Separator
3D Gaming on Consoles Is the Worst Idea Since Virtual Boy
Thursday, June 24, 2010

Editor's note: I haven't tried 3D gaming on a console long enough to verify what Rick claims, but I do know that I came out of an Avatar showing with a monster headache. I hope that's not a taste of my gaming future. -Brett


3D is Coming

Any reasonable human being outside of Sony's marketing wheel will tell you that 3D is neat. It's nifty. It's fun when it works well. And it's like taking a sledgehammer to your skull when it doesn't.

Before I launch into this rant against the 3D initiative that Sony pushed over and over again at E3, let me preface by saying I think the Nintendo 3DS is fine. It's a handheld. It doesn't require glasses, and it isn't going to affect me and my gaming habits in any way. That being said, playing 3D video games on your home television is the stupidest thing to happen to this industry and its core gamers since Nintendo trotted out the red-vectored 3D flop called Virtual Boy in 1995.

 

Three years ago, a group of friends and I ventured out to watch the movie Beowulf in 3D. We were stoked at the idea of CG violence in the third dimension. Axes flying over your head sound great on paper, but when your brain actually tries to process the overwhelming effects your eyes are absorbing over a long period of time, you’re in trouble. We walked out of the theater with excruciating, mind-bending headaches. All I remember about the experience was trying not to vomit (and, of course, Angelina Jolie's near-naked body).

The best part about all this 3D gaming nonsense is that no one acknowledges the difference between watching 3D films and playing 3D video games. Watching a film in 3D is a passive and controlled experience. Playing a video game, on the other hand, is an active experience, and in most cases you're controlling the camera yourself.

Let's fast-forward to a scenario.

It’s 2011. You're at your house and have a hefty amount of free time. You decide that you're going to burn the next three or four hours on Killzone 3 in 3D, so you pop on your overpriced 3D glasses over your normal glasses. For the first half hour, you're having a mind-blowing experience.

Then an hour passes and your eye fatigue kicks in. Now you can't discern any of the artistic nuances within the game. Stuff is flying at you too fast.

Another hour passes. Your eyes are exhausted and your head feels like it’s going to split open. You quit after an hour and a half despite yourself. You really wanted to keep playing but your eyes and brain couldn't handle the bombardment of depth-heavy imagery. And that’s Killzone 3 -- kid stuff.

Just imagine Bayonetta 2 in 3D. Or Devil May Cry 5.

Damn, I forgot my glasses.

Eye fatigue is going to happen. Maybe not to everyone, but I know it'll happen to me and to other people with eye problems they’re not aware of. Soon our strategy guides will include a how-to-view section, like this one for watching the 3D blockbuster Avatar.

So before you think about upgrading your TV, remember that 3D is not the next evolution in gaming. It is the result of a creative and marketing drought. Sony needs to capitalize on their shiny new television line, and ignorant gamers will pay the price because of that.

Trust me: 3D gaming is going to hurt. A lot.

The bright side? If this becomes the new standard, I’ll be physically restricted to one-hour gaming sessions. Maybe I’ll start watching golf blindfolded with 7.1 surround sound in my off time -- you know, to really get my own immersion factor pumping.


Rick Knight is a professional online copywriter, designer, and blogger living in Vancouver, BC. Follow him on Twitter @knightrick or visit his portfolio website, gamerwords.com.

 
5
RICK KNIGHT'S SPONSOR
Comments (11)
Robsavillo
June 22, 2010


I got a chance to see some 3D games in action -- 3D gaming isn't at all like what we think about when the topic of 3D film comes up. None of the games I played threw gimmicky 3D images off the screen. Instead, the 3D effect merely added a layer of depth perception, which for shooters and racers looks really cool. I didn't play for hours, but I liked what I saw.



And I did see Metro 2033 demoed on a 3D TV that didn't need glasses. Granted, the image wasn't perfectly clear (the THQ guy told me that the software is still being refined), but it's promising to see glasses-less 3D TVs.


June 22, 2010


Ah, thanks Rob. You did in two paragraphs what Sony failed to do in their entire keynote for us not at E3. It's still a hard sell just on budget alone and I wonder what happens when not all developers are as responsible for the visuals.



