Nintendo unveils...GUESS WHAT?

[Mithrandir]

Right, but that didn't stop people from screaming 'gimmick' about them before we saw any applications for them, and for many of them, their initial use would be considered extremely gimmicky. Just because you can't conceive of an application now, before any demo exists, doesn't mean that there can't be one or that someone can't come up with one.

Most of the people here have already said most of what I want to say. I was around for each of these advancements, and I never heard anyone call the vast majority of them "gimmicks" as you imply. FWIW, I saw uses for all of these when they came out; there was obvious application. If anyone did say "that's a gimmick" on things like analog sticks, then they were stupid and prolly ridiculed because there's no real logic behind those statements.

This is simply not the case with 3D. I will be bated into no more discussion along these lines.

[Roberts]

Have any of you ever misjudged a jump in a 3d platformer? How about misjudged a corner in a racing game? Missed seeing an immobile enemy in a competitive fps? Misjudged your distance from an enemy?

I don't know, it must just be me, but I can see some real tangible benefits that would be added from having 3D in games. I understand the point about movies, the added depth adds nothing to the movie, or at least little. In games at least, I expect it to be much more noticeable. How much the depth perception matters though, will depend upon the games' reliance on traversing a 3D space or noting the position of objects within said space (similarly to how depth perception matters more playing football than it does say, walking alone across a field).

Everything that 3D could add to games has literally already been done. It was done with Super Mario 64, which was in 3D. There was depth and you could see things far away, and get close to them, and walk around them.

You ever notice in Mario 64 how your shadow is always directly under you? This is because it helps with depth perception. It is, basically, a cheap way to help you judge your positioning and improve your platforming. I think people underestimate the amount of visual queues added to 3D games to artificially improve your depth perception.

Anyway, 3D will mean different things to different people. To me, I think it will be great, providing the technology behind it isn't a mess (blurry image, requiring glasses, etc).

[Mithrandir]

Wait... That was a well-reasoned response. Are we allowing those now?

I think we're a long way from it being possible, but that at least provides an interesting rationale. Hmm... If it could be done well, that would go a long way toward legitimizing it in my mind. Of course, I'd rather they just spent that energy on giving me a realistic virtual reality. XD

Crap... I was bated on the very next post. >.<

[Etoh*the*Greato]

lol

Alright, Roberts. You've got me. That's an excellent point there. And if we can see it used for that application. If we can see it used as an -addition- to a console instead of something to base an entire console around, we could see some great application, I think. Otherwise, I think it -would- be leaned on primarily as a gimmick.

[mechana2015]

Exellent point.

Except:

Anyway, 3D will mean different things to different people. To me, I think it will be great, providing the technology behind it isn't a mess (blurry image, requiring glasses, etc).

Unfortunately in this thread we're talking about a gameboy DS. The tech to do 3D without glasses requires essentially doubling the pixels in an image along the horizontal axis of the screen and aiming half of them at one eye, and half at the other. The only monitor I've seen so far that does this costs a ton, and is somewhere in the 30" range, since it needs to have a resolution of 2160 horizontal to do HD3D, and you have to sit directly in front of it to see. Lets say that with that in mind, I don't have particularly high hopes for a gameboy doing the same thing while being cost effective or readable.

[Mithrandir]

I think given enough TIME, that's kinda a moot point. I mean, I remember when cell phones were 50 lbs and cost a small fortune. But now I'm really dating myself...

[mechana2015]

Valid point Mith, I suspect that it will be valid tech in a few years. But they want to bring this out by March 2011. :|

[Bobtheduck]

Untrue. Anyone who follows games in any depth knows that Sony has already announced the tech, if just not in any official capacity that I've seen. We already know they're working on it.

Part of my response stems from the bold portions. Anyone who followed games in any depth in 2003-2005 also knew that Sony was working with motion controls, both camera only and augmented (wiimote sans accelerometers designt). The average person will see the official announcement on this specific topic (3d portable) and say Nintendo did it first.

The fact people are skeptical doesn't mean much. It's a win-win for Nintendo.

