3D TV

[emsley]

The wii is (and im really sorry to all Nintendo heads) a big pile of junk.

What have Nintendo done for its faithful one super mario game with another in the works bar the side stroller?

No real new metroid (i haven't heard metroid on Wiis praise at all)

and a few games like punch out etc...

No graphical finesse, it may as well be a gamecube with some magic wands.

I fucking love nintendo but the past few years have seen nintendo surive on mainstream crap...

I still think its pretty much the end of hardcore nintendo.

[Krosigrim]

Hmmmm, indeed.

 

Ok how about this! I just erased a ton of text cause I came across this. Blows all that other crap out the box but they are not marketing it yet. WHY? Just as I said... not enough media out for people to want to spend fat cash on it. Im sure this TV would put the Raging Final Atomic Demon Buster on your savings account.

 

Source

 

Philips’ 56-inch HD 3D display has four times the standard resolution of any TV. That’s awesome. But the fact it can be watched with your own eyes without wearing silly glasses (or imposing a serious headache) is causing people to check themselves. Because they just might wreck themselves trying to figure out how it works and how to buy it.

 

Yesterday, Philips unveiled the first Quad Full / Autosteroscopic 3D HD TV (see pic below) at a 3D event in Hollywood, after years of development. Quad Full TVs push through data at such a fast rate that they increase a display’s screen resolution to a truly sick 3840×2160 (or 8.29 million pixels), four times the number of pixels of the highest HDTV standard.

 

That’s important for 3D-focused screens, because the data speed and high resolution is needed to create believable, high-quality 3D images.

 

Autostereoscopic displays are an important innovation because they produce good depth perception without the use of special glasses. As Prof. Neil Dodgson from the University of Cambridge’s Graphics and Imaging department notes, street advertisers have used 3-D displays most recently because it’s the only one of the four main markets where a glasses-based 3-D solution can’t be used.

 

The three other markets (entertainment, scientific and medical visualization, and remote manipulation) could wait until the unit’s resolution capabilities caught up to speed.

 

But now that the Quad HD 3D TV genie is out of the bag, the technology is ready to go mainstream. Except there’s one tiny, but important part that’s missing.

 

Autostereoscopic displays, Prof. Dodgson says, ‘have the potential of making an impact in the consumer market. However . . . there needs to be a significant amount of good content, which it is currently lacking. (told ya)

 

Because content is king, Philips will promote their 3D WoW Technology with the TV.

3D WoW rewrites regular HD programming to 3D (wills edit: crap 3D as seen in Clash of the Titans remake) so users can pick for themselves which specific blade in the 3D version of Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon will be coming at ya.

 

Still, Prof. Dodgson does think this TV significantly breaks the previous barrier of entry: the need for a compelling (read: real) 3D

experience with a great image quality.

 

The Quad 3D TV’s large collection of pixels produce images take advantage of the same ol’ right-left human optical trick, and its speed slaps the images together at once. This creates a large viewing angle (160 degrees) and a very high image contrast. Otherwise, the images wouldn’t pop out of the screen — they’d look transparent and uselessly weak.

 

Philips promises up to 46 views at once, which means the resolution is 23 times better than the crappy 3D you’ve seen before.

 

Yea... like I said... $25,000 price tag currently. Even though its still not on the market.

[ken_cinder]

The wii is (and im really sorry to all Nintendo heads) a big pile of junk.

What have Nintendo done for its faithful one super mario game with another in the works bar the side stroller?

No real new metroid (i haven't heard metroid on Wiis praise at all)

and a few games like punch out etc...

No graphical finesse, it may as well be a gamecube with some magic wands.

I fucking love nintendo but the past few years have seen nintendo surive on mainstream crap...

I still think its pretty much the end of hardcore nintendo.

 

I can't agree with that. I own a 360 and over 30 games, and while it gets the majority of my play, my GF also owns a Wii and I think it's awesome when effort is put into the games.

I bought Metroid Prime Trilogy for her Wii, and I love what they've done with the Wiimote for all 3 games. The problem is with devs that don't actually make use of the controller, and MAKE it a gimmick...little waggles to do something they should have programmed full motion to do ie; Swing a sword, swing the controller...not barely move it, or your sword barely moves, ya dig? This IS possible, the devs just have to actually do it, instead of just copying and pasting source from the SDK for basic motion into their code.

There is an accelerometer in the remote for a reason, it's just rarely used.

 

Too many 3rd party devs being lazy and trying to make a quick buck are the Wii's problem, the Wii itself is awesome and there are enough games all-told, to make it a respectable purchase.

If you want to talk Shovelware though...I STILL point the finger at the PS2. Touted as having the largest library ever? Sure, but once you pull all the junk out, you're left with what? Enough A list titles to count on 2 hands, and the B rated ones on my toes?

