Wait... £250 in the UK (judging by all the prices on the sites now). Wtf? Thats the same price as a PS3! Definately not buying one for a long time, if thats true. Especially given the low battery life and the lack of decent original games. Call me back in a few years nintendo. We can have a nice reunion.
The lack of eShop makes me sad, but I can deal with the rest.
I am upset about the 3dshop too.
But I also dislike that the update for file transfers isnt at launch as well.
I have a lot of dsiware games to transfer, and would love to do that when I got the 3ds.
I really hope the 3D isn't really shit or the games implement it with shit design/no design philosophy
3D has been around for decades and every implementation of it has always been awful and hideous looking. I can't imagine that Nintendo would be the ones to somehow magically get it right.
3D has been around for decades and every implementation of it has always been awful and hideous looking. I can't imagine that Nintendo would be the ones to somehow magically get it right.
I like how you sent me the link to this berating of my opinion over Steam.
3D has been around for decades and every implementation of it has always been awful and hideous looking. I can't imagine that Nintendo would be the ones to somehow magically get it right.
Don't you talk about the Viewmaster in that tone! You shall not sully the good name of my childhood! :mad:
Also they're all passive mediums, games all have gameplay which can be designed with 3D in mind by clever developers
3D always just looks like a pile of moving colors, it never actually looks real, or even close to it.
The only 3D images that have ever looked even somewhat decent to me are stereoscopic images, and that's simply because the eyes are being separately presented with 2 slightly different images. And even stereoscopic images don't look 100% real, because our eyes are all different and it would be impossible to create something that accurately recreates 3 dimensionality for 100% of people.
3D always just looks like a pile of moving colors, it never actually looks real, or even close to it.
The only 3D images that have ever looked even somewhat decent to me are stereoscopic images, and that's simply because the eyes are being separately presented with 2 slightly different images. And even stereoscopic images don't look 100% real, because our eyes are all different and it would be impossible to create something that accurately recreates 3 dimensionality for 100% of people.
Well, I'm sorry 3D doesn't look good to you, but it does to me. I really enjoy 3D experiences. I keep hoping that 3D equipment for the PC will become standardized, so that I can buy it without being locked-in to nVidia.
Well, I'm sorry 3D doesn't look good to you, but it does to me. I really enjoy 3D experiences. I keep hoping that 3D equipment for the PC will become standardized, so that I can buy it without being locked-in to nVidia.
Yeah some of the stuff in Real 3D is so much better than 3D of a few years ago. Recent movies have really sold it to me, and I used to hate 3D because it would hurt my eyes.
3D always just looks like a pile of moving colors, it never actually looks real, or even close to it.
The only 3D images that have ever looked even somewhat decent to me are stereoscopic images, and that's simply because the eyes are being separately presented with 2 slightly different images.
But stereoscopic is just what we're talking about when we're talking 3D here. Everything, from polarizing filter glasses to shutter glasses, from lenticular lenses to parallax barrier screens... each of these techniques is used to separate the two images for both eyes. So, which "3D" are you talking about, that are just "a pile of moving colors"?
Anyway, some techs are better than others, of course. For example, I've never been a fan of shutter glasses, as they darken the image too much (especially in a lot of cinemas, where the projections are that bright to begin with), whereas the superior polarizing filter glasses are also lighter and more comfortable to wear. Still I'm extremely curious about the look of 3D on the 3DS' screen.
But stereoscopic is just what we're talking about when we're talking 3D here. Everything, from polarizing filter glasses to shutter glasses, from lenticular lenses to parallax barrier screens... each of these techniques is used to separate the two images for both eyes. So, which "3D" are you talking about, that are just "a pile of moving colors"?
Anyway, some techs are better than others, of course. For example, I've never been a fan of shutter glasses, as they darken the image too much (especially in a lot of cinemas, where the projections are that bright to begin with), whereas the superior polarizing filter glasses are also lighter and more comfortable to wear. Still I'm extremely curious about the look of 3D on the 3DS' screen.
Looking at exactly the same image, but with different colored lenses to half-ass filter out the other side of the image absolutely does not work though, as you can always partially see the other image. I was referring to instances in which your eyes are actually being shown 2 entirely separate images via stereoscopic lenses, rather than a single filtered image.
Not only does it look inherently wrong, and nowhere near true 3D, but the colors are always clashing like mad and just look like a horrendous mess. This is true of every single type of 3D that I have witnessed in my life.
