After trying a few games, I have to say this is almost entirely dependent on the game. GT5 is particularly good - the mountain level looks jaw dropping in 3D, you really sense how huge and far that mountain is, theres no parallax scrolling effect. Black ops can be a little bizarre because the gun looks very artificial there, as it literally is in a different plane from the world around you. When you go up against a wall it looks really strange cause the gun sticks out further into the world than the wall. And when you throw lots of flat UI elements in it gets worse. Movies can be a particularly bad offender with this, since so much of what you see on screen is artificially placed there. But this is not a fundamental flaw to stereoscopic 3D - a full 3D game engine can pull off convincing depth very well.
The problem is that they HAVE to limit it to high end TVs at the moment, its not just a marketing ploy. It requires either the natural fast refresh of a plasma or a fast LCD, and plasma's generally dont come under 45-50 inches - so thats naturally going to be more expensive. But samsung's cheapest 3DTV is a 720p 50inch set well under $1000, so its not like cheaper options dont exist. LCDs can be made smaller than plasma, but theyre generally terrible at 3D due to low refresh rates. You need a fast (and thus expensive) LCD to even come close.
Those are definitely some major fuck ups though. Thankfully universal glasses are out there, but it is currently a total mess with that. Theyre obviously making it more difficult for consumers, but I wouldnt say theyre shooting themselves in the foot. They dont want you to buy just TVs, they want you to buy THEIR TVs. 3D capability will be a given very soon, theyre just trying to capitalize now.
No one said it wasnt a dirty business.
Its quite good, I wouldnt deviate from the defaults very far or else it looks odd. Frame rate is hurt a bit when youre in last place, but still silky smooth in first place with few cars on screen.
The problem is that its GT5, a game I'm really not that excited about to begin with. But the 3D in it is quite good. Its well done, doesnt pop out from the screen so much as go deep in, but you can change that.
Sure, I agree that there are reasons behind it, but that doesn't make 3D sets any less expensive. The "3D premium" is very real for many people. If you typically buy from a higher end line anyway, then the premium may be pretty small. However, if you're someone that typically tries to save a few bucks and buy a mid-range or low end set you're currently screwed. I'd probably buy from a higher end line anyway, but it's when I start thinking about prescription glasses and possibly needing to upgrade my receiver that I have give it a second thought. Outside of 3D I have absolutely no need to upgrade my receiver. So making the jump to 3D suddenly becomes a bit more daunting and much more expensive than simply replacing the TV.
As for the 720p set, I'm not sacrificing size or resolution for the sake of a pitiful amount of 3D content. Even if there were mountains of content I doubt I'd make that sacrifice. I'd wager most people are this way. People rarely go smaller (in relation to the screen) with their new TVs.
Those are definitely some major fuck ups though. Thankfully universal glasses are out there, but it is currently a total mess with that. Theyre obviously making it more difficult for consumers, but I wouldnt say theyre shooting themselves in the foot. They dont want you to buy just TVs, they want you to buy THEIR TVs. 3D capability will be a given very soon, theyre just trying to capitalize now.
No one said it wasnt a dirty business.
I just think it's a shame. They're desperate for 3D to take off, yet making moves that will clearly hinder the adoption. I'm sure Panasonic will see a spike in sales, but there will also be people that just say "F*ck it" and wait longer to jump aboard therefore slowing down the overall rate of adoption.
Last edited:
I don't sense the desperation. I don't think panasonic is any more interested in you buying a samsung 3d set just so 3d can take off any more than Microsoft wants you to buy a ps3 so hd gaming could take off.
They're still making the same advances year by year in 2d quality, but that's almost impossible to market. They're adding Netflix and all these other apps to the TVs. 3d is a super easy feature to market, so it shouldn't be a surprise that theyre pushing it.
They're still making the same advances year by year in 2d quality, but that's almost impossible to market. They're adding Netflix and all these other apps to the TVs. 3d is a super easy feature to market, so it shouldn't be a surprise that theyre pushing it.
Beev
Diamond Member
- Apr 20, 2006
- 7,775
- 0
- 0
:awe:
I look forward to the day we get really good holographic technology. Or good virtual reality.
go DLP. Bigger. Cheaper. 3D. 60 inches for under a grand of 1080P
You havent looked at the whole playing field.