I don't count multi-platform games, remakes or arcade ports as titles for a system btw.

[emsley]

Sorry to hijack your thread here a little Grim.

 

You make a good point cinder about the crap been shovelled on to the wii we all know graphics Dont make a game awesome they only help we all know this we have played games long enough.

The last time a nintendo game genuinely got me pumped was prime on the cube.

If Nintendo Dont fly the flag on great games no one else will.

And while the wii prints money why change tactics?

When I look at a Wii games shelf I just go "fuck me...."

[solidius23]

nintendo has the rep of keeping the squeaky clean image,they let a lot of shit slide on the nes but on the snes they gave publishers hell for trying to release anything too edgy. and now adays they are really all about the casual mom and kid gamers of course they toss the fanboys a few bones every now and then, but the hardcore old school nintendo fans really dont have a say in what nintendo does now adays. as long as their two gimicky systems keep spitting out money for them they will continue on this path for a while .

[ken_cinder]

Hmmmm, indeed.

 

Ok how about this! I just erased a ton of text cause I came across this. Blows all that other crap out the box but they are not marketing it yet. WHY? Just as I said... not enough media out for people to want to spend fat cash on it. Im sure this TV would put the Raging Final Atomic Demon Buster on your savings account.

 

Source

 

Philips’ 56-inch HD 3D display has four times the standard resolution of any TV. That’s awesome. But the fact it can be watched with your own eyes without wearing silly glasses (or imposing a serious headache) is causing people to check themselves. Because they just might wreck themselves trying to figure out how it works and how to buy it.

 

Yesterday, Philips unveiled the first Quad Full / Autosteroscopic 3D HD TV (see pic below) at a 3D event in Hollywood, after years of development. Quad Full TVs push through data at such a fast rate that they increase a display’s screen resolution to a truly sick 3840×2160 (or 8.29 million pixels), four times the number of pixels of the highest HDTV standard.

 

That’s important for 3D-focused screens, because the data speed and high resolution is needed to create believable, high-quality 3D images.

 

Autostereoscopic displays are an important innovation because they produce good depth perception without the use of special glasses. As Prof. Neil Dodgson from the University of Cambridge’s Graphics and Imaging department notes, street advertisers have used 3-D displays most recently because it’s the only one of the four main markets where a glasses-based 3-D solution can’t be used.

 

The three other markets (entertainment, scientific and medical visualization, and remote manipulation) could wait until the unit’s resolution capabilities caught up to speed.

 

But now that the Quad HD 3D TV genie is out of the bag, the technology is ready to go mainstream. Except there’s one tiny, but important part that’s missing.

 

Autostereoscopic displays, Prof. Dodgson says, ‘have the potential of making an impact in the consumer market. However . . . there needs to be a significant amount of good content, which it is currently lacking. (told ya)

 

Because content is king, Philips will promote their 3D WoW Technology with the TV.

3D WoW rewrites regular HD programming to 3D (wills edit: crap 3D as seen in Clash of the Titans remake) so users can pick for themselves which specific blade in the 3D version of Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon will be coming at ya.

 

Still, Prof. Dodgson does think this TV significantly breaks the previous barrier of entry: the need for a compelling (read: real) 3D

experience with a great image quality.

 

The Quad 3D TV’s large collection of pixels produce images take advantage of the same ol’ right-left human optical trick, and its speed slaps the images together at once. This creates a large viewing angle (160 degrees) and a very high image contrast. Otherwise, the images wouldn’t pop out of the screen — they’d look transparent and uselessly weak.

 

Philips promises up to 46 views at once, which means the resolution is 23 times better than the crappy 3D you’ve seen before.

 

Yea... like I said... $25,000 price tag currently. Even though its still not on the market.

 

Do you forget that when Plasma sets came out, a 42" set would run you around the same? Yet here' the kicker with that, Plasma technology had been around for DECADES prior to it becoming consumer TV gear...

[Krosigrim]

Well the future better get here now damn it. I want 3D gaming goodness. I wanna check out 3D RE5 but dont want to get all the necessary stuff to check it out.

[VT-Vincent]

Emsley,

 

I think you're being a little too hard on Nintendo. For me, their biggest disappointment was the GameCube. The GameCube had technical superiority over every console of that generation, but it was marred by a hideous design, terrible controller and the most abysmal game library to ever grace a Nintendo console (excluding the VirtualBoy). There were only a small handful of games I enjoyed on that platform and even that was a stretch.

 

On the Wii, the first party lineup has been fantastic. We've seen more quality Mario titles on the Wii than any other platform in Nintendo history. The Zelda franchise received a much needed jumpstart and virtually all of Nintendo's other franchises are doing great. The only real downsides to the Wii are it's last-generation hardware and limited 3rd party development. I've never really considered hardware to be that important and the Wii is more than powerful enough to fulfill most developers visions. The lack of serious 3rd party development is their biggest problem right now... as I mentioned, the Wii's first-party lineup is great, but the problem is that's all I'm playing. I find myself going to the 360 for most of my other gaming needs.