I was referring to instances in which your eyes are actually being shown 2 entirely separate images via stereoscopic lenses, rather than a single filtered image.
Well, technically both shutter and polarization-filter based projections ARE showing two entirely separate images. In the first cases they're just projected alternately, while the latter one has them projected on top of each other (although newer methods use alternating projection as well, using a rotating polarization filter in front of the lens). And theoretically even the shutter technology should separate them cleanly, IF the glasses would be calibrated better AND their LCDs could become completely opaque. Polarization glasses on the other hand are capable of a perfect split, especially when using circular polarization (in which case tilting the head doesn't result in ghosting). And these projections are the only ones that really convinced me until now. I've seen some lenticular screens a few years ago, and they didn't convince me either, since the lenses reduced the horizontal resolution too much. The 3DS might do better here, as it does have twice the resolution horizontally to compensate for this. We'll see.
Looking at exactly the same image, but with different colored lenses to half-ass filter out the other side of the image absolutely does not work though, as you can always partially see the other image. I was referring to instances in which your eyes are actually being shown 2 entirely separate images via stereoscopic lenses, rather than a single filtered image.
Not only does it look inherently wrong, and nowhere near true 3D, but the colors are always clashing like mad and just look like a horrendous mess. This is true of every single type of 3D that I have witnessed in my life.
You have not seen it though my boy. Everything you say is conjecture. Maybe it will be pants, but from what those who have played it say, it's not. I haven't heard a negative report about the 3D other than the sweet-spot factor, which is apparently lenient enough
Wait... £250 in the UK (judging by all the prices on the sites now). Wtf? Thats the same price as a PS3! Definately not buying one for a long time, if thats true. Especially given the low battery life and the lack of decent original games. Call me back in a few years nintendo. We can have a nice reunion.
If they don't sell it for significantly less than €250 then so help me I'll import one from the US. That'll probably mean having to import my games from the US too, but it'll be worth it -especially since games will likely tend to come out earlier and be cheaper there as well.
I may get the 3DS when it comes out.
(It'll cost me about 200 quid as I get a store discount (I work at Tescos, and they'll probably have it))
But damn it is expensive over here!
I'll probably get DOA and SSF4 if they are in the UK launch.
Could get Super Monkey Ball to mess with my mind as well...
Launch line-up is a little lacking in the Nintendo department though.
Don't be overly surprised if your discount card doesn't apply to it. Usually they don't as the store makes very little profit on the console (which is why they always push bundles with pointless accessories for an extra £15)
Went to Gamestop today and set my color as blue. The black looks too plain to me. Also preordered Nintendogs, Pilotwings and Super Street Fighter.
I could care less what color I get so I wont go to gamestop.
I probably should preorder street fighter though, but then there is the chance it isnt a launch game thanks to Nintendo's "launch window"
It doesnt have the exact date, but it says march and would be stupid to release it on any other day of march.
EDIT:Just got a call from Gamestop. It basicaly stated what they knew, except for the fact that they have orderd a black 3ds for me and if I want a blue one I need to tell them.
Im getting a black one then.
You have not seen it though my boy. Everything you say is conjecture. Maybe it will be pants, but from what those who have played it say, it's not. I haven't heard a negative report about the 3D other than the sweet-spot factor, which is apparently lenient enough
People also said that playing games with Wii's motion controls wasn't completely awful and inaccurate.
And even stereoscopic images don't look 100% real, because our eyes are all different and it would be impossible to create something that accurately recreates 3 dimensionality for 100% of people.
Almost forgot to comment on this. It's my understanding that this is one of the reasons that the 3DS has a slider to control the 3D effect. It's not just an on/off switch for the 3D, it allows the effect to be adjusted until it looks right to each individual.
Not only does it look inherently wrong, and nowhere near true 3D, but the colors are always clashing like mad and just look like a horrendous mess. This is true of every single type of 3D that I have witnessed in my life.
I'm curious what types of 3D you've actually seen, because there is a huge difference between colored glasses and polarized or LCD shutter glasses. I'll agree that using colored glasses for full color content is awful (I think it can work well in B&W, but doesn't usually), but I've never seen colors be a problem with polarized glasses (though I have seen incomplete polarization be a problem). I haven't watched 3D with LCD shutter glasses myself, but I'm told it can be even more effective than polarized lenses.
