3D To Be Bigger Than Motion Controls, Apparently

I don't think I remember the last time a "trend" in entertainment technology generated such widespread loathing as 3D has in the past six months. If you're one of the haters, brace yourself, because it's only going to get worse.

Going by what a number of publishers have told trade site MCV, it seems 3D will be the industry's biggest push in the immediate future, and not, as you'd expect, motion controls.

"This will be on the cutting edge of gaming for the next year or two", SCEE boss Andrew House says. "If Avatar taught us one thing in an age of globalisation, it's that when consumers embrace something it moves quickly. This is definitely a wave of the future and one that we intend to ride."

Namco Bandai's Olivier Comte is equally optimistic. "Natal and Move are two new tools, but I don't think either are the next revolution of games," he said. "I believe the next revolution will be 3D. I have tested some 3D games and I think it is a big change."

Thankfully, Take-Two's Ben Feder acts as a voice of reason, saying "The use of 3D needs to be meaningful to the gamer and publishers will need to ask questions. Will it draw players further into my world? Will it change how they interact with the game? Will it make the title more fun and keep the player engaged? The answers need to be ‘yes' for them to fit into our strategy of being a leader in innovation and quality."

Forget motion – 3D to dominate E3 [MCV]


    I couldn't care less about either really.

    As for which is more popular or influential on gaming in general, I guess it will boil down to what is affordable for the average consumer.

    The industry has finally lost its tenuous grip on reality...

    Im happy with motion controls - when they are done right. There are a few good titles on the Wii that prove this, and of course a lot of shovelware to prove otherwise..

    As for 3D.. meh! Having to wear my glasses then 3D glasses and chance for headaches on prolonged use.. No thanks. Avatar was nice to watch but hardly convinced me I need to replace either of my plasma's..

      But think about how impressed your friends will be when you show them Avatar in 3D. Granted they'll have to share glasses because the TV only came with two pairs, but the scenes they do watch will rock their worlds.

    Again until glasses-free 3d TV's are fully on the market and at a reasonable price I couldn't give a rats about 3d at home. Its good for the odd film at the cinema, but I wear glasses and I game alot... so if I have to give up good vision for my TV to look like a Tazo then i'm not buying into it.

      "if I have to give up good vision for my TV to look like a Tazo then i’m not buying into it."


      Well put, sir.

    Doesn't really need to go far to be bigger than motion controls.

    I dunno, I can't get my head around 3D. I'm sure there's medical issues with using that long-term, and gaming and long stints in front of a screen go hand in hand.
    I predict lawsuits, a tidal wave of lawsuits.

      No, just a tidal wave of disclaimers saying that they are not responsible for anything that happens to you as a result of watching their particular model of 3DTV.

    Wait, people hate 3D? Why?

      lots of people get nausea and headaches from watching 3d movies. Also, its probably unnecessary, i personally thought avatar sucked balls in 3d. 3d can suck my balls.

      Because it is ridiculous. It's expensive, unnecessary and the type of people amazed by such technology are the same people who jumped on the blu-ray band wagon without even knowing what HD or 1080p meant. Glasses-free technology have been out for years and even the 3DS won't require them. This'll leave the few idiots who bought an expensive glasses-based model with an outdated joke. Plus you need a pair of glasses for each viewer which would be annoying if you had visitor and not enough glasses. Also who wants to have to wear plastic glasses just to watch TV or play a game?

      1) It costs a lot
      2) at this point it has not been demonstrated to be anything deeper than a gimmick
      3) Medical problems (i.e fainting, blackous, nausea)

      Because if you watch it for too long it warps your brain's sense of focus and depth perception. A 3D movie only has one spot in the landscape in focus, but in real life our brain can get our eyes to focus at many different distances. What this means is after an extended time watching 3D (like you would when gaming) your eyes will hurt from trying to focus on something they can't actually get to.

      3D tech isn't new, it's been around since the 50s and got a bit of a revival in the 80s. Neither one managed to stay popular because the novelty wore off and there simply wasn't anything it could do better than normal film. The ability to bring it to the home means many kids growing up with very screwed up eyes.

      Because they can't afford it, so if they can't have it you can't either.

      Because it's a terrible, un-original money grabbing scam that's been used since the 50's?

      I wouldn’t' say i hate 3D but at it's current state I’m defiantly not a fan. I think the main reasons people don't like it are:

      a) a significant percentage of people gain can’t see it (not sure what the exact number is)

      b) For the people that can see it there are a range of health issues some more serious the others (personally I get a headache after about 20 min but it disappears after another 20 or so)

      c) TV’s already show 3D via the magic of perspective. It’s just that the image can only appear to be further away then the screen, it can’t come any closer. If you really want the picture to come closer you can always just sit closer to the TV.

      d) Glasses depended 3D is an inconvenience for people not used to wearing glasses, and can be quite fiddley and annoying for those who have to ware the glasses over their own glasses.

      f) With all of the problems associated above, most people can’t justify spending the $$$ on an new TV.