My current main TV is actually a DLP, so I'm certainly familiar with them. Even though I used my own situation as an example, I meant it to be more of a general scenario. DLPs have fallen out of favor with the public so most people aren't even going to bother looking at them. Plus, I think Mitsubishi is the only DLP manufacturer left. And they're still using wobulated DLP chips and the checkerboard 3D display format. So their sets are incapable of delivering a full 1080p image to each eye. But, yeah, they're certainly an option if you want to get 3D at a large size for cheap. I just don't think most people are going to bother. The masses are in love with the thinner LCDs and videophiles are going to have second thoughts about the way they show 3D content.
Yreka
Diamond Member
- Jul 6, 2005
- 4,084
- 0
- 76
Almost every major TV vendor is pretty much giving away glasses, a BD player, and some piece of Media to watch.
For 3d, it seems like they are trying to skip the painful first part by investing a little more up front and removing the price premium for the consumer, at least at the 50"+ market segment. Pretty smart actually, they are seeding the market.
I just bought my TV end of last year.. I didn't care about 3D, here was my criteria.. 60+ inches, upper tier PQ, no projection (DLP), 2k +/- $500. All the TV's in this catagory were also 3dtv, All the tv's included free glasses and bd player.
I bought the TV without even actually looking at 3D on it.. I literally didn't give a shit. It didnt cost anything extra, and wasnt a feature i was interested in..
Once I got around to checking it out, I was actually impressed with how well it is done.. It actually adds depth, is more how you would look at a scene in real life than the old gimmicky blowing outward 3d. (but like someone else said, more like a Diorama vs a Window). Gaming is really cool too. Motorstorm Demo on PS3 looks crazy, racing along with the obsticals and scenery coming at you.
Now, my old 1080i set was 8 years old and several feet thick.. If I had a more recent LCD/Plasma would it be worthwhile upgrading just for 3d ? No probibly not.
Knowing what I know now about 3d, IE a home trial / demo would I pay the extra ~600-800 bucks to get the glasses / BD player if it was not included free ? - No, there isnt enough content, and the stuff that is out there is $30+ bucks.
For 3d, it seems like they are trying to skip the painful first part by investing a little more up front and removing the price premium for the consumer, at least at the 50"+ market segment. Pretty smart actually, they are seeding the market.
I just bought my TV end of last year.. I didn't care about 3D, here was my criteria.. 60+ inches, upper tier PQ, no projection (DLP), 2k +/- $500. All the TV's in this catagory were also 3dtv, All the tv's included free glasses and bd player.
I bought the TV without even actually looking at 3D on it.. I literally didn't give a shit. It didnt cost anything extra, and wasnt a feature i was interested in..
Once I got around to checking it out, I was actually impressed with how well it is done.. It actually adds depth, is more how you would look at a scene in real life than the old gimmicky blowing outward 3d. (but like someone else said, more like a Diorama vs a Window). Gaming is really cool too. Motorstorm Demo on PS3 looks crazy, racing along with the obsticals and scenery coming at you.
Now, my old 1080i set was 8 years old and several feet thick.. If I had a more recent LCD/Plasma would it be worthwhile upgrading just for 3d ? No probibly not.
Knowing what I know now about 3d, IE a home trial / demo would I pay the extra ~600-800 bucks to get the glasses / BD player if it was not included free ? - No, there isnt enough content, and the stuff that is out there is $30+ bucks.
Last edited:
The mistake is in locking up the content. Gaming has always been this way so people are used to it. Movies OTOH are typically hardware independent (in terms of brand, not talking format). That won't sit well with many people, especially those that are loyal to specific brands (which is many people).
Last edited:
Yreka
Diamond Member
- Jul 6, 2005
- 4,084
- 0
- 76
Exactly right in my estmation. 3d is already a value added feature on PDT's. The only reason its not on LCD yet is because the tech hasn't caught up yet, you still have to pay a premium but that is for the price of the faster panel, not 3d itself.
I will say though the exclusives suck for the 3DBD's. I seriously doubt many people are going to buy a panny over a sammy just to get Avatar, or vice versa for Shrek.
