Why The 360 Shouldn't Waste Its Time With 3D
With Sony pushing 3D like there’s no tomorrow, is the 360 in danger of getting left behind? Not likely…
3D-o-vision!
When it comes to features – and let’s face it, willy waving – 3D is the new Blu-ray. Perhaps that’s not quite a fair comparison, but right now, we as consumers are standing on the precipice of change. A change from, admittedly HD, 2D images into shiny multi-dimensional 3D. There’s been a continuous battle over the specs of consoles and as Sony pushes it PS3 into a position where it can legitimately say it has a trump card over the 360, we’re left wondering if it really does.
Sony would have you believe that this 3D revolution is happening right now, but let’s be honest, when it comes to new technology there will always be a small minority of early adopters – those with particuarly loud Internet voices. But, in the grand scheme of things 3D Tvs, their glasses and the required technology is just too costly for average consumers. Even then, when the costs ultimately come down, is this generation of consoles powerful enough to cope with the processing power required?
All this talk of reducing frame rates and resolutions, of processing power doing double the work to create the two images required of 3D. Killzone 3 takes a considerible drop in quality that isn’t quite masked by the 3D technique… is all this actually worth the extra cash?
Not right now it isn’t.
Speaking today with CNN, Microsoft’s Phil Spencer had this to say about the adoption of 3D:
“As an entertainment company, we’re trying to do things that millions of people can go enjoy today,” explained Spencer. “And for better or for worse, people just don’t really have TVs in their house right now that are going to do 3D in a way that’s going to work.
“As a corporate mandate, I don’t need to sell you a new TV. That’s not part of my business model. Other companies maybe have that part of their business model. I don’t.”
So there you go. Perhaps the PS3 doesn’t quite have the feature advantage over the 360 after all.
to find out about all the
latest XBOX 360 news, reviews, previews, interviews, features and a whole more.
So because Sony offers a feature still early in the market which Microsoft doesn’t want to be adopt, the article can assure us by saying, “So there you go. Perhaps the PS3 doesn’t quite have the feature advantage over the 360 after all.”
I thought I would read something about how 3D is a feature not worth venturing into, but the only argument is that not many people currently have 3DTV’s. This ridiculous article is not even worth all the use of green ink splattered throughout the page.
3D Gaming had its chance to run using a Sega console which I had the chance to own and I must say it looked great and only cost me $250 for console,light phasor gun and glasses, game was extra. The only draw back was, you were the only person in the room who could see anything on the TV screen, the console only supported one 3d glass user at a time,ah the good old days lol. Now the run to bring 3d back on a gaming console is just to expensive, TV makers forced everyone to buy HD TV’s so most people have spent a lot of cash for their systems to get HD TV an gaming and now have to spend even more cash to update their system to get the full 3d effect at home.That’s why it will be awhile before it it becomes mainstream, most people will not make that committment of spending that kind of cash at this time so soon,thats one of the things that killed the Sega 3d system, people did not think it was worth the money on a game console at that time but it looked great.3d without glasses is the way to go but screen size will delay it again because of price.Do not want look at small screens, already wear eye glasses.
The reason Sony is pushing 3D so hard is because they have a line of 3D TV’s, and with 3D gaming both PS3′s and TV’s get sold.
And the argument that not enough people currently have 3DTV’s is a pretty good argument.
What a ridiculous article. There would be no innovation in the industry and no push forward in technology if everyone thought like the author of this article. Didn’t people also say there’s no need for Blu-Ray and that it’s going to fail? Didn’t people also say Nintendo would fail with it’s motion sensing technology? And they both ended up being MAJOR selling points for the respective consoles?
Even with Microsoft, back when the original xbox came out, Sony and Nintendo both thought online gaming wasn’t a big deal and MS started xbox LIVE and gained a major advantage over its competitors. Now both Sony and Nintendo are struggling to catch up with MS in that front.
The author of this article has a lot learn about the tech industry and how important innovation and being first to market are.
with quotes like “Perhaps the PS3 doesn’t quite have the feature advantage over the 360 after all.” the author sounds more like a fanboy who’s desperate to defend his xbox.
Xbox 360 website trashing the PS3. How surprising…
I know it is still in its early stages but 3d gaming is actually quite remarkable. I got a chance to play Killzone in 3D at an MLG convention last week and it blew my mind. Sure there is a slight loss in detail but it is still pretty cool. Although I do understand the argument of the costliness of 3D.
Whoever wrote this pile of gay article obviously doesn’t know the first thing about technology. Microsoft said that a true 1080p resolution wasn’t important – look how quickly they changed their minds.
Microsoft said Blu – Ray wouldn’t beat HD – DVD – look what happened.
Microsoft said that a top – of – the – line Cell Processor with 7 SPU units wouldn’t make a difference – now all the 360′s games have shit graphics while the PS3 games look just like real life.
Microsoft said the number of first – party studio’s didn’t matter – now the 360 doesn’t have a single exclusive game available for it while the PS3 has exclusive games coming out it’s ears.
And now Microflop have said that 3DTV’s won’t make as big a spalsh as people think…….considering that they’ve gotten EVERY SINGLE decision this generation completely wrong you would have to be a braindead simpleton to believe anything that they say. Why don’t you losers go back to playing your kiddy games on Kinect while REAL gamers play REAL games in true 3D on the PS3.
yea well……….it only does everything!!!!!
Not likely indeed…
…Stereoscopic 3D games can be played on BOTH 360 and PS3 today, and last year in 2009. Blitz Games released the PSN and XBLA game Invincible Tiger: The Legend of Han Tao, Aug 2009, and Ubisoft released Avatar The Game in Dec 2009, both 3D compatible. Yes, you needed TVs with either Active Shutter (with the expensive glasses) or Passive technology (using the cheap cinema polarised glasses – my personal favourite), and yes they are expensive, but with Sky 3D channel finally launching we will see more and more in peoples homes over the coming years – they made HD work.
Admittedly Joe Bloggs will not run out to by a TV with 3D but people will always need new TVs and 3D will just be a feature of all new TVs going forward. It will just take time.
But if you havent played a 3D game. Try it. It’s amazing. And I would recommend the Passive tech as it is much gentler on the eyes.
Yeah we can talk resolution and all that jazz, but I used to play games on a 14″ colour portable and still had fun. Who cares as long as its a good game.
Get over it and enjoy the future. On either platform.