3% definite purchase intent - that's the real immediate future for 3D TV and console gaming.

So just to clarify, I am not pro-Sony's 3D as you seem to be insinuating with irrelevant reference to Arwin's post and suggesting I'm ignoring results that show 3D interest drops after 3D exposure despite my raising those points on this thread before this report you linked to, nor am I saying 3D is dead, nor it's wonderful. My point here was only that this Nielsen report isn't a very good investigation for determining what the future of 3D could be, and that an article drawing DOA conclusions from it is premature and poor reasoning. Just as reports of significant interest based on that Nielsen poll are also badly reasoned because the poll results don't tally with what we know about the given markets.

 

[upnorthsox]

Way to dismiss a report I am positive you haven't read, as far as the journalism goes the author clearly stated it was for the next twelve months. But hey, Arwin, saw 3D in MediaMarkt that is way better than a report that has media executives discussing the market or better than Sony discussing how their 3D targets were off...targets which were made during a "tight economy".

Given that it is essentially 2011 this takes us to 2012.

EDIT: You don't find it interesting that 3DTV interest DECREASES after someone views 3DTV...in a Sony test lab...ok?

Huh?

In the groundbreaking study, 12 groups and families were exposed to 30 minutes of 3DTV content in a traditional living room space in Sony’s 3D Experience Media Lab in MGM TVCity (Las Vegas). An additional 425 participants from around the country were also exposed to the same content in a more formal theater-style lab environment. The content included clips from a range of genres – nature, sports, comedy, a music concert, movies, and video games. After watching the 3DTV content reel, six in ten participants agreed that the content was better than their current 2DTV viewing, and nearly half (48%) found it more engaging. They also stated that it made them feel like they were part of the action (57%) and closer to the characters (48%).

 

[corduroygt]

Agreed. By the way I was just in mediamarkt and Sony is doing pretty well with TV demo setups that have 3D glasses tethered that are always charged up. I also got to see some Motorstorm Pacific rift footage and damn, I agree that that is a 3D tech selling thing. I now wish that they had a Playstation 3 3D game demo setup as well, though perhaps it is better they didn't, because if they had had Gran Turismo 5 in 3D playable, I don't think I'd have been able to resist - I can't wait to try driving the Nurburgring in 3D and see if I get the same sense of vertigo!

Motorstorm in 3D is much more impressive than GT5 in 3D. Motorstorm has the "in your face" effects that GT5 lacks.

Also try a 3D 16 car replay in high speed ring with rain and the frame rate is 15 fps in GT5.

 

[Arwin]

Motorstorm in 3D is much more impressive than GT5 in 3D. Motorstorm has the "in your face" effects that GT5 lacks.

Also try a 3D 16 car replay in high speed ring with rain and the frame rate is 15 fps in GT5.

Sure, but when I drive by myself on the Nurburgring, only occasionally overtaking another car, I could still be doing quite well on the framerate, but still at a pretty high resolution too. I told myself that if I could buy a car for 1000 euros and not have any road tax and insurance to pay for it, I would probably have bought a car for just going to the Ring occasionally and driving there, possibly together with a friend. Now I want to see just how close GT5 comes to giving me the feeling of the real thing when I drive it in 3D ... because after the G-forces, definitely the vertigo lacking from the 2D version is the major differentiator on that track atm.

 

[Danalys]

Motorstorm in 3D is much more impressive than GT5 in 3D. Motorstorm has the "in your face" effects that GT5 lacks.

Also try a 3D 16 car replay in high speed ring with rain and the frame rate is 15 fps in GT5.

Out of screen effects are a bane on 3D cinematography and experience. Everything else can get better on a technical level, but you can't stop people wanting to test your blink response or response to things getting in your face. That takes content makers having some maturity and self control.

 

[patsu]

Motorstorm in 3D is much more impressive than GT5 in 3D. Motorstorm has the "in your face" effects that GT5 lacks.

Also try a 3D 16 car replay in high speed ring with rain and the frame rate is 15 fps in GT5.

corduroygt, did you see these on a Plasma TV or an LCD TV ? Does the 3D effect help in driving ?

Out of screen effects are a bane on 3D cinematography and experience. Everything else can get better on a technical level, but you can't stop people wanting to test your blink response or response to things getting in your face. That takes content makers having some maturity and self control.

It doesn't have to be abrupt. I usually hate out of screen effects.

An article mentioned that in KZ3, the time bomb is implemented as an out of screen object, so it's like a bomb attached to your TV in the living room. Need to see it myself to tell how believable the effect is.