If they go glasses-less, I'll be more receptive.


Brett_new_profile
June 22, 2010


It'll be a few years yet until your living room TV can display 3D images sans glasses. In the meantime, we'll have the 3DS. I was blown away by my time with it at E3 -- and my eyes didn't hurt at all afterward, like they do with 3D movies.


Default_picture
June 24, 2010


I don't understand what all these freaking whiners are complaining about. If you like 3D movies or gaming, and you can afford a new 3D-compatible TV (which really isn't that expensive; they're about the same price or slightly more than regular TVs), then the extensive lineup of 3D PS3 games is there for you. If you DON'T have a 3D TV or don't WANT to experience games or movies in 3D, then DON'T FREAKING TURN ON THE 3D OPTION. Can this be any more simple for you? The keyword there was OPTION... as in OPTIONAL. Yes, shocking newsflash for you guys: You can actually CHOOSE to play PS3 games in 3D or 2D. WOW!



It's like you're all trying really, really hard to find something to complain or get pissed off about. What's the matter, sad about all the abuse Kinect has taken by gamers and want to overcompensate by nitpicking about something related to Sony?



3D isn't a fad; it's here to stay, if the stunning success of movies like Avatar are anything to go by. As time passes, 3D TVs will only continue to drop in price and thus become more affordable/mainstream, and even when more glasses-less 3D TVs come out, then 3D movies and games will only become more and more common, adopted, and accepted. Face the truth, despite whatever jealous fanboyism you might or might not harbor.



@Tony: My response to that would be that funding and manpower is limited, and this artificial pitch on 3-D is going to hoard both from non-3-D projects, I had the same problem with the Halo franchise, I totally loved the first game and the very dynamic narrative it brought, but the multiplayer was hugely popular, so the next Halo games become a multiplayer first, campaign if we got some time affair. Look no further than Killzone 3, the time and manpower to make it 3-D will be taken from other aspects of development, how about the next game of your favorite franchise being half size to make it 3-D ready? how about the very Playstation 3 having to process 2 screen outputs and duplicating its load thus reducing the animation to 30fps?


June 24, 2010


Finally someone is saying something negative about this whole 3D push by Sony!  I thought I was the only one that thought this was not a good idea.



Personally, I see this as a very self-serving move on Sony's part... they have a WHOLE lot of 3D capable TV's they are trying to sell.  Cross-product push, anyone?


Default_picture
June 24, 2010


3d and kinect? can someone say holodeck? I can


4540_79476034228_610804228_1674526_2221611_n
June 25, 2010


Here's the thing with 3D gaming. For the last 10 years the only improvements we've seen in video games technology is graphics. Graphics, graphics, graphics.  Rather than improve artificial intelligence or really reach out and do something innovative, developers are getting lazy, and making 3D the next graphical push is the next easy way out.  



So for next gen, look forward to better graphics, in 3D, but with the same dumb AI we've been playing with for the last 15 years. (aka in a shooter you stealthily shoot somebody in the head with a silenced weapon and he falls to the ground dead, but his buddy 10 feet away is none the wiser to the situation.)



DUMB. 



Highly intelligent, reactive, proactive and cognisant (NOT SCRIPTED) artificial intelligence is the only thing that's going to change the way video games are played and experienced.. Until then, we're just playing the same old bullshit but with prettier graphics. 


Dan__shoe__hsu_-_square
June 26, 2010


You might be right with the head hurting, eye fatigue, etc., but I'm still very much looking forward to 3D gaming. :)  I was blown away by the PS3 stuff at E3.


37893_1338936035999_1309080061_30825631_6290042_n
June 27, 2010


Amen.


37893_1338936035999_1309080061_30825631_6290042_n
June 27, 2010


Actually, that deserves a bit more explanation. As long as 3D doesn't detract from the essence of a game, I have no problem with it. But from what I've seen so far, that's exactly what it's doing. And that is frustrating me to no end.


You must log in to post a comment. Please register or Connect with Facebook if you do not have an account yet.