At the 3D gaming Summit in Los Angeles today, super-producer Jon Landau (he made a little movie with James Cameron called Avatar) had a few words about the importance of 3D in video games. "The potential of 3D gaming is greater than the potential of 3D films," Landau proclaimed. Boom -- Debate over.
Landau, who was instrumental in the creation of (arguably) the first 3D video game, James Cameron's Avatar:The Game, went on to point out that the benefits of 3D won't be only for consumers. Game developers will be presented with new tools to tell stories. "It will accomplish anything that game developers want...and will deliver a truly unique experience that people will be playing in their homes throughout the world.
As far as one of the main hurdles to 3D being adopted on a mass scale, those damn glasses, Landau says he doesn't see the problem. "We have to ask ourselves, 'how can we make glasses an opportunity, and not make them the white elephant in the room?'"
"People wear glasses now. People go to the beach and they wear glasses, and then don't have a problem with it," Landau said. "How do we stylize glasses? How do we make glasses that bring added value to the table? How do we make glasses with a USB port? Or that give additional content or access codes for a game?"
Landau's right in a sense -- gamers will sit around with a pair of headphones on and game all day without thinking about it, and everyone will slip on some sunglasses at the beach, so why are special gamin glasses seemingly such a big problem? Perhaps it has something to do with the past, and the horrible cardboard contraptions you used to have to stick on your face for cheap 3D.
What do you think? Is Landau right here? Are the glasses an opportunity or a problem? Could you envision a time when wearing 3D specs to game would be something you'd want to do?
You'll be able to see Jon Landau's entire keynote speech right here on G4 within the coming couple of days, so keep your browsers pointed to G4!
Comments are Closed
Comments
Displaying 1–17 of 17
Mandark XX
There are a multitude of reasons why the concept of 3D gaming (or home 3D media, for that matter) is a horrible idea at this time.
First, the glasses. Landau wonders why these are such a problem and cites the fact that people wear glasses all the time. This is true except for one major point. Glasses you wear now, be it sunglasses or prescription, are used to protect your eyes or to see better. 3D glasses alter perception per eye and, for many people, this causes fatigue, nausea and/or headaches. Imagine having to wear them for hours on end as you are trying to complete your favorite game or going for that major multiplayer marathon. Not very realistic, in my opinion.
Then there is, of course, the cost. Currently, these glasses cost around $150/pr. So, for a four player party, you would be dropping $600 for glasses. More than the console you are playing on. That is ridiculous.
Another factor that makes this whole concept unrealistic if the technology itself. I believe there are two or three competing technologies for how 3D is delivered, depending on which 3D TV you use (i.e., Sony's 3D system is different than Samsung's). Taking my previous point, say you are going to have three of your friends over and you all have 3D TV's. Great, just have them bring over their glasses so you don't have spend the extra money. Wait! Not so fast! You have a Sony system, your friend has a Samsung, another has a Toshiba... You get the point.
Now, if they can bring the price of glasses down to about $25/pr. and settle on one technology, then it may stand a chance as a more marketable home novelty. However, on a grand scale, I think it's chances of long term success are pretty much nil.
Bottom line, Landau is smokin' crack...
Variand
No offense, but i'm not going to take the advice of a movie industry guy about the game industry.
There's this little fact some people know that movie games usually SUCK... that's because they are designed like a movie and not as a game. So yeah, when GAME developers tell me that 3D is good, I still wont listen, but I'll at least take it under advisement.
That would be like me (a security guard) telling cops about some new technology or Law enforcement. Just because I wear a (rather crappy) Uniform doesn't mean I know jack crap about being a cop! The only logical reason to do it is to make myself seem like I'm more "in-the-know" than I really am, which only makes me look like a bigger tool.
That said I heart Avatar and actually liked the Avatar Game. (though it could have been MUCH better)
SteveKB
I shall transfer to 3d whenever nvidia makes good cards next time or if ati decides to make them as well.
MrSketchySketch
Glasses, whether they be to aid in vision, or in stopping UV rays, are slowly being phased out. Everything will be done within the eyes soon enough. That being said he does have a point. If you make it with enough utility, people will wear it.
Symicide
I still have nothing bad to say about 3D gaming. Except for the cost I'm in full support of the idea. And also I DO wear glasses and wearing 3D glasses over them is not uncomfortable, maybe your glasses are too big. As for the whole looking dumb wearing the 3D glasses, get over yourself. If you walk around with a blue-tooth headset all day YOU look dumb.
Crazyjd87
Please don't R*ape games and make me buy a 3D tv just to take advantage of ALREADY $60 games! I don't want to buy games and have to feel like I'm missing out on all the cool stuff cause I don't have a 3D tv
Darclin17
My issue has never been with the glasses. I threw them on for the first time to watch Avatar in the theater and it was one of the most memorable experiences in my moviegoing career.
