Poll: 3D Gaming is here - Your thoughts?

[Calgetorix]

I was looking through another forum yesterday and saw somebody tell about how awesome Dragon Age: Origins was in 3D. Curious to find out how, I did a quick Google search and sure enough, you can actually buy a 3D kit.

Obviously there are some disadvantages.
1. The price. You need to have a 3D-ready monitor, good enough graphic card and the 3D kit itself. Assuming your graphic card is good enough, the cost is still £300 / $500 for the kit + monitor
2. Performance. Not because it's not compliant with many game, in fact it supports many games. It's the fact you basically need 2 frames when you normally use 1, effectively halving the performance.

But still. Gaming in 3D, imagine how awesome that is!

Anyways, what is your opinion on this? And is it something you would consider buying?

 

[WillSimplyBe]

I wouldn't, I don't have the money for a 3D capable Television (Yes, somehow I play Dragon Age: origins on the 360, shock!)

Anyway, it's just too much of a luxury at this point in time, in my honest opinion.

 

[Katherine Kerensky]

I'd never bother with it.
As I said to my friends talking about 3D Avatar being better than 2D:
"If you need stupid glasses to see something in 3D, I pity you"
I have 3D gaming already.
Just use one's imagination...

 

[The Infinite]

It's too damn expensive. Also I just got an HDTV just recently so no I'm not going to buy a new 3D capable TV for a while. Though I do have to say it's pretty cool, but nah it's alright.

 

[InsanityRequiem]

Like my vote, it's the obligatory maybe. Money, time, how good it all looks. Many variables will beat me to or away from the stuff.

 

[enzilewulf]

Da hell with motion and ta hell with 3D, Wish people would stop and just keep games using controlers. Not motion or 3D. yeesh.

 

[A3Bf72rVWE5hA]

I'd never bother with it.
As I said to my friends talking about 3D Avatar being better than 2D:
"If you need stupid glasses to see something in 3D, I pity you"
I have 3D gaming already.
Just use one's imagination...

my thoughts (almost) exactly. besides, if you lose the glasses, your games are all messed up

 

[MiracleOfSound]

I'm utterly indifferent to it.

I'll wait until buying a 3D TV costs less than a mortgage and then look into it.

 

[Calgetorix]

my thoughts (almost) exactly. besides, if you lose the glasses, your games are all messed up

I think you can turn it off. Still, it would be some expensive glasses to lose.

 

[Optimus Hagrid]

I actually thought NFS:Shift was pretty good with 3-D glasses, especially in the first person cockpit view. It's like the steering wheel is really there! etc.

my thoughts (almost) exactly. besides, if you lose the glasses, your games are all messed up

I think you can turn it off. Still, it would be some expensive glasses to lose.

Not really, all you need is a piece of card with a blue lens and a red lens, unless you're talking about those mach goggles.

 

[I Stomp on Kittens]

I think it would be a waste..x5

 

[Pielikey]

games are plenty immerse without it. Until it becomes mainstream (And GOD do I hope it doesn't), I'm not spending some-hundred or so dollars on it.
Because, what if you loose the glasses, what if you're like my father and have a lazy eye where 3D-glasses don't work, and what if you're like me and using 3D gives you a severe headache?

 

[Simalacrum]

I'll probably wait before getting it, just like any other new media.

If it doesn't kick off, then nevermind I haven't wasted my money on now-useless crap, if it does kick off I can get it for cheaper than those who dived straight in

Also, I heard that the PS3 is the only console that is 3-D capatable in this generation?

 

[Jaranja]

I wouldn't, I don't have the money for a 3D capable Television (Yes, somehow I play Dragon Age: origins on the 360, shock!)

Anyway, it's just too much of a luxury at this point in time, in my honest opinion.

I play DA:O on a TV and I have the PC version.

 

[GodKlown]

Maybe they are trying to lure in gamers to invest in this idea. I think it's just a marketing campaign to give us a reason to have a 3D anything. Once they get past the whole $300 glasses add-on, they might have something. Oh right... they call those HOLOGRAMS. Call me when that technology is available. I already wear glasses, I don't want a 3D prescription to play games now.

 

[Fayathon]

Not awesome, 3D effects do not work for me and if it gets to where it's mainstream then I'll have to quit gaming, and I really don't like that idea.

 

[ucciolord1]

2D is fine, at least until Cyberspace.

 

[WillSimplyBe]

I wouldn't, I don't have the money for a 3D capable Television (Yes, somehow I play Dragon Age: origins on the 360, shock!)

Anyway, it's just too much of a luxury at this point in time, in my honest opinion.

I play DA:O on a TV and I have the PC version.

okay... that doesn't change what I said or meant though.

3D TVs are expensive, too expensive. And not to mention 3D SUCKS for anyone who needs glasses to see. It's very uncomfortable.

 

[tomvw]

Maybe when they perfect the technology more, as it stands right now, 3D movies and games give me a blistering head-ache. So you can see I'm not really a fan of it.

 

[Ziltoid]

Once 3D gaming is more affordable, I will definitely try it out. Everytime I start thinking about how it might not be that great, I think of how insane Condemned would be on a huge 3D tv. That would seriously scare the shit out of me.