Support NeoGAF

[MDX]

Is 3D dead? Avatar 2 did bring in 2 billion at the box office.
And at this year’s CES:

“Something to look forward to: Stereoscopic 3D never took hold with mainstream audiences, but Asus is taking another shot at it with a couple of its latest laptops. The company's new display technology seeks to remove some of 3D's biggest problems with a combination of special panel features and eye tracking.

Asus unveiled laptops with 3D OLED screens at CES this week. The displays are autostereoscopic - meaning they create the 3D effect without requiring special glasses.

Spatial Vision promises a 3D effect that holds up from multiple viewing angles. The Verge writes that two people could see a 3D image on the screen simultaneously. Asus achieves this through two cameras above the display that track users' eyes to continually adjust the 3D image, even as their viewing angle changes. Lenticular lenses in the screen transmit separate stereo images to each eye to create the effect.

Asus debuts laptops with glasses-free 3D screens

Asus unveiled laptops with 3D OLED screens at CES this week. The displays are autostereoscopic - meaning they create the 3D effect without requiring special glasses. The...

www.techspot.com

Nintendo likes to develop a feature over several generations: The Gamecube-WiiU-Switch are related with the idea of console gaming on the go. Even with WiiU’s lackluster sails, Nintendo still went forward with the Switch. And, I think immersion is also important for Nintendo. So I do think if 3D has advanced to their liking, they might want to take another crack at it.

 

[RavageX]

Nah, the new switch is going to be something like psvr2/quest 2.

Think virtual boy but better and you strap it to your head.

Trust me.

Your next full Legend of Zelda game will be a fully immersive VR adventure. Same with Metroid AND Mario Kart.

Smash play normally with replays in being first person and you are free to explore the levels in immersive detail.

 

[cash_longfellow]

Let’s be real here…Nintendo fans will buy whatever the hell Nintendo puts out. 3D, Double D, 1D…it doesn’t matter, as long as the Nintendo name is on it. We all know this OP (including Nintendo peeps) come on lol.

 

[Codes 208]

…why? They stopped giving a damn about 3d about halfway i to the 3ds’s lifespan

 

[Spukc]

They should release a nintendo vr headset.
Named virtual boy 2 priced at 3K just to undercut the Apple Vision Pro

 

[supernova8]

I don't remember there being many games that really took advantage of the 3D in a novel way though. Maybe Super Mario 3D land, I remember the enhanced depth perception making it easier to land jumps between platforms.... that's about it???

Maybe Nintendo decided it wasn't enough if it was just going to be the same games but they happened to be in 3D.

 

[genesisblock]

I was really hoping Nintendo would follow up on this incredible face-tracking demo on the Wii:

 

[GigaBowser]

No Switch 2 but more models yes its all true my friends

Switch OLED LITE
Switch TV
Switch OLED LITE TV

 

[ZehDon]

I personally love my 3DS - it's my favourite Nintendo handheld. I'd love a proper full-fat successor, but I don't see how it makes business sense. The jump in hardware to a Switch 2, with every game targeting a stereoscopic display, would eat a pretty big chunk of the hardware gains, so you'd get a bunch of Switch-looking games in 3D for the next eight years.

 

[FoxMcChief]

It’s what I want. I loved the 3D effect from the 3DS.

 

[TheCrowsReaper]

Day one, baby.

 

[SecretAgentHam]

I personally really enjoyed the 3D feature of the 3DS. I still pull it out from time to time to enjoy some sweet 3D goodness with Fire Emblem. I’d welcome a 3D capable switch if it means 3DS backwards compatibility of some sort [Virtual Console] and beefier internals to play games at more solid frame rates. I doubt we see new hardware announced tomorrow though.

 

[Kumomeme]

 

[HerjansEagleFeeder]

GAFs intrigued, so it'll probably bomb hard in the general market. Which is precisely what Nintendo does every other generation.

 

[CamHostage]

Is 3D dead? Avatar 2 did bring in 2 billion at the box office.
And at this year’s CES:

“Something to look forward to: Stereoscopic 3D never took hold with mainstream audiences, but Asus is taking another shot at it with a couple of its latest laptops. The company's new display technology seeks to remove some of 3D's biggest problems with a combination of special panel features and eye tracking....

Nintendo likes to develop a feature over several generations: The Gamecube-WiiU-Switch are related with the idea of console gaming on the go. Even with WiiU’s lackluster sails, Nintendo still went forward with the Switch. And, I think immersion is also important for Nintendo. So I do think if 3D has advanced to their liking, they might want to take another crack at it.