1. They get popular, and people recognize them as the "first"
2. They bomb, and (re)poison the 3d waters, helping damage one of their biggest opponents in a much bigger way then outselling them in their own field.

[Nate]

Have any of you ever misjudged a jump in a 3d platformer? How about misjudged a corner in a racing game? Missed seeing an immobile enemy in a competitive fps? Misjudged your distance from an enemy?

Yes, of course, however, I honestly don't see how "real" 3D (I don't know what to call it since as I said before, Super Mario 64 is already 3D) will fix that. I mean okay, so it'll add "depth?" But it STILL won't be real depth, it's just an illusion. I don't see how in any way this is superior to already existing games rendered in 3D.

So I still don't buy it. It's the same as when people talked about motion controls and were like "Dude you can swing the controller like you're swinging a sword which will totally be more immersive and intuitive! It's so much better than pressing a button!" Except, it isn't better at all. It was just hype, and while motion controls aren't bad, they are still very much a gimmick and don't really add anything to a game.

Now, there ARE good applications for the motion controls. Point and click adventure games like Sam & Max or SBCG4AP work wonderfully with the Wii remote, and would be a pain to do with traditional controllers. Even so, I can't think of any traditional platforming or adventure games that have been improved in any way by motion controls. They really serve no purpose.

Now for the 3D? I can see it being pretty cool for certain types of puzzle games. In fact that seems to be a great genre for 3D depending on how creative the puzzles are. But for platforming or RPGs? It's gimmick, it'll never be anything BUT gimmick.

But, we'll have to wait and see. It's hard to judge it when we really don't know anything about the system itself yet. However, I will grant it this. The 3DS can't possibly be as stupid or terrible as Natal. This is assured.

[Bobtheduck]

But, we'll have to wait and see. It's hard to judge it when we really don't know anything about the system itself yet. However, I will grant it this. The 3DS can't possibly be as stupid or terrible as Natal. This is assured.

Hmm... I don't see what's terrible about Natal. I actually own an Eyetoy (BY EVERY MEASURE a predecessor of Natal) and there were some legitimately fun applications of camera technology. Antigrav, for instance, was an incredibly immersive experience. Natal is an improvement over that, and the IR reduces the downside of lighting issues getting in the way. Along those lines, Move is also an improvement on that, and in addition reduces the problem you have doing anything other than head trackig which is the lack of tactile interaction.

I think motion controls have their place and should be explored, as long as they don't replace traditional controls.

[Etoh*the*Greato]

Part of my response stems from the bold portions. Anyone who followed games in any depth in 2003-2005 also knew that Sony was working with motion controls, both camera only and augmented (wiimote sans accelerometers designt). The average person will see the official announcement on this specific topic (3d portable) and say Nintendo did it first.

The fact people are skeptical doesn't mean much. It's a win-win for Nintendo.

1. They get popular, and people recognize them as the "first"
2. They bomb, and (re)poison the 3d waters, helping damage one of their biggest opponents in a much bigger way then outselling them in their own field.

BUT, Sony's been making a much bigger deal of their 3D work than they ever did about their motion controls pre-wii.

[Bobtheduck]

BUT, Sony's been making a much bigger deal of their 3D work than they ever did about their motion controls pre-wii.

This is true. That's only because it's being focused on by Sony outside of SCEI. If they could have worked motion controls into their TVs or computers in a logical way, they would have made a bigger deal out of it. SCEI has terrible marketing. Either they do it wrong (first run ads for PS2 / PS3) or not enough (current PS3 ads... Though, I'll admit, I don't know about ads in the US now because I don't live there now, but they certainly didn't in October, when I left).

[Rusty Claymore]

I lean more towards Nate with this one. If a monster or enemy comes into my three dimensional realm, I should be able to contact it. But in "real" 3D you'll just wave at it.
On another note, what about the chemical responses of a "real" 3D game? I already get adrenalin spikes from FPS, and in 3rd person games when you jump off a cliff you get a weightless feeling similar to eleavators and airplanes going down. If your brain is telling you, "There are actual zombies coming out of your TV!" because your eyes are seeing it, I think it will have some physical reprocussions(?).
Although, who hasn't wanted a "real" 3D Poke'mon Blue/Red game? That could be pretty if done right. Though we'd get a 'friends of poke'mon' group trying to shut it down...