 

...

 

On the original topic though, I've never actually seen any modern 3D movies. I'm cautiously optimistic about this transition and I always look forward to the advancement of technology.

[ken_cinder]

Emsley,

 

I think you're being a little too hard on Nintendo. For me, their biggest disappointment was the GameCube. The GameCube had technical superiority over every console of that generation, but it was marred by a hideous design, terrible controller and the most abysmal game library to ever grace a Nintendo console (excluding the VirtualBoy). There were only a small handful of games I enjoyed on that platform and even that was a stretch.

 

On the Wii, the first party lineup has been fantastic. We've seen more quality Mario titles on the Wii than any other platform in Nintendo history. The Zelda franchise received a much needed jumpstart and virtually all of Nintendo's other franchises are doing great. The only real downsides to the Wii are it's last-generation hardware and limited 3rd party development. I've never really considered hardware to be that important and the Wii is more than powerful enough to fulfill most developers visions. The lack of serious 3rd party development is their biggest problem right now... as I mentioned, the Wii's first-party lineup is great, but the problem is that's all I'm playing. I find myself going to the 360 for most of my other gaming needs.

 

...

 

On the original topic though, I've never actually seen any modern 3D movies. I'm cautiously optimistic about this transition and I always look forward to the advancement of technology.

 

Mostly disagreement on my part there too, the Cube controller is THE most ergonomic controller I've ever used, it's Analog shoulder buttons far superior to anything to date and just feels right in my hands. My only gripe is the ridiculously small d-pad.

 

Hideous design? I disagree 200% there, there is alot crammed in that little cube...that fits well anywhere you put it, and it looks nice too, if you have a platinum one like I do. In it's generation, it was THE best looking console. The PS2 and Xbox were abominations style-wise with what sat in my entertainment center.

 

I will agree with the lack of games, but I wouldn't call it abysmal...you're reaching there, and I'm willing to bet you simply don't know most titles to be had on the system.

[emsley]

I would happily go buy a Wii tomorrow if I had a great bunch of games to pick from, call me narrow minded but only mario galaxy springs to mind along with resident evil 4 and I pawn3d that game so hard on the cube that playing with wiimote would be like me been in a wheelchair and someone busting my tires.

Im hard wired to play resi 4 through a cube pad... (of which i like a lot!)

The new monster hunter looks pretty good though.

Besides that the Wii mote, I tried it with the Wii sports and played bowling and fuck me did i have to fucking launch that wii-mote to get the ball rifling down the isle.

Call me old fashioned but I want buttons not throwing my self round the room, which i understand could be fun but have yet to play a Wii game exstensivly and get used to the controls.

 

I just haven't heard enough things about the Wii to put it in the forefront of my mind...

[emsley]

Ok while Im at it I did a quick search for Wii "top games" and come up with this quick list. (as in A+ titles that are supposed to attract a gamer)

Super Smash Bros. Brawl (not for me I Dont have any friends)

Super Mario Galaxy

Resident Evil 4: Wii Edition (Sort of want)

WarioWare: Smooth Moves (A collection of mini games) Sounds like great fun to be honest but... Where are my zeldas? My excite bike?

The Beatles: Rock Band (I never liked guitar games besides I play guitar)

Tiger woods (golf is golf)

Okami (I heard of this and its supposed to be brilliant)

No More Heroes (seems like a great game)

 

A few others are stuff like the twightlight princess (already had it on cube) metroid 3 (average attempt so i read)

And the rest is a lot of mediocre or rehashed old school games...

 

Im sure it could be a lot of fun, but with the rate of great games at a snails pace there is no way I could get a Wii for my own personal tastes at the moment.

 

For the 360 and PS3 I could give you a huge list of titles making me want to jump on ASAP, The PS3 so far for me has been a great buy and there are new games coming out for it at a fast consistent rate. (red dead redmeption joygasim!)

Of all the people I know with a Wii none of them have super Mario galaxy.... Just some lame ass cooking games or some other mixed up madness.

Give me an epic zelda

give me excite-bike/Pilotwings/a metroid that oozes super and primes greatness with wii-mote controls, give me a game where i can seriosuly swing a sword round like promised 2 years ago and decapitate someone's arms and legs.

 

With its current standing I am still only luke warm about the games I can play on the Wii and do not see a future of greatness ahead, and if the good shit does come it seems like it is been drip fed from a super tight feed.

I dont want to buy a Wii fit I dont want to draw blobs of shit on my screen i can do that with photoshop, What is miyamato doing??

Honestly I want to be able to do this:

 

My new hot girlfreind calls me: Hi, you coming round tonight?

Me: Got a cold see you in a few days.