The primary point is that "Coraline" displays fine in 3D on my 1080 LCD TV and yet for some reason that tech can't be applied to the new upscale glossy version of 3D. The problem is this: 3D is being used as a gimmick. It's being touted as this awesome revolution based on the sales ticket and experience of a single film.
Yes Avatar is great. It's a unique experience and lots of people love it, however it took more than 10 years of thought, planning and flawless execution to make it. Slapping 3D on something that hasn't been that well thought out is folly. And make no mistake, companies like Activision will slap it on so hard the box art will be nothing but a big red hand print.
Here's the thing, stop declaring how awesome 3D is. Stop trying to shove $4k TVs down our throats. Stop trying to justify that after 2 decades of R&D on the third dimension glasses are still needed. Just prove it. Stop selling and start proving.
Gamers are a solid bunch. Glossy pictures and buzz words will only get you so far. Show us the games and then we will decide if it's the next big thing.
If all else fails follow the basic rules of a Hollywood screenplay. "Show, don't tell."
Aldowyn
My beef with 3D in games is the same as Sessler's: How does it add to the game?
Admittedly, I've heard that in Avatar the game, the 3D actually DOES affect the game. Not sure how, but that's what the review said. (I think it was here on G4, actually)
pingerdinger
I'll get motion sickness playing games in 3-d
Xenodyne
My big beef with 3D glasses has to not only do with the cost, but with the fact that it limits the accessibility of the entertainment. It's different in a sense then sunglasses or headphones because a TV is a mass media device. If we were talking about glasses that projected an image on the glasses themselves for personal use, then I could understand the argument, but the TV is viewed by whole families and groups of friends. If we were talking about video glasses (such as the oft-mocked saiyan scouter from Dragon Ball Z) then the argument would be valid.
As I said before, my biggest beef is that it is going to limit accessibility and enjoyment of the TV, and also increase the cost of the technology for the more people that are going to be viewing the screen. I mean, if you have both friends and family over for movie night, and "Whoops, we only have 8 pairs of glasses, sorry Aunt Fran, you're out of luck!" becomes a bit of a problem.
Granted this is only an example, not something that would always occur, but I believe you get the point.
Tim_1138
Glasses on glasses. Ha.
The number of glasses you would have to have doesn't really come into play the same way it does with movies, but would probably need at least two pair, if not four... MONEY.
Kallazar
From what (little) I saw when I looked him up, his credits revolve almost exclusively around movies. While this is fine on its own, why does it seem like so many people who aren't really connected to gaming feel compelled to comment on how useful 3D will be for games? What ability does 3D give storytelling in games that it wouldn't give to storytelling in movies? What benefit does it give to storytelling at all for that matter?
Besides that, video games already "deliver a truly unique experience that people [play] in their homes throughout the world." They're video games, we get to play them; that sets them apart pretty well already.
JustTheBeginning
3D glasses are atrocious because they have the same properties of sun glasses but are worn inside. Have you ever worn sunglasses inside? Its stupid because it makes everything look dark, and on top of that you do not even get to look cool! The people who design these 3D glasses (even the new shutter ones) should be fired, they make them like bulky plastic kid/gansta type glasses. The only glasses I will ever wear are nice sleek thin glasses you can barely feel as they are so light.
Gamelife1
Honestly, all the people you here saying that they won't do 3D because of glasses are completely bs'ing themselves. All those people know damn well if they went to a friends house who had a brolick 3D LED TV and their friend said, "here put these glasses on" you would throw those on in a second a wouldn't look twice about it. The only real reason people are acting like they care about this is because they know the TV's are to expensive for them to have now and maybe even for a few years. The glasses are just an excuse to make themselves feel better for not being able to play with that fresh tech.
As for 3D in video games, I also unlike many others see this as much more than a gimmick. It really does have a lot of potential to offer new elements to the game. Think about how much change you saw when games jumped from SD to HD. Its the same idea as that.
rGrayMiller
Funny how he skips right to glasses after glossing over things like storytelling - he obviously doesn't know how many games are actually well written nowadays, shouldn't we work on improving that first? If you think movies are bad, 3D will be used to the fullest extent of gimickry when it comes to games, treated as no more than an easy selling point like so many other things.
"Avatar Producer Jon Landau" obviously knows very little about games, but very much about making money using the tech he's no doubt thoroughly invested in.
asthmagasm
Except the fact that I already wear glasses and glasses on glasses is the start of a yo dawg joke I'd rather not be apart of. Unless of course he's saying he can offer me prescription 3D glasses. Maybe I'd consider then.
iMonk
"People wear glasses now. People go to the beach and they wear glasses, and then don't have a problem with it," - LOL, yeah but the don't cost you 1500 a pair, and you do not need them to go swimming, or build a sandcastle.
Sigh, 3D gaming makes me sad, in that "prepare for shovel ware" kind of sadness of reservation.
Displaying 1–17 of 17