It's dormant, for sure.

Avatar 2 of course did big business, but 3D movie releases have decreased in frequency. 3D is still around, but it's not like it used to be. Theaters are instead pushing different types of theatrical experiences, such as Dolby Atmos or IMAX or DBOX. In its heyday, most big weekends had 1 if not multiple 3D movies releasing on a weekend and every major blockbuster was either shot in or converted to 3D; this weekend did see multiple 3D movies with Elemental and Transformers plus a Hindi movie, but The Flash isn't and only some of the big movies of the year, mostly kid stuff or CGI, did 3D releases (Super Mario, Fast X, Guardians 3, Ant Man 3, Puss in Boots Last Wish, Little Mermaid... the Titanic re-release.) For comparison's sake, Mission Impossible Fallout was a 3D movie (by conversion) but the new Mission Impossible Dead Reckoning 1 will not be released in 3D.

Then you have the home releases... which basically no longer exist. The BD consortium didn't even make a new 3D format standard for UHD BD (which is a shame, as 4K and framerate systems could have made dynamite improvements in managing crosstalk and improving per-eye resolution or other 3D issues.) None of the major streamers are in the 3D business anymore. Disney+, Amazon, and Youtube do not offer 3D versions of 3D films despite owning a lot of 3D content (YT does have an old 3D channel from back when it was experimenting with that, but it's basically abandoned tech) ; Netflix does offer 3D streaming on a paltry 18 films and hasn't added one since 2013 (if you do want to stream 3D from Netflix, I highly recommend Pina... and pretty much nothing else.)

The technology to play 3D is gone too. You can no longer buy a 3D TV. Not even if you want to pay extra for it, not even if you try to import. (The only 3D entertainment devices currently available are 3D projectors, or watch 3D in VR. You can technically use Meta Quest/Rift to watch 3D movies, but the Oculus TV video store has I think 1 3D movie officially available, Paul WS Anderson's The Three Musketeers... the 3DS had I believe more 3D movies, and it didn't have a movie store.) We have seen a few laptops or tablets with 3D screens (the ASUS one, the Leia Inc LumePad, a couple 3D phones) but not much content is out for them so I'm not sure what they're banking on aside from 3D photos? PlayStation and Xbox are tech devices, but neither has had 3D support in two console generations now (not even backwards-compatibility, although both PS4 and Xbox One played 3D movies.)

I think the most telling tale about how iced 3D is would be if you look at the aforementioned Avatar. The first Avatar was the boom release for 3D; it sold tons on BD and put 3DTVs in people's homes for 5-10 booming years. With the sequel, they released the home version today, and it does include a 3D version, but both Amazon and Best Buy are already sold out of that version (we'll see if that was a limited release or if stocks come back in,) and the streamers Disney TV and Max don't stream it in 3D. no 3D TV manufacturers took the $2.35billion dollar challenge of putting a new 3DTV out to watch this version. It's just a thing that exists for a small amount of people, and if you were not an early adopter, you'll not get to see the 3D version again (*until it's re-released in theaters... the HFR content is also is not available on home video, so it is what it is.

https://www.bestbuy.com/site/avatar-the-way-of-water-includes-digital-copy-3d-blu-ray-2022/6544420.p?skuId=6544420

Sure, Nintendo could go its own way and do 3D again, but they'd be alone in the field again, trying to sell a feature which the audience is already over (and didn't really take to the first time with 3DS.) 3D couldn't be the singular driver to attract people to upgrade to Switch 2, and it's unlikely that they'd just throw it in as just a nice feature (even if it happened to be cheap to add, which I don't think is the case) in addition to whatever else this new system will need to offer new. But maybe, I guess...

 

[CherryFalls]

No, not since we found out looking at 3d images breaks your eye

 

[CamHostage]

I was really hoping Nintendo would follow up on this incredible face-tracking demo on the Wii:

They kind of already did, actually. New 3DS improved its 3D by tracking the player and orienting 3D for their viewpoint, rather than relying fully on the parallax barrier.

The ASUS ProArt Studiobook appears to do the same thing (one tech journalist even showed how it works by strapping a printout of his face on a camera, and then if you watch the clip without the facecam, you can see the 3D shifting as the speaker moves.)

 

[hemo memo]

No. 3D failed. The 3DS sold despite 3D not because of it. They are not going to repeat the 3D mistake again.

 

[genesisblock]

They kind of already did, actually. New 3DS improved its 3D by tracking the player and orienting 3D for their viewpoint, rather than relying fully on the parallax barrier.