In case you didn't know about the different types of 3D, there is:
- Tinted glasses (not just red/blue, but also amber/blue and other configurations, but they all kinda suck)
- Linearly Polarized lenses
- Circularly Polarized lenses (allows for the viewer to tilt their head without losing 3D)
- LCD Shutter glasses
- Glasses-free 3D displays (like the 3DS, but full size TVs are coming as well)
- Head-mounted dual-display 3D (not done often, but very impressive)
And that's just the tech used for full color, full motion video. There are more types of 3D used for still images.
I'm honestly curious if you've seen all of these, and found trouble with all of them. I imagine there are some people whose optical processing just doesn't get fooled by the same optical illusions that trigger most people to see 3D (aside from those with physical limitations like a missing eye, amblyopia and whatnot). I bet we'll see some numbers about that at some point in the future.
I know that I've tried looking at the red and blue crap multiple times, as well as the ones with the black and white lenses multiple times, and probably at least a couple of the other ones, but I have never in my life seen any 3D that didn't look completely awful.
I know that I've tried looking at the red and blue crap multiple times, as well as the ones with the black and white lenses multiple times, and probably at least a couple of the other ones, but I have never in my life seen any 3D that didn't look completely awful.
Well I barely have seen any 3D, since every "3D" movie I have seen used the 3D for the credits and previews.
Almost forgot to comment on this. It's my understanding that this is one of the reasons that the 3DS has a slider to control the 3D effect. It's not just an on/off switch for the 3D, it allows the effect to be adjusted until it looks right to each individual.
Also, as far as I've heard, the slider simply controls the intensity of the effect, as in, how much things supposedly "pop out". Maybe I'm wrong, but that was the impression I was given of the slider. Whenever I get a 3DS, I will be playing with it turned off both because I hate 3D and because it will devour less battery power without it.
By the way, Nintendo are idiots for not allowing devs to make games that don't use 3D. They could do so much with the processing power being wasted on 3D. I don't care that it can do 3D, I just think devs should have an option to hard-code 3D mode to "off" if they want to take advantage of the extra power.
By the way, Nintendo are idiots for not allowing devs to make games that don't use 3D. They could do so much with the processing power being wasted on 3D. I don't care that it can do 3D, I just think devs should have an option to hard-code 3D mode to "off" if they want to take advantage of the extra power.
I know that I've tried looking at the red and blue crap multiple times, as well as the ones with the black and white lenses multiple times, and probably at least a couple of the other ones, but I have never in my life seen any 3D that didn't look completely awful.
If you haven't seen 3D in the last two years, you haven't seen a lot of the advancement made. That's even if you saw 3D with some sort of polarization tech.
The cheap paper glasses that were tie-ins with TV boadcasts were crap. (especially since most TVs don't have properly calibrated color.) You can't compare those to 3DS with any sort of logic. Even if you saw a red/blue 3D movie in a theater decades ago, it's not a fair comparison because the technologies are so radically different.
If you have seen something with polarized glasses, say some 3D at Disney World or some other theme park, your experience highly depends on the condition of the cheap glasses you were handed as you entered the ride. Thin, linearly polarized plastic lenses that have been tossed in bins over and over and over are going to be warped and not filter the image properly. If your experience with this type of 3D was with bad equipment, you can't blame the tech as inherently broken and assume the 3DS will look the same way.
Also, as far as I've heard, the slider simply controls the intensity of the effect, as in, how much things supposedly "pop out". Maybe I'm wrong, but that was the impression I was given of the slider.
That's what much of the press has assumed as well. However, Garnett Lee said that the slider is to adjust to an individual in the latest Weekend Confirmed podcast. Basically, the major difference between people's eyes is how far apart they are, and adjusting the in-game cameras' stereoscopic separation with the slider can be used to make it look right for various people. This is basically increasing an decreasing the amount of "pop" that there is, but a various settings should look more right to some people than others. This could be why some people hate 3D, their eyes are set farther or closer apart than average, and the 3D effect always looks exaggerated or underwhelming to them.
People also said that playing games with Wii's motion controls wasn't completely awful and inaccurate.
Aye but sure at that stage they were playing Wii Sports which requires only simple gestures, you can't really fake the 3D effect, though it'll probably be underwhelming in the not too distant future
Ok the 3ds is 249.99 US dollars.
It will be out on March 27th for the US
and March 25th for Europe.