 

[NavNucST3]

...

So just to clarify, I am not pro-Sony's 3D as you seem to be insinuating with irrelevant reference to Arwin's post and suggesting I'm ignoring results that show 3D interest drops after 3D exposure despite my raising those points on this thread before this report you linked to, nor am I saying 3D is dead, nor it's wonderful. My point here was only that this Nielsen report isn't a very good investigation for determining what the future of 3D could be, and that an article drawing DOA conclusions from it is premature and poor reasoning. Just as reports of significant interest based on that Nielsen poll are also badly reasoned because the poll results don't tally with what we know about the given markets.

"...DOA" was and is definitely hyperbolic even if I actually concur. I am not suggesting pro-Sony anything, it just happened to be that the Nielsen test was in a Sony lab it could have been in a Dolby lab and my responses would have been posted with the same vitriol. Where we differ is that I actually think the Nielsen report IS good...the blogging about the report is a separate issue. My issue with your post was more with respect to you seemingly basing your opinion on the entire report by the four or so public data points mentioned in that piece. The report is much more than just what was mentioned by gigaom.

Personally, I found this one to be more aligned with how I feel about 3DTV.

Huh?

“In fact, purchase interest for a 3DTV set among those planning to buy a new TV in the next 12 months decreased after seeing a demonstration of the technology, experiencing the glasses (57 percent) and learning more about product costs (68 percent),”

 

[patsu]

There have been quite a few 3DTV surveys and reports. The common thread is some consumers are interested but most of them will wait and see. The key is who should you focus on (i.e., where are the early adopters ?). One of the surveys mentioned that gamers are generally more keen in 3DTV.

I'm not surprised at the decrease in interest in Sony tests. Plasma 3DTV images are noticeably more stable. I highly recommend it. I was stunned the first time I saw the right demo.

As for extra cash on the 3D equipments, I think you'll find that in the stores, they will give you free 3D glasses, free 3D movies/games and even a free 3D Blu-ray player for a mid-end 3DTV. If a researcher identifies himself/herself as a "late adopter", he/she won't hunt for deals like an interested buyer would. He/she may sit in the office, and adds up the average prices on paper. Consumers should be able to get better deals than that.

 

[Toaddio]

Personally, I found this one to be more aligned with how I feel about 3DTV.

“In fact, purchase interest for a 3DTV set among those planning to buy a new TV in the next 12 months decreased after seeing a demonstration of the technology, experiencing the glasses (57 percent) and learning more about product costs (68 percent),”

So when costs go down, interest will go up. I'm not sure why this is such an odd concept to you.

 

[patsu]

They need better and cheaper 3D glasses ! I am not too worried about the 3DTVs. They are very good at throwing 2D images also.

EDIT: I guess 3D content is critical too, but that goes without saying.

 

[joker454]

“In fact, purchase interest for a 3DTV set among those planning to buy a new TV in the next 12 months decreased after seeing a demonstration of the technology, experiencing the glasses (57 percent) and learning more about product costs (68 percent),”

At the last e3 there were a bunch of 3d games in the Sony booth, and the reactions were as one would expect. Some loved it, some thought it didn't quite work right, some got a headache. I'd say that until they:

1) make the 3d effect more universally pack a punch
2) make the 3d effect not require glasses
3) make the 3d effect not feel like you just drank a pan galactic garble blaster

...it will remain niche. I'm sure the manufacturers will tout sales and other data, but I suspect most people will leave the feature unused on their tv's, just like hdtv signal was largely unused on the first flat panels that were sold way back.

 

[assen]

All MS, Sony or Nintendo has to do is simply mandate 3D inclusion in all full packaged games just like Sony mandates use of BluRay disks or MS mandates Live inclusion.

Ummm what? Factually not true, MS does not mandate any kind of Live functionality.

 

[patsu]

It's a long haul movement. I'm sure there are tons of issues to address throughout the entire value chain. If they can offer something as compelling as what I saw to all consumers cheaply eventually, then they should definitely repackage existing content for 3D format over time. It may not be a simple case of toggling a 3D switch.

As the content are done up, waiting for 3D glasses or glasses free displays is a matter of context. The existing 3D Blu-ray format standard may undergo a few revisions. Mobile gaming and devices will go glasses free first. Nintendo considered adding it to GameCube, so they must like the vision quite a bit.

On a personal level, there are a lot of things I want to capture in 3D video and photograph first (Goodbye, young Anna. T_T).

The problem with this thread is no one knows when exactly nextgen will start. So it's kinda strange to gauge 3D gaming status without a timeline.