The ASUS ProArt Studiobook appears to do the same thing (one tech journalist even showed how it works by strapping a printout of his face on a camera, and then if you watch the clip without the facecam, you can see the 3D shifting as the speaker moves.)

But the 3DS is the opposite of what that video is representing. All the new 3DS did was stabilise effect when the player head moves but it's still a single dimension depth effect. This video shows proper head tracking, which means you can peek on different angles based on how near or far your head is relative the camera. I believe there was a 3DS game that did this but I forgot the name.

 

[nikos]

3D was always trash.

 

[Kataploom]

I'd laugh out my ass while drying my tears with salt

 

[CamHostage]

But the 3DS is the opposite of what that video is representing. All the new 3DS did was stabilise effect when the player head moves but it's still a single dimension depth effect. This video shows proper head tracking, which means you can peek on different angles based on how near or far your head is relative the camera. I believe there was a 3DS game that did this but I forgot the name.

I think you're talking about Looksley's Line Up, a DSi game



That used face tracking (even with the limited power of DSi) to orient the 3D objects to your viewpoint, and because the objects were simple and the movement could assume your face was relatively steady while you moved the portable with your hands, it created a diorama effect which felt 3d.

The Wii demo did kind of a similar diorama trick, but it was your body which moved while the screen sat still. The objects in the game oriented their direction towards your viewpoint, and then the game of the TV also helped to give you a sense of spatial awareness that confused your brain to see it as 3D.

(Its not the same, but those "3D GIF"images also trick your brain with indicators substituting reality. )

The problem with the Wii or DSi demo is that they rely on motion of the player to create the 3d trick. Unless you're ducking and weaving, you see the screen as flat as it always was. Also, I'm not sure how well it would work with more complex, realistic graphic elements? Paper imagery seems to work well, but objects with dimensionality and lighting in their geometry would, I'd guess, fight against the effect. That'd be my guess why games didn't widely adopt this motion effect, since it's so cheap to produce.

A new Switch could do a face tracking effect pretty easily these days if it had a camera, but following a face usually isn't very eventful with a portable game system. (You don't usually "duck" punches in ARMS physically, and the diorama effect would have to be incredibly accurate and subtle to work in like Smash Bros. ) And using it on a TV would require a camera device and calibration (and only work for 1 player. )

(BTW, the face tracking effect could conceivably work with the 3DS 3D screen, i think? Same orientation trick, working to track your same two eyeballs on each side of your head, and depth could just be calculated by the game engine, same thing. You'd have a problem if you rotate the screen off-axis though, and the parallax barrier would probably be insufficient for most distances.)

 

[genesisblock]

I think you're talking about Looksley's Line Up, a DSi game



That used face tracking (even with the limited power of DSi) to orient the 3D objects to your viewpoint, and because the objects were simple and the movement could assume your face was relatively steady while you moved the portable with your hands, it created a diorama effect which felt 3d.

The Wii demo did kind of a similar diorama trick, but it was your body which moved while the screen sat still. The objects in the game oriented their direction towards your viewpoint, and then the game of the TV also helped to give you a sense of spatial awareness that confused your brain to see it as 3D.

(Its not the same, but those "3D GIF"images also trick your brain with indicators substituting reality. )

The problem with the Wii or DSi demo is that they rely on motion of the player to create the 3d trick. Unless you're ducking and weaving, you see the screen as flat as it always was. Also, I'm not sure how well it would work with more complex, realistic graphic elements? Paper imagery seems to work well, but objects with dimensionality and lighting in their geometry would, I'd guess, fight against the effect. That'd be my guess why games didn't widely adopt this motion effect, since it's so cheap to produce.

Oh, so it was a DSi game. Thanks for that. As for "realistic graphics", this is Nintendo we're talking about here. Charming art style is taken in priority over realistic which is why I wanted the next Nintendo to at least integrate this feature as it's relatively inexpensive to produce the effect as opposed to actually stereoscopic 3D.

Mario, Kirby or even Yoshi in a Diorama like game - that, would be wild.

 

[CamHostage]

As for "realistic graphics", this is Nintendo we're talking about here. Charming art style is taken in priority over realistic which is why I wanted the next Nintendo to at least integrate this feature as it's relatively inexpensive to produce the effect as opposed to actually stereoscopic 3D.

Mario, Kirby or even Yoshi in a Diorama like game - that, would be wild.

I don't think you're understanding why I say the face tracking trick works with simple graphics but "realistic graphics" is a problem. 3D isn't just an illusion of the mind; it's your two vision sensors, your eyes, taking in two different perspective glances of a scene and comparing them to assess depth by its differences.