[Etoh*the*Greato]

This is true. That's only because it's being focused on by Sony outside of SCEI. If they could have worked motion controls into their TVs or computers in a logical way, they would have made a bigger deal out of it. SCEI has terrible marketing. Either they do it wrong (first run ads for PS2 / PS3) or not enough (current PS3 ads... Though, I'll admit, I don't know about ads in the US now because I don't live there now, but they certainly didn't in October, when I left).

And on the flip side, in regards to their motion controls they've had the time and the press to keep developing the technology to finer levels. Wii might have allegedly "innovated" the technology, but I'm certain Move will provide a greater degree of fine control over movements, allowing for much more accurate use.

[Mr. Rogers]

I agree with what has been previously said about 3D in games and movies. I never understood why it was there except just to look fancy. In Avatar and Alice in Wonderland, it seemed to add nothing to the story or experience. I feel sorry for anyone who buys a 3D TV and wastes all that money.

[blkmage]

I apologize if I've been coming off as obnoxiously contrarian, but I just feel like it's a little reactionary and premature to declare that this will have absolutely no value for gaming and that Nintendo is terrible when all we have to speculate on is a short, badly typeset press release.

I do agree with most of the points that have been raised so far, but I'll be waiting for them to produce something that they can show off before I start throwing negativity at them.

[Htom Sirveaux]

"without the need for special glasses?" This can only result in severe pain.

. . . That is, until Nintendo releases their upcoming 3D eyeball replacements (working title: 3D-i's). They will be small electronic orbs that will fit right into your eye sockets (following an operation from a Nintendo-licensed eye care professional). The 3D-i's will allow you to see all Nintendo games (excluding NES, SNES, N64, GC, Wii, Game Boy, Virtual Boy, Game Boy Color, GBA, DS, DS Lite and DSi) in full 3D. For an extra fee, an upgrade will be available which will allow your 3D-i's to see real life in 3D. With this, you will be able to truly go anywhere and do anything you want. Think about it. Real life. Made possible by your friends at Nintendo.

[battletech]

I love how Nintendo comes out or says something is coming out. Every time it happans almost every one goes insane and claims the idea stupid. At lest Nintndo is always trying to inovate gaming. The same thing happaned with the Wii. Now MS and Sony are taking what Nintendo started and developing new devices. I thank Nintendo for all the hard work they put to coming up with new devices.

[mechana2015]

I'm sorry, have you read the thread? Most of us are talking about the inherit limitations of using 3D technology in a gaming environment, both technologically and creatively. We arn't bashing Nintendo for being Nintendo, for the most part.

[Nate]

Now MS and Sony are taking what Nintendo started and developing new devices.

Yeah, like when Nintendo started using discs for their games because they said they were better than cartridges, and then Sony star...oh wait, no...

Oh, so like when Nintendo said online gaming was the future of consoles and then Sony and Microsoft created PSN and XBL to counter Ninten...wait, no...

Oh, oh! So it's like when Sony announced earlier this year that they were developing TVs that would utilize 3D effects, which was copying Nintendo's 3DS that they just announced this past week! Sony went BACK IN TIME to copy Nintendo's idea! Now I understand.

[TGJesusfreak]

The only thing I can think of that would make 3D interesting would be if they implemented head tracking tech so that the depth really comes through. This is what I'm talking about.

Link directly to the effect, without the long explanation

Due that was awesome! I want to see some games come out for this.

[Htom Sirveaux]

I thank Nintendo for all the hard work they put to making more money off stupid kids who haven't picked up on the pattern yet.

Fixed.

[Bobtheduck]

Wow... This is a bit of a turn-around. I didn't expect this sentiment in here. Crazy. Irony is I'm sorta meh about 3d. I think it could be cool, but until HMDs come back completely, it won't matter. I sort of want an HMD, actually, and if they make one compatible with the PS3 I'd probably save for it.