      There is probably also the fact that many people feel the need to hate on something that suddenly gains a huge amount of attention.

      not sure if that was sarcasm or not but eh ill bite

      A) gotta wear glasses to make them work

      B) there are numerous things that can muck up the picture (glare, viewing angle, your own eyes)

      C) your not meant to be under the influence of alcohol, pregnant and a bunch of other things

      D) have you seen a bunch of the wii games they have motion controls for th sake of it and come off really tacky and poorly done

      E) its an excuse for the tv companies to make us buy a whole new set of TV's after the ones they just sold us

      F) will there be an advantage to using 3d or non 3d when it comes out

      G)inability to multitask

      blah blah blah

      the aim should be to get rid of the screen

      Because it's cool to hate new things that everyone talks about? eg the iPhone, the iPad... oh god, imagine if Apple released a 3DTV or something, the internet would have a heard attack and die from the nerd rage...

        The hate is because the hype is exponentially greater than the reality, and its nearly always the manufacturers that are telling us how freakin awesome its going to be, rather than people who don't have a stake in its success.

        I played a whole bunch of games in 3D at GDC, and after the initial OMG effect, it adds nothing at all to the experience.

    I love 3D, like anything, when it is done properly.
    I've just been playing quake, the extra depth makes it so much more fun. But I didn't enjoy it before in 3D because of problems with it, but thanks to Ben Ryves those glitches have been fixed.

    I think the added depth makes a huge difference in a lot of games, but then I see the 3D effect extremely easily and it looks very 'real' to me, I imagine if it didn't work as well for you, then you'd think why bother, just like a hearing impaired person may not think surround sound is a big deal.

    Anyway, if you don't like 3D, just don't play in 3D, all games seem to have a perfectly good 2D mode.

    I want 3D but I'd prefer not to have to wear glasses. Head tracking would be a great idea to implement in Natal, seeing as though it's got some HD 3D Cameras... Whatever they are.

    3D is just about the most force fed tech I've ever seen.

    This quote kills me: “If Avatar taught us one thing in an age of globalisation, it’s that when consumers embrace something it moves quickly. This is definitely a wave of the future and one that we intend to ride.”

    Who is embracing 3D apart from movie studio's who are using it as a vehicle to try and get people back out to the cinema and hamstring the "screen rip" bootleg market. I am yet to meet a single person in my day to day life that proclaims "FUCK YES DUDE I LOVE 3D!!!". Instead all I get is collective sigh's and groan's expressing general apathy and loathing about the whole thing.

    A possitive to public reaction to a single film does not equal huge demand for more. He'll most of the way through Avatar I was wishing I could just take the damn glasses off so that my eyes would stop feeling funny.

    Screw 3D, keep it the hell away from me. We've only just started seeing real gains in the Blu-ray market, and nobody want's to replace their 2 year old players, amplifiers and TV's just so they can get some stupid gimicky 3D shennanigans.

    It won't revolutionise gaming, in the same way that the move to HD didn't. The games look better, but the increased resolution didn't redefine the media. I've seen what developers do when they try to "turn gaming on it's head", and honestly camera games and motion controllers are ridiculously gimmicky. I'd rather have the next level of visual fidelity than a series of mini games that involve shaking a piece of plastic or leaning side to side.

    3d HOLY crap cause i havent seen anything in 3d within the last 19 years of my entire fucking life give me holograms then we'll talk

    "If Avatar taught us one thing in an age of globalisation, it’s that when consumers embrace something it moves quickly".

    Translation - "As soon as we know that people really like something we will flood the market to grab as much money as we can, as quickly as we can, before people change their mind and start liking something else".

    I love 3D, I have played Avatar in 3D on the new samsung 55 inch 3D and it is A W E S O M E!!!!
    And there is so much depth and when you walk down a corridore ...you walk DOWN a corridore. You can't explain it to someone who hasn't played it. it's like explaining colour to a blind person. stop hating it just love it, 3d is here to stay just like colour tv's in the 70's

    My only concern is that companies will rush out the door to jump on the bandwagon, and we will have a few years of garbage use of 3D before we start getting to the good stuff. For example, a few companies sell 3D TVs and I’m certain the market will be full of them by the end of this year. But we have no content....well, limited content. Foxtel only launched its first 3D exclusive channel yesterday, Fox sports 3D. But what about non-sports content? We don’t have any.

    It will be the same way with games. They state Avatar as an example, but Avatar was designed to be in 3D, not added on as an afterthought. GT5, Wipeout, Killzone and all the other games that will get the 3D treatment have just been added on to cash in on the trend. If you ask me, a game needs to be designed in 3D from the ground up. Or else it’s just another gimmick right? i'm guessing we will see great 3D games in a few years when developers are confident enough to actually start in 3D.

    Damn it I just brought a HD TV 6 months ago and keep regreting because it seems like I should of waited a bit longer and got a 3D TV.

