Perhaps it's good that I don't have a 3DS yet. My wallet says that I'm not ready to jump on the 3D train right now, and I don't want to get sucked in like Matthew did.
I would say I’m a little more experimental than the average “hardcore” gamer because I’ll buy any accessory that looks to enhance or change my gaming experience, even if the effect is minor. I bought the PlayStation 2’s EyeToy for the sole purpose of putting my likeness in Tony Hawk’s Underground 2; I got Logitech’s Driving Force Pro to play Gran Turismo games with as life-like an experience as possible; I also had an Activator to pretend-kick-ass in Eternal Champions for the Sega Genesis.
These aren’t cheap peripherals, especially if they were bought for specific games. I just love gaming in new and different ways whenever it’s possible. I feel like I’m missing out on an experience if I don’t use every feature available in the game.
It probably has to do with my gaming OCD. I need to finish every game I begin, and it also has to be 100% completed...no matter how bad the game may be. A part of that includes playing SOCOM with a machine gun shell for my Move controller and shoving my fist up a horse butt in that equestrian game for the Wii. Okay, maybe that last one was made up, but if it were real it would probably be stored in the closet next to all my plastic Rock Band instruments.
When I made a day-one purchase of the Nintendo 3DS, I didn’t realize it was planting the seeds in my head that would later influence me to buy a 3D television. I was not fortunate enough to have played with one before release, so I didn’t know what to expect from the 3DS’s 3D capabilities, and I sure as hell didn’t anticipate it working so well. The most impressive game was quite easily Ridge Racer 3D.
Visually, the depth of field Ridge Racer 3D provided made playing much more immersive. I’ve never been that lost in a handheld game before because the screen is so small, but the looking-through-a-window-effect of the 3DS gives the illusion of the screen feeling much bigger. You sense like you’re actually driving the car when it’s in the first-person perspective. Mind you, all of this is done through the tiny 3.5 inch display. I soon began thinking about how awesome it would be to play in 3D on a much bigger screen; so my research began.
I always educate myself before making any purchase, and when it comes to something I know little about (such as 3D technology), I double up on the knowledge. I’ll spare you all the boring details and get straight to why I chose to jump on the 3D bandwagon so quickly.
At CES earlier this year, several manufacturers introduced glasses-free 3D displays. So why didn’t I just wait for those? The answer was simple for me: The autostereoscopic technology used in the 3DS has proven that it’s not the optimal method to view 3D images. Although the image is three dimensional and done clearly, you need to place yourself in a very restrictive angle in relation to the screen. Move your head only a couple inches in any direction and the illusion of 3D is broken. If your friend can’t witness the glory that is the 3DS by simply looking over your shoulder, how bad is it going to be when the same technology is used on a fifty-plus inch television? The viewing angle is going to be horrible.
Doing some very rudimentary math in my head, I’d expect a maximum of only three people being able to watch a TV that utilizes autostereoscopy. Moreover, they would also need to be huddled together directly in front of the TV at a very specific distance. I’ve read multiple accounts from tech sites lucky enough to attend CES that confirmed my suspicions.
Okay, so now I know I don’t want a glasses-free 3D TV, and I don’t have nearly enough money to get a passive 3D projector to use polarized glasses like the ones used in movie theaters. That only leaves me with a TV that requires active shutter glasses.
After religiously checking the Best Buy ad in the Sunday paper every weekend, I finally found a deal I couldn’t pass up. I ended up getting a 51 inch Samsung that came with two free pairs of glasses for $899. I had some gift cards saved up, so that took another little chunk off the final price. My dad isn’t Scrooge McDuck, so I realize that’s still a lot of money. Keep in mind, however, that the next lowest price is over $1,000, and you usually have to buy the very expensive glasses separately. All things considered, I would have paid almost twice as much if this sale didn’t come around.
Now that my brand new shiny 3D TV was hanging in my living room, I couldn’t possibly have been more stoked.
The first game I tested was Crysis 2. Frankly, it’s simply amazing. From the first second the in-game footage starts, you’re completely immersed. It begins with an underwater shot of a submarine heading in the camera’s direction. The endless abyss of the ocean is accurately represented. I know how ridiculous this sounds, but I actually caught myself holding my breath as if I was underwater. It could have been because I was dumbfounded by the introduction of the third dimension, but I like to think it’s due to the added realism.
Then, as the sub slowly cruises past the camera, you experience the feeling of being completely insignificant in size next to the huge nuclear-powered machine. When you finally take control of the main character, the flooding hallways of the damaged sub drag you further in to the illusion of going through what he’s experiencing. After playing through Crysis 2, I have to say that 3D is absolutely needed as the next step to fully engage the player in what they’re playing.
I have a couple theories as to why there are so many naysayers when it comes to the topic of 3D as a whole. For one, there are far too many people who like to comment on things they know absolutely nothing about. That’s why you get 9.5 ratings on Gamestop.com for a game whose release date isn’t for another six months. Another is merely due to not giving it enough time, or viewing the right content. Would you judge all video games based on the shovelware that plagues the Wii? No. So why would you make conclusions on a technology without seeing what it’s truly capable of doing?
I can’t say anything to those of you that aren’t able to view 3D images or who get physically ill. You have legitimate reasons to not use the technology, but it in no way makes it rational to hate it because you can’t see it. I think the internet has a meme that sums it up nicely.
If you’re in the market for a new TV, why not get one that displays in beautiful 3D? They’ve come down in price considerably and now cost about the same as a regular HDTV. If you’re going to be paying the same amount of money, you might as well get more bang for your buck, right?
Anyways, I’ll leave you with this quote from my son after we watched a dinosaur documentary in 3D:
“Daddy, I wish everything was in 3D.”
So do I, son. So do I.
Fanboy is such a dirty word, but that’s exactly what Matt is. To rid himself of the negative connotation he coined the word unjadeable, because he doesn’t pledge his allegiance to any one company but to the gaming industry as a whole. Check out Unjadeable.com for him and his friends’ latest take on games, movies, comics, and anything else you can be a fanboy of unjadeable about.
















