Kotaku 
Enter your username and password.
Denver, 10:03 AM
Sat Nov 28
33 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip us:
Editor-In-Chief:
Brian Crecente
| AIM | Twitter
Deputy Editor:
Stephen Totilo
| AIM | Twitter
Senior Editor:
Michael McWhertor
| AIM | Twitter
Senior Contributing Editor, Japan:
Brian Ashcraft
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editor, East Coast:
Michael Fahey
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editor, Oceania:
Luke Plunkett
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editor, Weekends:
Owen Good
| AIM | Twitter
Correspondent, San Francisco:
AJ Glasser
| AIM | Twitter
Columnist:
Leigh Alexander
Columnist:
Tim Rogers
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
01:03 AM
11/27/09
The first being Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory which had the best co-op mode in any shooting game, ever!
When I got Splinter Cell: DA on the 360 and found out that it had no co-op, I (along with the three mates I had completed the co-op with at least 5 times each) was devastated. What stung even more was that the xbox version had Co-op and a longer story.
People say the Ps3 had a shit launch, at least they were just bad ports of the 360 games not games missing features that had been a staple of the series. Tiger Woods 06 was ridiculously better on the xbox as were other games.
(granted a port of the SC:DA 360 version made it to the PS3 bad times)
-----
Meh the point of this post was SPLINTER CELL: CONVICTION CO-OP = MAN WEE IN MY PANTS!
11/27/09
11/27/09
11/27/09
11/27/09
11/27/09
11/27/09
11/27/09
11/27/09
From "Yeah, whatever" and "It's just a fad" to "STFU and stop talking nonsense", it's a bit disheartening to see so many gamers against taking a step forward. It's just like the article when Youichi Wada made a statement about the future of games being one reliant on networks rather than consumer owned hardware.
Sure, some of these ideas may be half-boiled right now. Sure, the advantages to the consumer seem to be outweighed by the disadvantages right now but as with just about every leap forward, nothing is ever perfect the first time around.
You ask many people who made the first automobile and they'll reply with Henry Ford, unknowingly discrediting Gottlieb Daimler and Wilhelm Maybach with the invention. Why? Because it wasn't until around a decade later that Henry Ford made automobiles kick off.
But I digress. My point is that without the work of Daimler and Maybach, we might never have seen the Model T. Likewise, without the early proponents of many of our technologies, we would likely not have them today.
Nvidia, Ubisoft and Sony may be pushing 3D gaming now, when it isn't viable for the mass market, but without this kind of push, it never will be.
Before you decry gimmick and fad, stop and think. Without early visionaries and supporters, we'd still be living in the stone age thinking the world ended on the other side of the mountains.
11/27/09
Although I also turned my nose up at HD video and games until the moment I tried it, and now I (as they say) 'couldn't go back'.
Basically, I'll try 3D when it becomes affordable, but I'm not holding my breath for it.
11/27/09
To go back to my analogy about automobiles, that's exactly why people at first didn't pick up on Daimler and Maybachs work early on.
Why should I buy an expensive metal horse that needs a strange expensive liquid to run when I have two horses, a carriage and enough food to keep the horses healthy?
At first, it's going to be impractical for the majority of people but over time, with enough support and continued dedication towards it, it'll evolve into a standard feature of our media. Remember, todays expensive unnecessary technology is tomorrows bog standard piece of crap.
11/27/09
Albeit, in my opinion, 3D gaming will be a fad. A long-running one, most likely, but a fad still. I think everything has an expiration date, and 3D will have its time in the spotlight. But when newer technology comes (And I can't even begin to imagine what else they'll be able to come up with AFTER 3D), it'll be lost to the world. :c
11/27/09
Having said that, I haven't actually given 3D much of a chance yet. I watched Up in 3D and liked it just fine (although it did hurt my eyes quite a bit by the end of it), but I've never tried to use 3D as a day-in, day-out part of my routine - mostly because it's not feasible right now. If they do it right, I could well end up looking back on 2D the way I currently look back at standard definiton video and games.
11/27/09
I should add that I really don't get the weird ideological opposition to 3D that we're seeing right now. I know people have been burned by 3D in the past, but this isn't an IMAX theatre we're talking about here - it's 3D in the home, as an 'ordinary' part of gaming. Don't wash your hands on it completely if you haven't actually tried it yet.
11/27/09
This kind of tech is certainly something to watch, but I'd be shocked if it becomes standard in the next two decades. Look at how long it took to get HD to stick -- the spec has been in the works since at least the early 90's.
11/27/09
11/27/09
It's fine to be skeptical and realistic about the viability of something in it's early days. It can even help in making whatever it is better by perhaps highlighting issues that others overlooked so they can be addressed. Seeing all the negativity in threads like this though is just...well...bad for business. Nothing is going to stand a chance if it's never given one in the first place.