    *yawn* I'm not a hater, but I'm just not interested in the slightest... It seems like the kind of thing that will be a sort of lasting gimmick (like motion controls), where it sounds good on paper, people will go out of their way to get it... but the support will be underwhelming. I.e. only a few games and movies will take advantage of it making it a pretty unnecessary purchase in the long (and short) run.

    That and I just bought a 46" non 3D Bravia, and genuinely I'm not worried about 3D at all...

    Considering the number of people that still haven't migrated to high definition TVs, why in the hell are they pushing so hard for 3D in this generation?

    I hear that the technology to see 3D without the need for glasses is in development. Within the next 5-10 years this type of 3D with glasses will be out of date.
    This is why I see no reason to spend $3000 on a TV that gives me headaches.

    I was one of those people who thought "HD? What difference will a few pixels make?" and alas, I have been proven wrong, and now I love my HD.

    I was one of those people who thought "Stick waggling on the Wii? I play games to relax, not to stand up and get exhausted." No need to say what's been happening there.

    When I first saw the ads for Masterchef I thought it would fail hardcore. Didn't happen.

    I was also pretty sceptical about 3D. I then saw a demonstration at a shop. Now, in its infancy, it isn't that flash, but my immediate thought was "When they start making films like Saw 3D, then it'll be cool." I have no doubt 3DTV will be big, but as other people have said, glasses free it has to be for it to break into the mainstream and make it viable to put the resources into 3D game.

    3D doesnt work for me, i put on the glasses, the image appears and seems no different to seeing it flat on the screen itself, nothing pops out, i see no dimensional differences at all, it's just flat imagery. All i notice is that anything i see on a screen with 3d glasses is more fuzzy then a regular TV/movie screen.

    the only people who hate 3d are people who recently spent way to much on a HDTV setup that's not 3d capable.. which in Australia is alot... while in the USA and especially japan HD is old news there and they will be more willing to pick up 3DHD.

    technology is just a generational thing based on people with money to burn.. because lets face it all entertainment is just a luxury.

    I planned ahead and held off from a LCD/Plasma and did the jump from a HD CRT to 120hrz 3DHD projector. But most people.. are sitting looking at a 60hrz LCD or LED 40-50inch and feeling dumb.

    I think combining 3D with Natal could lead to some pretty immersive games. They just need a developer to take it seriously.

    As somebody who does not wear Glasses I find wearing Glasses for long period's of time uncomfortable. My friends who do wear Glasses find wearing two pairs of Glasses much much worse. Heck ATM I think 3D movies over 2hrs are much too long (2h41m for Avatar = too long)

    Now your telling me 3D Gaming is the next big thing, so a game with say 20 hours of gameplay means I have to wear glasses for 20 hours. Will the game be specificly designed so that short blocks feel satisfying? A lazy mans all day Multiplay session will be broken into infrequent small blocks?

    JB quotes $3691 for a 3D Samsung 46"... I have 46" LCD I bought about 2 years ago, so your telling me I need to spend $3700 on a TV to play the next big thing in games? The thing every gamer is going to have in the next year or two? Honestly how many of us recently bought or are paying off our currant flat screens? Heck I practically have to drop $4000 for my first 3D game.

    Now let's look at Cinema's 3D Movie. About $20 for a ticket, plus your going to spend around $10 on a drink and munchies and some places charge a bit more for the glasses, but if you buy 1 pair and bring it back your fine. (I go to www.Cineplex.com.au, so $20 covers ticket and munchies they are the same quality as the others, Heck this chain owns Brisbanes IMAX) Your basically asking for $3 more for a 3D movie. It's a heck of a lot easier to justify at the end of the day seeing a movie in 3D than hooking up your Console for 3D.

    I know that I can watch 3D movies, get 3D TV (Sports mainly from what I hear) and that your going to watch the TV in 2D as well. And if I was saving for a Big Screen I don't think I'd seriously consider it because JB is selling 46" 1080P HD 100Hz TV's for just over $2000.

    Now 3D Gaming could really boost the few Arcades left, I buy a pair of Glasses for a couple of bucks or the game has them attached. It's an experiance that is incredibly expensive at home but quite cheap in short bursts in Arcades.

    Oh and Shutter 3D glasses (Like 3D TV ones) came out for PC's back in the mid 90's and everyone said this is the future, it makes 3D gaming possible, in a few years every PC game on the market will support this. 2010 And their trying it again? As Jonathan Betten said Until it doesn't require glasses I predict it will not go main stream. Cinema on the other hand is just a couple of bucks and we'll see a host more 3D movies.

    If you read this whole thing, thank you.

    Three things, Avatar's 3D did nothing for me, after about half an hour i actively forgot it was their.

    Second, how is a cheap gimick such as 3D the next big thing when an increased level of control such as motion control not, i suppose people are just stupid.

    Third: "The use of 3D needs to be meaningful to the gamer and publishers". Yeah just like motion control was for the last few years. All thats going to happen is there is going to be cheap gimicks and alot of 3D porn.

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now