I owned and loved the Virtual boy... Except the red color and the way you looked into it. Full color and head mounted would have been awesome...

[battletech]

Yeah, like when Nintendo started using discs for their games because they said they were better than cartridges, and then Sony star...oh wait, no...

Oh, so like when Nintendo said online gaming was the future of consoles and then Sony and Microsoft created PSN and XBL to counter Ninten...wait, no...

Oh, oh! So it's like when Sony announced earlier this year that they were developing TVs that would utilize 3D effects, which was copying Nintendo's 3DS that they just announced this past week! Sony went BACK IN TIME to copy Nintendo's idea! Now I understand.

All the things you mentioned are not new game devices. They are established tech put to use in gameing.The internet was not made for gameing. The CD was not made for gaming.

[Davidizer13]

All the things you mentioned are not new game devices. They are established tech put to use in gameing.The internet was not made for gameing. The CD was not made for gaming.

Neither was 3D: once again, it's more established technology being put to use in gaming. Just sayin'.

Anyway, I'm still happy with my GBA, and have other things to spend my money on. This'll probably be better than the Virtual Boy, if only because you can still play DS games on it, but until I see it for myself, I'm still really skeptical about this whole 3D thing. The movies I've seen in 3D didn't really benefit from being in 3D, and I think that 3D games are going to be basically the same thing.

[Etoh*the*Greato]

All the things you mentioned are not new game devices. They are established tech put to use in gameing.The internet was not made for gameing. The CD was not made for gaming.

And the infrared technology Nintendo patented for the Wii was not invented for gaming either.

[Rocketshipper]

To add in my two cents...

You know, I think I'd rather this just be another "DS upgrade" like the DSi and DS Lite. Because if its not, then that means another potential system to buy in the future, for whatever new Pokemon and final fantasy derivatives they decide to release ^^. I wasn't really expecting to have to upgrade my DS to something else already. Time flies I guess

And I must admit I'm a little bit skeptical. Its hard for me to imagine how they could make real 3D more than just a gimmick...but then again, I had the same feeling about the Wii till it actually came out. So who knows.

[Bobtheduck]

And the infrared technology Nintendo patented for the Wii was not invented for gaming either.

Neither were accelerometers, as they had been used in gaming since the Commodore 64, and the PS1 had a controller that was sixaxis like, just not as part of the system. And I don't think they were invented for gaming, either. Nor were pointing devices. Nor touch screens.

[battletech]

You all are right and I am wrong. I now agree that every thing Nintendo does is stupid and fails.:grin:


God bless all of you. Goodbye.

[Nate]

When did anyone here say everything Nintendo does is stupid and fails?

The point we were making (or at least I was) is this. 3D seems very gimmicky. There does not seem to be any useful application for gaming other than cheap 3D thrills. You know, the kind like where in 3D movies someone blows a noisemaker and it flies out of the screen at your face. Furthermore, even if 3D did have good applications for gaming, it's difficult to see how well it would work on a portable system with small screens rather than a large 42" TV. Especially if said system is supposed to not require special viewing glasses.

Nobody is saying everything Nintendo has done is stupid. However, neither has everything Nintendo has done been a roaring success. Remember the Virtual Boy? How about the Game Boy Micro? And although it wasn't a failure, the Gamecube wasn't exactly making Nintendo money hand over fist like the Wii or DS did.

Look, it IS possible for Nintendo to have bad ideas. Like I said, look at the Virtual Boy. Also...

Now MS and Sony are taking what Nintendo started and developing new devices.

What new devices have Sony and Microsoft made that Nintendo started? Please name one. Portable gaming doesn't count; Mattel was the company that started handheld gaming, so handheld game consoles are not something Nintendo started. Neither is 3D or motion controls. Those things were not something Nintendo started.

So I challenge you to name one thing Nintendo created that Sony and Microsoft took and created new devices based off of. You only need to name one.