@superberg: I wouldn't say it's so far off as two decades away since many games on PC already support it but it's at least 5 years off becoming mainstream, perhaps even 10.
@JayEdgahoover; Let's just be glad they weren't.
11/27/09
11/27/09
My point isn't that 3D gaming is the only step forward but it's a possible step forward and as such, shouldn't be disregarded because the technology and the mass market itself isn't as great as it could be right now. I have just the same opinion of any other advancement in technology.
11/27/09
Though I understand your point of any progress is good progress, I just think we could've taken another path that was more interesting. This is like the next big thing, and it just doesn't get me excited, whereas motion technology, and touchscreen technology gave me a boner just thinking about them (:P).
11/27/09
11/27/09
...there needs to be an option to put an overlay on the monitor or screen, or something. There's gotta be a way to remove the glasses altogether.
11/27/09
@Twisk: A solution to this is to develop 3D-glasses in the shape of simple clip-ons that you simply "overlay" on your normal glasses (see image). This is easy to do with the type of glasses that uses polarization but could be a bit tricker with the shutter style 3D glasses.
Similarly it should be possible to create the same type of polarization in contact lenses as well.
Also, related and interesting:
[www.well.com]
[www.wipeout44.com]
No glasses needed.
11/27/09
11/27/09
As i said, correct me if i am wrong...
11/27/09
Nonetheless, having the wear glasses in order to achieve the 3D effect is cumbersome (especially for those who have to put the extra plastic junk over top of their existing glasses).
So if there were another alternative to create the 3D effect without having to wear the glasses, then bring on the 3D movies, the 3D books, the 3D video games, the 3D cereal boxes, etc.
11/27/09
I think hologram-projector-ish technology will be out and be used by the time 3D becomes mainstream enough to be used for gaming.
You're not just looking at a 3D landscape, you're MOVING in a 3D landscape!
Maybe they'll call it the "WiiiD".
11/27/09
Why must we have so many different technologies to get the same effect?
11/27/09
11/27/09
11/27/09
It even came with 3D glasses!
11/27/09
11/27/09
11/27/09
Nicely done :D
11/27/09
However I think I'd prefer true peripheral vision in gaming, but that would require curved monitors and televisions, so for now I think 3D will probably hit first.
11/27/09
11/27/09
There are many many people (myself included), who can't wear contacts and have to wear prescription glasses. Their 3D glasses rarely fit perfectly over regular glasses.
Also, the use of glasses makes it hard to see correctly unless you look perfectly in the center. I've seen Beowulf in IMAX 3D, and the screen is so large that you can't focus on the 3D and the rest of the picture at the same time, so in the end, it's just a distraction.
11/27/09
Plus they're asking people to toss away their shiny HD TV's for a 3D one.
No thank you.
In the upgrade from mono to stereo, or from vhs to dvd, there was a clear cut benefit for the upgrade, with no downsides. It was a no brainer. In this day of diminishing returns, when someone asks why they should upgrade, the reasons are less compelling.
3D is a nice gimmick, but I don't want to watch every movie and play every game that way.
11/27/09
With every new 3d "phase" we get into there are those that say 3d will change everything. However, it has never come to pass. Everything is still 2d mostly.
One day I'm sure they'll say "3d will change everything!" and be right for once, but, there's a long precedent of people saying this and being wrong.
They've been saying this since long before anyone reading this article was even born, since long before almost anyone's parents here were even born.
11/27/09
I feel it will be the same thing for games. Do they really think people are going to buy another expensive TV on top of the system and game to play in 3D. Not as many as they probably think. Although I guess it is one step closer to full VR.
11/27/09
Then I just laugh thinking about how absurd that damn idea is. Even if it were available and commonplace, none of us would do that.
Now, me and my friend just kicking back playing a game taking turns watching and playing or split screen, even then I don't see either of us wearing some kind of contraption on our heads just to see the game in "more 3d".
Personally, alone in my room, playing a game that has some nifty little gimmick to it that 3d would enhance the actual quality of the "playing" of the game, like...the 3d perspective would be important to the actual gameplay, say...some kind of new Qbert title or whatnot, or a platform jumper where you're seeing the platforms floating around in 3d space, then yes I would play it for kicks but no I would not purchase a new monitor/tv or peripheral that was exclusive to the format, because honestly I'm fine with it how it is.
The only time I would be as hyped up over the technology as some of these guys are is if it was going more in the direction of that game we saw being played in the Millennium Falcon in Star Wars. The holographic (True 3d) style that went out of fashion in the arcades a couple of decades ago. Now personally, that technology always interested me and I thought for sure we'd have it by now since I remember the early attempts were around decades ago and weren't half bad but that vanished unfortunately.