Look carefully at this picture. Note the slight differences in lighting and orientation. Look at the watch band, and how you can see the stitches on the left side in one image but not the other. Look at the brightness of the glare in the upper left gear of the watch, or the shine around the crown, or the reflection projected under the watch off the glass.

Or, hold up a finger in front of your face close one eye each back and forth. Notice where the finger is in your view, and what it blocks or doesn't block from each eye; notice the different percentage of light you see with one eye and shadow with the other.

Now, stereoscopy doesn't have to be so extremely exact to fool your eyes (I'm going to assume the rasterized lighting used in PS3/360 games did very little if any modification of the lighting/shadows between views,) but that's an important part of how we see 3D. And if a game only use the face tracker method to trick a 3D effect, you would never get those differences from a flat screen. Your brain would probably resolve this discrepancy pretty quickly, especially since the "3D" effect goes away if you stop moving, and the effect would dissipate.

So if you're thinking this effect would be great for say Paper Mario, realize that the effect only works when you or the screen is moving, and when you're playing a normal game, you just stare at the screen. No "diorama effect", no 3D. Maybe this trick could be used in like a Kirby Tilt n Tumble, where moving the system is part of the play, but even then, the effect would flatten out every time you hold the screen steady, plus it could only use fairly simple cartoon graphics since there's no way to simulate shading or perspective differences on a non-stereoscopic screen. Or maybe you could do like a Mario's Target Practice where you play full-bodied moving and aiming in front of a screen, but then whatever camera system used would need high-precision face tracking (or you would need to wear an IR device) to see you move and would require you to keep in motion always while playing. It could be a fun gimmick for some specific games, but it's clearly not something you could build a new platform on.

 

[Tams]

Give me a dual screen and Wacom EMR too...

 

[genesisblock]

I don't think you're understanding why I say the face tracking trick works with simple graphics but "realistic graphics" is a problem. 3D isn't just an illusion of the mind; it's your two vision sensors, your eyes, taking in two different perspective glances of a scene and comparing them to assess depth by its differences.

Look carefully at this picture. Note the slight differences in lighting and orientation. Look at the watch band, and how you can see the stitches on the left side in one image but not the other. Look at the brightness of the glare in the upper left gear of the watch, or the shine around the crown, or the reflection projected under the watch off the glass.

Or, hold up a finger in front of your face close one eye each back and forth. Notice where the finger is in your view, and what it blocks or doesn't block from each eye; notice the different percentage of light you see with one eye and shadow with the other.

Now, stereoscopy doesn't have to be so extremely exact to fool your eyes (I'm going to assume the rasterized lighting used in PS3/360 games did very little if any modification of the lighting/shadows between views,) but that's an important part of how we see 3D. And if a game only use the face tracker method to trick a 3D effect, you would never get those differences from a flat screen. Your brain would probably resolve this discrepancy pretty quickly, especially since the "3D" effect goes away if you stop moving, and the effect would dissipate.

So if you're thinking this effect would be great for say Paper Mario, realize that the effect only works when you or the screen is moving, and when you're playing a normal game, you just stare at the screen. No "diorama effect", no 3D. Maybe this trick could be used in like a Kirby Tilt n Tumble, where moving the system is part of the play, but even then, the effect would flatten out every time you hold the screen steady, plus it could only use fairly simple cartoon graphics since there's no way to simulate shading or perspective differences on a non-stereoscopic screen. Or maybe you could do like a Mario's Target Practice where you play full-bodied moving and aiming in front of a screen, but then whatever camera system used would need high-precision face tracking (or you would need to wear an IR device) to see you move and would require you to keep in motion always while playing. It could be a fun gimmick for some specific games, but it's clearly not something you could build a new platform on.

That's a great breakdown on stereoscopy. But that is not why I was impressed with the target wii demo.

The whole point to my argument is not about 3D nor it stereoscopy effect. That is just the effect, what I'm suggesting is that the parrallax effect changes the way how we can manipulate perspective. You can see the guy move his head as the perspective change. This has nothing to do with realistic or lighting or whatsoever,

There are games already incorporating eye tracking for simulator games because locking your perspective in one view point is limiting when you want a peak in angle, not a problem for FPS but on a vehicle or cockpit, this is a game changer.

 

[01011001]

it wouldn't be wise to do since that's very hardware hungry as the game needs to render 2 viewpoints.

I like 3D, but it wouldn't be worth it unless it's an absolute hardware monster... which it most likely wouldn't be