These are the American launch titles
•Pilotwings Resort
•Nintendogs + Cats
•Steeldiver
•Dead or Alive
•Pro Evolution Soccer 2011 3D
•Madden NFL
•Super Street Fighter IV 3D
•Asphalt 3D
•Combat of Giants: Dinosaurs 3D
•Ridge Racer 3D
•Resident Evil: The Mercenaries
•LEGO Star Wars III: The Clone Wars
It will have the augmented reality games built in.
I will be getting Nintendogs at launch apparently.
Ok the 3ds is 249.99 US dollars.
It will be out on March 27th for the US
and March 25th for Europe.
These are the American launch titles
•Pilotwings Resort
•Nintendogs + Cats
•Steeldiver
•Dead or Alive
•Pro Evolution Soccer 2011 3D
•Madden NFL
•Super Street Fighter IV 3D
•Asphalt 3D
•Combat of Giants: Dinosaurs 3D
•Ridge Racer 3D
•Resident Evil: The Mercenaries
•LEGO Star Wars III: The Clone Wars
It will have the augmented reality games built in.
I will be getting Nintendogs at launch apparently.
Comments
I really hope the 3D isn't really shit or the games implement it with shit design/no design philosophy
I have enough money for either one or two depending on if I get Pokemon Black or White.
So which games would you guys get?
Im thinking street fighter.
These features will not be available at launch.
The lack of eShop makes me sad, but I can deal with the rest.
I am upset about the 3dshop too.
But I also dislike that the update for file transfers isnt at launch as well.
I have a lot of dsiware games to transfer, and would love to do that when I got the 3ds.
(It'll cost me about 200 quid as I get a store discount (I work at Tescos, and they'll probably have it))
But damn it is expensive over here!
I'll probably get DOA and SSF4 if they are in the UK launch.
Could get Super Monkey Ball to mess with my mind as well...
Launch line-up is a little lacking in the Nintendo department though.
Yes, that it is unfortunately.
http://www.nintendo.com/3ds/hardware
I swear kid beyond is doing the video tour.
3D has been around for decades and every implementation of it has always been awful and hideous looking. I can't imagine that Nintendo would be the ones to somehow magically get it right.
I like how you sent me the link to this berating of my opinion over Steam.
3D hasn't been done well in games before.
Don't you talk about the Viewmaster in that tone! You shall not sully the good name of my childhood! :mad:
Or films, or comic books, or anything, at all, ever.
I saw Toy Story 3 in 3D, it was pretty cool.
Also they're all passive mediums, games all have gameplay which can be designed with 3D in mind by clever developers
3D always just looks like a pile of moving colors, it never actually looks real, or even close to it.
The only 3D images that have ever looked even somewhat decent to me are stereoscopic images, and that's simply because the eyes are being separately presented with 2 slightly different images. And even stereoscopic images don't look 100% real, because our eyes are all different and it would be impossible to create something that accurately recreates 3 dimensionality for 100% of people.
Well, I'm sorry 3D doesn't look good to you, but it does to me. I really enjoy 3D experiences. I keep hoping that 3D equipment for the PC will become standardized, so that I can buy it without being locked-in to nVidia.
Yeah some of the stuff in Real 3D is so much better than 3D of a few years ago. Recent movies have really sold it to me, and I used to hate 3D because it would hurt my eyes.
But stereoscopic is just what we're talking about when we're talking 3D here. Everything, from polarizing filter glasses to shutter glasses, from lenticular lenses to parallax barrier screens... each of these techniques is used to separate the two images for both eyes. So, which "3D" are you talking about, that are just "a pile of moving colors"?
Anyway, some techs are better than others, of course. For example, I've never been a fan of shutter glasses, as they darken the image too much (especially in a lot of cinemas, where the projections are that bright to begin with), whereas the superior polarizing filter glasses are also lighter and more comfortable to wear. Still I'm extremely curious about the look of 3D on the 3DS' screen.
Looking at exactly the same image, but with different colored lenses to half-ass filter out the other side of the image absolutely does not work though, as you can always partially see the other image. I was referring to instances in which your eyes are actually being shown 2 entirely separate images via stereoscopic lenses, rather than a single filtered image.
Not only does it look inherently wrong, and nowhere near true 3D, but the colors are always clashing like mad and just look like a horrendous mess. This is true of every single type of 3D that I have witnessed in my life.
You have not seen it though my boy. Everything you say is conjecture. Maybe it will be pants, but from what those who have played it say, it's not. I haven't heard a negative report about the 3D other than the sweet-spot factor, which is apparently lenient enough
This.
I feel that I need to start using this phrase in everyday conversation.