Last edited:
IMO all it will accomplish is slowing adoption of the 3D format and provide a reason to pirate the content. They're going after short terms gains without regard for long term repercussions on the format. With so little content available how can it be anything but a mistake to lock up some of the most popular content?
Is this true for the new 120hz models as well? I can't find didly about the new ones in that respect. I have the 120hz 65"
I have to imagine some bean counter at the movie studios decided the bundle of money they got from panasonic more than made up for lost sales and piracy.
It's certainly in the best interest of the tv makers to lock stuff down. They don't give a rats ass about piracy as long as you watch it on their set. They just don't want you watching it on someone else's.
I don't think there's any worry about long term damage to the format from anyones perspective. These exclusives wont last forever. Unless everyone in the world loses an eye, 3d will be relevant going forward.
I'm not sure to be honest. I haven't looked at DLP tech in the last half year or so. Have they switched to using 1920x1080 DMD (DLP) chips? Last I knew they were still using the 960x1080 chips and I figured that since DLP was on the way out that they wouldn't make any major changes. You could be right though, I just can't find anything either. IMO, if they have updated then that does make DLP more appealing, but I still don't think most people are going to look at them.
Not if people simply don't buy them. It's not my main reason by any means, but it's on my list for reasons why I'm waiting.
3D has failed before. Personally I don't think it's going to completely disappear again, but I think crap like this ultimately slows adoption for everyone.
I cant find out, hard to dig those specs up
not realy on the way out though when its the root of the 3d/digital movie theater
Eh, its never been tried before on this level. One offs like the virtual boy are irrelevant. The whole industry is behind this, its time has come.
If I wasnt in the market for a new TV yet, I wouldnt have bought one yet either. The content really isnt there, although its coming at about the rate I expected. I was going to buy a high end TV no matter what, but I'm glad it came with 3D. I am really enjoying what little is out there, and its only going to get better. Those who write it off as being a gimmick are either going to miss out on a good thing or eat their words later.
It seems like some people are eager to see it fail for one reason or another, but it's here to stay.
Not in any decent way in the forseeable future. Its likely the glasses will get better to the point that you'll be fine wearing them before the TVs get to the point that youll want to watch with whatever kludgy system they come up with.
They can get away with it on small screens like the 3DS and cell phones because theyre held very close to your face, and this creates a very wide angle between your eyes from the POV of the screen. Sitting further away that angle is greatly reduced, and its far more difficult to get a different image to each eye.
By the time autostereoscopic is even a realistic technology for big screens, its going to look very poor and be horrendously expensive compared to what will be inexpensive and light glasses.
DLPs are horrible quality. 1080p on one doesn't look anywhere near as sharp/clear/crisp as 1080p on an plasma or lcd.
Plus they require a darkened room to look halfway decent.
I've gamed and watched blurays on a 65" 1080p 3D DLP. Not impressed at all.
I heard they already have developed large 3D tvs without glasses that work for up to 9 seating positions. How long that will take to be a consumer product.. who knows..
Well, there's a few problems with the ones theyre showing already. Generally, those positions are going to be fixed, and while they might be adjustable to your seating, theyll still be fixed to *very* specific spots on those seats, within inches. They literally had footprints on the floor at CES for the demo units, standing anywhere else the screen looked horrible. Some crazy head tracking solution will be needed to rectify that, and not sure how workable that will be for more than one user. All of that is going to add MASSIVELY to the cost, if its even feasible at all.
And then in order for them to do that without cutting the resolution in half, they have to use a 4K panel, which will probably be horrendously expensive as well.
And by the time these things are even available in their most basic form at large screen sizes, the glasses are going to be ridiculously cheap, the TVs much cheaper, and probably offer way better quality to boot.
10 years from now it might be a different story, but seriously, dont hold your breath for autostereoscopic on a big screen anytime soon. Its just not going to happen, not at any consumer affordable level.
Honestly, I think people will eventually just get over having to wear the glasses. I dont think people will be watching everything in 3D, but visually oriented stuff, for sure. A few decades ago walking around with speakers jammed in your ears probably seemed equally stupid, but its completely normal nowadays.
Last edited:
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 384
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
Facebook
Twitter