So The Wii U GamePad Will Have 3D Imagery... The Worst Kind Of 3D Imagery

Nintendo has been obsessed with 3D ever since Hiroshi Yamauchi asked his staff if they could find a way to make Mario jump out of the screen. After decades that demand manifested itself in the Nintendo 3DS, but now it seems as though that legacy lives on through the Wii U's new GamePad. In the worst possible way.

IMGMR appears to have confirmed with Ubisoft that Assassin's Creed III will actually support stereoscopic 3D through the Wii U's GamePad.

We called Nintendo Australia, and were told that as far as it knew, nothing had been announced as far as 3D was concerned. We're still waiting to hear back Ubisoft locally, but it seems as though the option does exist and you will be able to view 3D images on the GamePad.

But -- one more detail before you start celebrating.

The type of 3D utilised in the Wii U version of Assassin's Creed III won't be the type of glasses free 3D you see in the 3DS. It's not even of the same quality of the 3D images seen in modern televisions. It's actually the old stereoscopic 3D, the type where you have to wear coloured glasses. So, in a sense the GamePad itself has no real ability to display 3D imagery above and beyond any other non-3D enabled screen. Most likely it's an attempt to create some kind of parity between the 'proper' 3D imagery you can see on your television and the Gamepad. Meaning that if you forced to switch between the TV and GamePad, you can continue playing in with some sort of 3D.

So, a little disappointing, but interesting nonetheless. In order to see the 3D images, users will have to wear these glasses, with Inficolour lenses designed to allow 2D televisions display '3D' images.

Wii GamePad 3D Enabled Confirmed [IMGMR]


    Do people still care about 3D?

    Come to think of it, did people EVER care about 3D?


      Infinitely this

      I have high hopes for the Oculus Rift.

        U mean the virtual boy 2?

          Electric Boogaloo

      I care about the potential and I think the concept of 3D is great. The current execution leaves a lot to be desired though.

      I care.
      I love 3D.
      We just bought a 3DTV and I'm playing ACIII on it in 3D and loving the effect. Everything is more immersive, it really makes me feel like I'm there.

      I'm also tired of people complaining about 3D just because they don't like it. It's optional. If you don't like it, don't use it. No need to complain.

        It's not always optional.

        I wanted to go and watch Dredd in the cinema a couple of weeks back. There was literally not a single 2D session on offer. It was either watch it in 3D or miss out. I missed out. And they wonder why people don't go to the cinema anymore...

          Really? I saw it in 2D.

          By 'missing out' you mean you were too lazy to go down to the other cinema down the road or go to another session during the other 364 days of the year.

            Thanks for telling me what I meant, but what I meant was what I said. There were no 2D sessions. There were only 2 cinemas showing it, they only had 2 sessions a day each, and they were all in 3D. The movie wasn't on for 364 days - it barely survived a month in cinemas.

            If I meant there were no 2D sessions at my nearest cinema but there were at some less conveniently accessible cinema elsewhere in town then I would have said that. But if you actually read my comment, my exact words were "there was literally not a single 2D session on offer". I realize that might be an ambiguous, unclear, possibly even confusing statement to somebody with poor reading and comprehension skills or a moderate-to-severe intellectual disability, but I'm not sure if it can be made any simpler than that. There. Was. Literally. Not. A. Single. 2D. Session. On. Offer.

        I really do like 3D as well, it's almost the first step towards a holodeck. (That appeals to the nerdy Star Trek fan in me a whole damn lot!) There's definitely room for improvement, but there's a whole lot of potential here too!

    I have to play my 3DS on 2D or lowest setting 3D, it just irritates my eyes to much.

    Nintendo definately needs to kill the 3D angle.

      They did - this is Ubisoft doing it, not Nintendo. Its just on their console.

      All 3D capable devices have a similar setting. It's to do with the distance between your eyes. No two humans are alike.

    Oh god the red green puke machine glasses return.... Nintendos virtual boy mk2 people!!!

    Batman: Arkham Asylum (at least the GOTY edition on xbox) had the same thing, came with 3D glasses. It has nothing to do with Nintendo @distantdrop.

    I haven't played my 3DS with the 3D on in ages. I'm completely over 3D. It doesn't add anything to a game and usually halves the frame rate in the process. But who the hell actually wants to use stereoscopic 3D? I mean seriously!

    I agree with everyone on this thread so far. 3D as it stands today is pointless and annoying. Over it. Move on.

    I love 3d. Got a 3ds and a 3d tv. If thrre was 3d in the wii u id buy it.

    I love 3D, but have found that it's only good in certain games.
    Skyrim looks VERY nice in 3D, but it's a huge tactical disadvantage.
    Sleeping Dogs in 3D isn't so good as the bright neon glows and colours are dulled down.

    The only games on PC that I've happily played in 3D all the way through with no issues are Arkham Asylum and Arkham City.
    That being said I haven't played that many games in 3D.

    Hmmm.... I must try Just Cause 2 in 3D later...

    The 3D on the 3DS is usually awesome though. I turn it off if I'm tired though as my eyes get sore when I'm viewing 3D whilst tired. And it can also be a pain to have to hold the 3DS in the perfect position. All minor issues though.

    So in other words - Nintendo have stated the next console wont be 3D and they have no plan to do it - Ubisoft themselves are doing it. I don't see how this relates to Nintendo's obsession with 3D apart from the fact Ubisoft is using there console. Wasn't there also 1-2 XBLA games that also could do this?

    BLOPS2 has an anaglyph 3D option.

    I'm fairly certain that the red/blue 3D is not stereoscopic 3D. Stereoscopic 3D is actually the 3D used in movie theatres and on 3D TVs at the moment, isn't it?

    Edit: This was meant to be a reply to Ben J a few comments up.

      I think the red/blue is called anaglyphic 3D or something like that.

      Stereoscopic 3D just refers to systems that provide two images: one for each eye. There are various methods that can be used to separate those images to get the effect.

      Anaglyphic 3D is one way, using coloured filters. Shutter glasses or RealD polarising glasses are also ways of delivering stereoscopic images.

      The alternative is when more than two images are used, which can give multiple viewing angles for a scene (either letting you move around, or have multiple viewers each seeing slightly different angles on a scene).

        Thanks for the clarification. :)

    Why is this article acting like Nintendo is doing this? it is Ubisoft, Nintendo has nothing to do with it. Terrible journalism is terrible. And as Strange has said, this isn't even stereoscopic 3D. Again, terrible journalism is terrible.

    I don't know if I would classify this as the worst kind of 3D.

    If they had copied the 3D mode from PSP game Metal Gear Acid 2, that would probably be worse.

    The new 3D was good for a while when we had a few movies that were made for 3D "Avatar" then we got this onslaught of every movie being in 3D. I enjoyed only a couple of the many movies I went to see in 3D, and very few you would know you are watching a 3D movie. The headaches and eye pain is not worth it. 3D should be left to IMAX movies. As for gaming I haven't played any PC / console games in 3D but do own a 3DS I did enjoy the 3D effect for cutscenes but the gimmick got old fast.
    In the end I'm relying on my own depth perception for dimension.

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now