I probably should preorder street fighter though, but then there is the chance it isnt a launch game thanks to Nintendo's "launch window"
Don't worry, it is.
It doesnt have the exact date, but it says march and would be stupid to release it on any other day of march.
EDIT:Just got a call from Gamestop. It basicaly stated what they knew, except for the fact that they have orderd a black 3ds for me and if I want a blue one I need to tell them.
Im getting a black one then.
People also said that playing games with Wii's motion controls wasn't completely awful and inaccurate.
Hype's a hell of a drug.
Almost forgot to comment on this. It's my understanding that this is one of the reasons that the 3DS has a slider to control the 3D effect. It's not just an on/off switch for the 3D, it allows the effect to be adjusted until it looks right to each individual.
I'm curious what types of 3D you've actually seen, because there is a huge difference between colored glasses and polarized or LCD shutter glasses. I'll agree that using colored glasses for full color content is awful (I think it can work well in B&W, but doesn't usually), but I've never seen colors be a problem with polarized glasses (though I have seen incomplete polarization be a problem). I haven't watched 3D with LCD shutter glasses myself, but I'm told it can be even more effective than polarized lenses.
In case you didn't know about the different types of 3D, there is:
- Tinted glasses (not just red/blue, but also amber/blue and other configurations, but they all kinda suck)
- Linearly Polarized lenses
- Circularly Polarized lenses (allows for the viewer to tilt their head without losing 3D)
- LCD Shutter glasses
- Glasses-free 3D displays (like the 3DS, but full size TVs are coming as well)
- Head-mounted dual-display 3D (not done often, but very impressive)
And that's just the tech used for full color, full motion video. There are more types of 3D used for still images.
I'm honestly curious if you've seen all of these, and found trouble with all of them. I imagine there are some people whose optical processing just doesn't get fooled by the same optical illusions that trigger most people to see 3D (aside from those with physical limitations like a missing eye, amblyopia and whatnot). I bet we'll see some numbers about that at some point in the future.
Well I barely have seen any 3D, since every "3D" movie I have seen used the 3D for the credits and previews.
Also, as far as I've heard, the slider simply controls the intensity of the effect, as in, how much things supposedly "pop out". Maybe I'm wrong, but that was the impression I was given of the slider. Whenever I get a 3DS, I will be playing with it turned off both because I hate 3D and because it will devour less battery power without it.
By the way, Nintendo are idiots for not allowing devs to make games that don't use 3D. They could do so much with the processing power being wasted on 3D. I don't care that it can do 3D, I just think devs should have an option to hard-code 3D mode to "off" if they want to take advantage of the extra power.
Actually...
That can be helpfull.
So if you have the 3D on it wouldn't make a diffrence.
If you haven't seen 3D in the last two years, you haven't seen a lot of the advancement made. That's even if you saw 3D with some sort of polarization tech.
The cheap paper glasses that were tie-ins with TV boadcasts were crap. (especially since most TVs don't have properly calibrated color.) You can't compare those to 3DS with any sort of logic. Even if you saw a red/blue 3D movie in a theater decades ago, it's not a fair comparison because the technologies are so radically different.
If you have seen something with polarized glasses, say some 3D at Disney World or some other theme park, your experience highly depends on the condition of the cheap glasses you were handed as you entered the ride. Thin, linearly polarized plastic lenses that have been tossed in bins over and over and over are going to be warped and not filter the image properly. If your experience with this type of 3D was with bad equipment, you can't blame the tech as inherently broken and assume the 3DS will look the same way.
That's what much of the press has assumed as well. However, Garnett Lee said that the slider is to adjust to an individual in the latest Weekend Confirmed podcast. Basically, the major difference between people's eyes is how far apart they are, and adjusting the in-game cameras' stereoscopic separation with the slider can be used to make it look right for various people. This is basically increasing an decreasing the amount of "pop" that there is, but a various settings should look more right to some people than others. This could be why some people hate 3D, their eyes are set farther or closer apart than average, and the 3D effect always looks exaggerated or underwhelming to them.
Aye but sure at that stage they were playing Wii Sports which requires only simple gestures, you can't really fake the 3D effect, though it'll probably be underwhelming in the not too distant future
You're better than this
*sad that Zelda:OOT 3D isn't on that list* :"(
Wait, are their any games being shipped with it?
The AR cards, but that's it.
Which are faceraiders, target shooting, and a miis for the camera.
The cards are just the view point, not the games themselves.