Topic: 3D Without the Glasses For Television!

alex, it's not that anyone (well, mostly anyone) wants 3D to fail. being able to see depth is an absolute good and will undoubtedly become standard in the future... it's just that 3D in it's current incarnation obviously doesn't deliver it the way we'll get it in the future.

there's a reason nintendo worked so hard to make a glasses free 3D device, rather than just going the sony and microsoft route and use current 3DTVs, and that's because they know 3DTV isn't likely to catch on well: it's a little too inconvenient, expensive, and uncomfortable to enjoy the adoption rate HDTV has.

upgrading to hdtv doesn't take much effort other than just buying a new set; you can find content broadcast in HD easily enough and aside from all your old devices all you really need is a blu-ray player.
3DTV requires more adjustment. you have to get used to wearing the glasses, which you buy on top of the price of the tv, which can cause eye strain and discomfort for many people, not to mention you'll need a 3D blu-ray player if you're interested in actually using the whole 3d thing since you're not likely to get it anywhere else yet.

if you already own an hdtv and standard blu-ray player, (which, being the type to jump on the newest tech like 3D and HD before it, you'd undoubtedly already have) you get to buy everything all over again.

for the record, i did look at how much the tvs cost before making my last post and $3,000 is still the average price. even if you find one of the few cheap ones, the overall cost is much higher than $1,000 if you include everything you'll need to actually enjoy anything in 3D, especially for families. so between the expenses, glasses, the fact that most people finally just bought an HDTV, and the fact that it's an obvious stopgap before a better way to do 3D comes along, upgrading to 3DTV now is kind of an unappealing idea.
.

by the way, without getting too political i wanted to point out that we are in a recession and that an uptick in luxury cars is not the commonly experienced result of it. the gap between the rich and poor is widening and the middle class is being lumped squarely into poor end, so although the rich may be getting richer and buying more extravagant things, most people are getting poorer and can't afford to do the same. things like 3dtvs can and will wait for most people.

Macbooks, Ipads, only rich people buy those things?

I'm not sure of your definition of 'rich', but apparently it includes four or five people.

Even if one in ten can afford a $1500 TV, that's a 30,000,000 market just in America. Yes, there's nobody out there that will be buying one.

And just because the average price is 3000, doesn't mean you have to pay that much. That's just plain dumb. What do you think the average price of a new car is?

Once again, if the theory that every American citizen (A) was poor, (B) didn't like 3D, and (C) knew about new technology that might come out a decade later and decided they were waiting for that was true, then I'd think the same as you all.

Fortunately I know better. Sites even project the sales of these TVs as around 15 millio...

And pricewise, good lord, most people here spend hundreds on video games with no problem. I just went out and bought a $900 laptop even though I already have a perfectly good desktop.

If people want one (hardest part for people to understand, since people here don't) they'll find a way. The problem I consistently find on this site is people not wanting to think about things outside their perspective.

Just because this site doesn't like the way 3D is right now and thinks it will fail, doesn't mean it will. And I wish people would stop bringing up Nintendo. They worked with the handheld because it was significantly easier. Not the same as with a TV.

your point was that because sales of genuine rich person-type stuff (like fancy cars) was on the rise, 3DTV should have no problem selling. i was just making the point that a tv that costs several thousand, while possible to afford, is still a difficult purchase for anyone to make.

a handheld device in the hundreds of dollars range with a lot of clear uses in your everyday life is something much more practical easy to buy; a 3DTV is a little tougher to justify considering that you likely already have a perfectly good hdtv in addition to all the expense and convenience issues mentioned already.

Thanks for the insult. I didnt say 2000 was a third of 3000, didnt see your link and didnt see you say anything on any other page except for page 3 until now. But have a great day.

..

Hey can someone tell me if he likes me or not? I hate getting mixed signals like this, and I don't want to resort to using sunflower petals and saying, 'he likes me, he likes me not'...

Anyway, I don't know about repetitive ranting. I've replied less than the people on the opposite viewpoint yet I don't see anyone badgering them.

There's also a few prerequisites for having me reply to your post... (and this can go as future reference for all NL members)

A. Don't tell me to quit posting. Basically telling me I should be quiet and wanting me to reply to a post seems.. counter-productive.
B. Have something I can actually reply to. Telling me I'm wrong, I'm ranting, my dog is cute, etc. is great and all but doesn't provide much for discussion.
C. No asking me who cares. If I'm still posting, there's obviously someone on the other team, ask them why they care.
D. No blatant insulting (especially when you agree with me, wtf). Even I try to cover them up with indirect sly remarks.
E. Give me spaces. Easier to pick apart everything and tell people how they're wrong when everything isn't all jumbled together.

I think that covers it. And wups, bit of miscommunication then Josh. Have a great day too though!

just remember that we're on a video game forum here and that it's not worth it to take anything here too seriously

I actually thought Avatar wasn't out in 3D yet and had to do the interpolated 3D thing on capable sets (gives it a bit of depth, but nothing like an actual optimized 3D bluray)....I may be mistaken though (my buddy's friend has one and was only able to get regular Avatar on bluray).

You are correct

Cameron said he wants to wait until there's more support on the cable side of things since they just started selling 3D TVs and all.

Even though Avatar in 3D would probably help sell some TVs, but oh well.

That's more because I'm generally not into handheld gaming than the 3D specifically, though I do think it has more potential to be relevant in a handheld than on a big screen television.

There was a poll run in Japan recently and the response was overwhelmingly negative. Whilst I suppose North America and Europe could drive adoption of this technology alone (Japan was slow to get on the widescreen bandwagon; hence you'll annoyingly find more Japanese Wii/WiiWare games presented 4:3 than elsewhere), I'm doubtful. Sorry if this annoys any Sony shareholders out there; I didn't realise my comments had Buffett-like weight to them...