Microsoft Dismisses 3D as a "Future Technology"

Andy Chalk

One Flag, One Fleet, One Cat
Nov 12, 2002
45,698
1
0
Microsoft Dismisses 3D as a "Future Technology"


Microsoft says the 3D gaming technology being touted by Sony and Nintendo is "interesting" but still way too expensive for mainstream success.

If there's a central theme at this year's Microsoft [http://www.e3expo.com], on the other hand, doesn't seem to be too anxious to jump on that particular bandwagon.

3D is "an interesting technology of the future," in the worlds of Microsoft U.K. honcho Neil Thompson, but apparently the distant future, not the immediate one. "If you look at the costs of entry into the living room and when that's going to become mass-market, we think the offering with Kinect [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/101312-First-Impressions-Microsoft-Kinect] and the natural user-interface we're bringing, that's a more compelling proposition for consumers over the coming years than maybe looking at 3D at this point," he said.

It's a valid point. The PlayStation 3 Best Buy [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/conferences/e32010/7712-Liveblog-Sony-2010-Press-Conference-E3] and glasses are $180 a pop. Have a few friends over on a Saturday night and suddenly you're looking at a $3000 display setup. That's not the kind of coin most people find lying under their couch cushions.

Source: Eurogamer [http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/microsoft-dismisses-3d-as-future-tech]


Permalink
 

John Funk

U.N. Owen Was Him?
Dec 20, 2005
20,364
0
0
This is why the 3DS is exciting me exponentially more than the PS3's 3D offering.

PS3 3D: $2000 TV, $180 glasses, $300 PS3.

3DS 3D: almost-certainly-below-$250 3DS. Plus, no glasses, and it's portable.

How is this even a contest? THAT'S the way to go to implement 3D, not the full home theater version.
 

WrongSprite

Resident Morrowind Fanboy
Aug 10, 2008
4,503
0
0
Yeah I'm with them here...

I'm with the whole '3D is just a fad' way of thinking, it'll be gone in a few years, then it'll resurface in the future when we can do it properly, and cheaply. I don't even enjoy it that much.
 

starwarsgeek

New member
Nov 30, 2009
982
0
0
John Funk said:
This is why the 3DS is exciting me exponentially more than the PS3's 3D offering.

PS3 3D: $2000 TV, $180 glasses, $300 PS3.

3DS 3D: almost-certainly-below-$250 3DS. Plus, no glasses, and it's portable.

How is this even a contest? THAT'S the way to go to implement 3D, not the full home theater version.
Exactly...Nintendo surely knows that an overly-expensive handheld would not sale. The graphics are certainly impressive for something so small...have you seen the pics from the new Resident Evil?
 

Baby Tea

Just Ask Frankie
Sep 18, 2008
4,687
0
0
John Funk said:
This is why the 3DS is exciting me exponentially more than the PS3's 3D offering.

PS3 3D: $2000 TV, $180 glasses, $300 PS3.

3DS 3D: almost-certainly-below-$250 3DS. Plus, no glasses, and it's portable.

How is this even a contest? THAT'S the way to go to implement 3D, not the full home theater version.
Amen.
The idea of forcing a whole new TV is killing the idea of 3D for me. If they can't do it with existing televisions using a trick of the image, then count me out. I totally agree with MS, and I'm glad they didn't jump on the band-wagon. Nintendo has the right idea with the 3DS: A stand-alone handheld with no glasses. I may not be a 'handheld' guy, but it's a great idea.
 

HK_01

New member
Jun 1, 2009
1,610
0
0
And they're right. It'll be a while before 3D is going to work out.

1) Cost: We all just got an HDTV, and now we're supposed to throw out some more money for a 3D TV?!

2) I don't see the appeal, to be honest.
 

scotth266

Wait when did I get a sub
Jan 10, 2009
5,202
0
0
John Funk said:
Plus, no glasses,
This is why I'm loving Nintendo right now. In case no-one ever guessed, wearing a pair of 3D glasses is sort of difficult when you already wear glasses to see.
 
Apr 28, 2008
14,634
0
0
Baby Tea said:
John Funk said:
This is why the 3DS is exciting me exponentially more than the PS3's 3D offering.

PS3 3D: $2000 TV, $180 glasses, $300 PS3.

3DS 3D: almost-certainly-below-$250 3DS. Plus, no glasses, and it's portable.

How is this even a contest? THAT'S the way to go to implement 3D, not the full home theater version.
Amen.
The idea of forcing a whole new TV is killing the idea of 3D for me. If they can't do it with existing televisions using a trick of the image, then count me out. I totally agree with MS, and I'm glad they didn't jump on the band-wagon. Nintendo has the right idea with the 3DS: A stand-alone handheld with no glasses. I may not be a 'handheld' guy, but it's a great idea.
Agreed.