Back to zelda!!!

[VT-Vincent]

Mostly disagreement on my part there too, the Cube controller is THE most ergonomic controller I've ever used, it's Analog shoulder buttons far superior to anything to date and just feels right in my hands. My only gripe is the ridiculously small d-pad.

 

Hideous design? I disagree 200% there, there is alot crammed in that little cube...that fits well anywhere you put it, and it looks nice too, if you have a platinum one like I do. In it's generation, it was THE best looking console. The PS2 and Xbox were abominations style-wise with what sat in my entertainment center.

 

I will agree with the lack of games, but I wouldn't call it abysmal...you're reaching there, and I'm willing to bet you simply don't know most titles to be had on the system.

 

In terms of functionality, the cube's design wasn't bad. It was well cooled and as you said, it fit a lot of hardware into a tight space. My problems with it's design are mostly aesthetic. The original purple color made it look like a toy and the handle on the back seemed completely pointless. My entertainment center consists of game consoles almost exclusively and the cube (particularly with the Gameboy player) is awkwardly tall. I actually had to re-adjust my shelving just to accommodate opening the drive door.

 

I also beg to differ on the controller... I found it to be quite small and the D-pad is completely unusable. The face buttons on the controller were also awkwardly shaped. It worked for many of the first party games that were designed with it in mind, but many games are built around a standard diamond layout for the face buttons. While the cube's controller could emulate that layout, it was far from comfortable.

 

Lastly, on the topic of games - I don't deny there are some good titles on the cube, some I still play till this day but it just seemed like the first party support Nintendo consoles are known for was missing. To make matters worse, a lot of the first party titles on the system felt half-hearted at best (Sunshine, Double Dash, Thousand-Year Bore, etc.)

 

...

 

I agree that the Wii has a lot of crap on it, it was an unfortunate result of Nintendo's casual gaming push combined with the Wiimote. On the bright side though, if you're willing to sift through it, you'll find some of the finest games made in the last decade. One thing Nintendo could do to help their case is reel in developers like Ubisoft that produce games like their Imagine series. It's unbelievable how much shelf space they manage to take up with that crap. Even if they don't stop them from releasing them, they could at least cap it at only two or three per year to keep the clutter down.

[Agozer]

Might as well jump into this Nintendo conversation...

 

As far as the GameCube goes, the it had its system-sellers but those games were by large developed by Nintendo's in-house studios. True 3rd party support was piss poor, save for a very few exceptions. Another Mario game? Check. Another Pokemon game? Check? More Zelda? Definitely. Nintendo is notorious for recycling their "hits" ad nauseam thanks to the existing fanbase.

 

I've never really liked how the GameCube looked aesthetically - too boxy and toy-like + the original color scheme The GC controller, while definitely ergonomic, is otherwise a design nightmare for me. Along with the much-lambasted D-pad, the placement of the buttons pretty awkward, and I've never liked how the triggers feel.

 

Nintendo definitely gets props for introducing gaming to the casual audience with the Wii, but seeing the game library consist of game trash like Imagine Party Babies and its ilk makes me all the more concerned that even with the Virtual Console, Nintendo has completely sidestepped hardcore gamers and what they want from a gaming console. Then there's the seemingly endless parade of Wii ports of older games with motion controls tacked on for good measure, just because "Motion controls make the experience far better and justify charging full price for an old game". Like with the GameCube, some 3rd party efforts come out of the woodwork and turn out great (Dead Space: Extraction, MadWorld, etc.), but aren't nearly enough to cause much change in the otherwise extremely homogeneous game library.

[Krosigrim]

Yea but can it do 3D?

[The-Ice-Man]

I never liked Nintendo. I was always a Sega guy, and then Microsoft when Sega decided to ruin my life and not make any more consoles. It's only after I started getting properly into emulation that I've really played anything Nintendo. It's only looking back through emulation that I can see that the NES and SNES were actually quite awesome. I didn't know that the SNES was technically superior to the Mega Drive coz I never had one. But the N64 still failed compared to PSX and Saturn, purely coz it was cartridge based and just couldn't fit the same amount of content as the CDs on PSX and Saturn could, that and a shitty controller. Gamecube, on par mainly with the Xbox technically, apart from bad controller and games list. There are only a handful of games on the Gamecube that I really wanted to play, or more to the point, wanted to be ported to Xbox. Resi 1, Resi 0 and The Twin Snakes. The Wii, can seriously kiss my arse. Games that look like I could have made better 3D models myself in Milkshape? No thanks. Shaking a stick around? No thanks. The only thing I like about the Wii is the design of the console itself. It's size and look is much nicer than the 360 or PS3.

 

As for 3D, if they can make it so you don't need glasses, and I can actually see it, it's fine by me. But the price had better drop to the same as a regular TV, or I'll never buy it.