PC Pals Forum
Technical Help & Discussion => PC & Console Games and Gaming => Topic started by: sam on January 24, 2010, 05:04
-
http://www.wired.com/gamelife/2010/01/3-d-games/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+wired%2Findex+(Wired%3A+Index+3+(Top+Stories+2))
With manufacturers rolling out 3-D television sets, the promise of videogames that transport players into deeply immersive 3-D worlds is inching closer to reality.
-
I have to agree with:
Emphasis on the inching. The burden of 3-D glasses, the cost of a brand-new 3-D TV, the paucity of programming — all the reasons that adoption of 3-D television will be slow as molasses also apply to games
Given how long it's taking to get HD off the ground, and the fact that Ofcom have moved the goalposts for Freeview, I think consumers will be standing well back and waiting for standards to settle and prices to fall.
-
I don't think standards will settle again, as technology moves so fast these days. As soon as you buy a component, it's out of date, and the next 'big thing' is round the corner.
-
You're talking about my stomach again aren't you. :)
-
;D
-
I really don't see these 3D sets taking off much... who wants to wear glasses when they don't have to?
-
Indeed.
-
Especially those of us who have to wear glasses already.
-
Stick on lenses?
-
No chance, I'd not risk the coatings. It would have to be a sort of 'surround' pair, extra large and even less desirable.
-
just clip ons then, like those classy ones you can get for the Sun.
-
They need to be the right size, though, Sam, and the clips need to be 'lens friendly' - too many of them will cause scratches.
-
so you have tried... do I need to say "should have gone to specsavers"? :laugh:
-
I have, I now buy prescription sunglasses, even though they cost a small fortune.
-
but worth it I'm sure!
-
It is for the optician. ;D An average visit costs me around £1200!
-
:horror: I thought my Raybans were expensive!
-
It is for the optician. ;D An average visit costs me around £1200!
yikes!
-
Varifocals
Computer glasses (worth the investment give the hours I sit in front of a monitor)
Sunglasses
Driving glasses
(sometimes) Reading glasses.
I do wonders for Nikon's turnover.
-
separate computer / driving? Is the prescription different?
How do you keep track of all of them? Or do Nikon fit a radio transmitter too? :laugh:
-
:)x
-
I'ver not heard of computer glasses either. Surely they are similar to reading glasses?
-
are they polarizing?
-
If they use those polarising glasses like they do at the 3D Imax screens then I cant see the problem. They arent uncomfortable to wear and as it will be a long time before everything is in 3D, as it is for HD now and as it was for colour when that first came out, then a couple of hours an evening would be no problem at all for most people.
I cant see why they would need new TVs or extra equipment if current SD DVD players can do 3D using the red/blue or green glasses then why cant the polarised glasses do the same thing. Its only if they are going for the shutter type of glasses or the no glasses 3D TVs that you should need new equipment. Given the extra cost that would involve I would happily go wit the polarised glasses method :)
-
Its not just the DVD - its the emission.
The emission from the screen has to change polarisation - so you can't just add the glasses. I'm pretty sure that the average screen has some degree of polarisation but it should constant over the whole screen. My life is all about polarisation these days... though normally at radio wavelengths.
-
separate computer / driving? Is the prescription different?
How do you keep track of all of them? Or do Nikon fit a radio transmitter too? :laugh:
;D
Driving glasses are just my distance prescription, Sam. They don't suffer from the same peripheral distortion that varifocals do. Computer glasses are set at my eye-to-monitor distance, so the eye is relaxed when reading, it's the same principle as reading glasses, but with a longer focal length, about 1.5 dioptres different.
-
Thanks for the explanation Rik.
-
ah that makes sense.
-
And money for the optical industry. :) I doesn't help that I like Nikon C-Max lenses, which are about as expensive as you can get.
-
Waybans wool. 8-)
-
Though not for night driving. ;D
-
I disagree, Rik. Provided I keep my main beam on and adjusted upwards and the foglights on, I have absolutely no trouble seeing the road ahead. I do notice a lot of fools driving into ditches though.
-
:pmsl: So that was you I nearly met the other night. :laugh:
-
Why can't cars have automatic dipping headlights?
-
Too dangerous? If the system went wrong, you could end up driving blind, or blind the oncoming motorist. IAC, you really should have dipped long before their headlights were strong enough to trigger a sensor of your car...
-
This is true.