Thousands of dollars for the TV plus the hundreds for the glasses? Yeah, count me out. 3D has always given me a headache anyway. Which is why I'm glad Nintendo is giving the 3DS a slider to turn it off if needed.

scotth266 said:
John Funk said:
Plus, no glasses,
This is why I'm loving Nintendo right now. In case no-one ever guessed, wearing a pair of 3D glasses is sort of difficult when you already wear glasses to see.
Oh yeah, this to.
 

Thaius

New member
Mar 5, 2008
3,862
0
0
I see their point, but this has always been the problem with Microsoft when it comes to their computers: they never look ahead enough. While other companies are out there developing the future, they're sitting there feeling good about the present. Then by the time they catch up, everyone else already rules. It's why Windows 7 is a shadow of a decade-old OS, and why Halo had to pull the Xbox to popularity.

3D may not necessarily be ready to take over the home theater system, but without doing things like this now, it would never be developed to that point.
 

ddq5

I wonder what the character limi
Jun 18, 2009
415
0
0
I hate 3D. I hate motion controls. I hate the future.
This must be what Francis feels like. Maybe if they had introduced a new vest peripheral at E3... one can only dream.
 

Cliffie

New member
Nov 25, 2009
60
0
0
This is what I think. Nintendo will do just fine with the 3DS, in fact I think it will sell really well, simply 'cause you don't have to buy a 3D-display in order to use it. As soon as you have your 3DS you're done. Sony on the other hand should not put too much power into this whole 3D-thing... yet. Eventually 3D will be good, but just like the Microsoft rep said, it's too early. Nice thing with Sonys 3D however is that it's optional. So basically it's just a nice bonus if you've got a 3D TV and if you don't you can still play the normal version. That way I don't think they are putting THAT much resources into this... probably. :p
 

Tzekelkan

New member
Dec 27, 2009
498
0
0
Wait, wait, wait... 3D glasses are 180$ a pop? WTF? Are they made of gold, coated with diamonds polished with the souls of little orphaned children? How different are they from the cheap plastic ones in cinemas? What is in them that can possibly be almost as expensive as an entire gaming console?
 

DigitalSushi

a gallardo? fine, I'll take it.
Dec 24, 2008
5,718
0
0
Baby Tea said:
John Funk said:
This is why the 3DS is exciting me exponentially more than the PS3's 3D offering.

PS3 3D: $2000 TV, $180 glasses, $300 PS3.

3DS 3D: almost-certainly-below-$250 3DS. Plus, no glasses, and it's portable.

How is this even a contest? THAT'S the way to go to implement 3D, not the full home theater version.
Amen.
The idea of forcing a whole new TV is killing the idea of 3D for me. If they can't do it with existing televisions using a trick of the image, then count me out. I totally agree with MS, and I'm glad they didn't jump on the band-wagon. Nintendo has the right idea with the 3DS: A stand-alone handheld with no glasses. I may not be a 'handheld' guy, but it's a great idea.
Didn't the same happen thanks to Microsoft 5 years ago and it touting HD when alot of the TV's on the market weren't true HD?.

I know of several people that got stung that way, they hadn't realised they had bought a sub par TV until someone pointed it out to them.

My uncle is a big fan of all this technological advancement and he reckons TV, Signals and computers are finally coming at parity with each other, I'll try and get more info for you guys if you want, but basically in years gone by one system in the chain was weaker than the other, with the latest lot its kinda married bliss in technological terms.

Also Spinwhiz has a 3dTV doesn't he?, lets all point and laugh at him!
 

craddoke

New member
Mar 18, 2010
418
0
0
ddq5 said:
I hate 3D. I hate motion controls. I hate the future.
My feelings exactly - except 3D is more throwback to 1950s B-movie schlock than futuristic. Can you have "nostalgic futurism" or is that some kind of oxymoron?
 

Kid_Icarus55

New member
Feb 20, 2009
28
0
0
Microsoft tells us that some new technology is too expensive?
What an irony!

But, there right, i will never buy glasses that cost more than a wii, but I will buy a 3DS!
 

Jandau

Smug Platypus
Dec 19, 2008
5,034
0
0
The only future 3D might have is the no-glasses kind. Sony's 3D with the PS3 is just pointless. It requires peripherals (glasses) for anyone present to be able to even watch, and the 3D TVs are just sickeningly expensive at the moment. 3D with glasses is just impractical and mostly a gimmick.

However, the no-glasses kind removes the hassle and is more user friendly. That's why 3DS stands a good chance. It will be something new, in a compact portable format. If the price isn't too high, it'll pretty much be a pocket Wii as far as hardware goes, with the 3D functionality and backwards compatibility with all the older DS games. Basically, Nintendo stands to bite off a huge chunk of the mobile gaming market (again).