emsley Posted April 28, 2010 Posted April 28, 2010 I think everyone is in agreement that great games on the wii for the hardcore are pretty much dried up. I always thought the first party games on the cube like Vinnie said about sunshine were defently missing something. Maybe when this Wii casual stuff dies down nintendo will come crawling back to its hardcore.
Krosigrim Posted April 28, 2010 Author Posted April 28, 2010 Did you just say SNES controllers suck? Your nuts. SNES controllers are some of the best. In no particular order except Playstations first of course... Playstation, SNES, Sega-6 button & Saturn all had the tightest controls plain and simple. Im referring to Fighting games as example. With those controls in my hands, any error was on my part. 360 controls... horrible. So... Bill Gates is interested in 3D and Sony is also looking into it. Im sure the next systems will be 3D capable (superior 3D) but what of this in the near future? I wonder if/when/what the first real 3D capable game will be. Capcom released a 3D version of RE5 but when will this start to take root?
The-Ice-Man Posted April 28, 2010 Posted April 28, 2010 Did you just say SNES controllers suck?Who me? No. I said N64 and Gamecube ones do.
Skythe Posted April 28, 2010 Posted April 28, 2010 I don't care for 3D so much that I watched Avatar in 2D on purpose just to piss everyone off.
The-Ice-Man Posted April 29, 2010 Posted April 29, 2010 They kept saying on the radio over here that Clash of the Titans was better in 2D. They were telling everyone not to see the 3D version.
ken_cinder Posted April 29, 2010 Posted April 29, 2010 They kept saying on the radio over here that Clash of the Titans was better in 2D. They were telling everyone not to see the 3D version. That's because the movie wasn't made in 3D like Avatar was, it had post-processing run on it.
Krosigrim Posted April 30, 2010 Author Posted April 30, 2010 They kept saying on the radio over here that Clash of the Titans was better in 2D. They were telling everyone not to see the 3D version. That's because the movie wasn't made in 3D like Avatar was, it had post-processing run on it.Indeed. The move was filmed in 2D and then they took various layers and artificially added depth. It looked much like a pop up book and that was pretty lame. Since you cant see in 3D Iceman (sidenote) Avitar had absolute depth. Immagine looking at a picture of a tree in the background... like on a poaster board. Avitar had actual depth so it didnt look like a picture book at all. Sidenote: I have been reading various techniques used for 3D viewing. I was wondering the extent of your inability to see them. Hmmm perhaps the technique used in that glassesless 3D TV will work for you?
The-Ice-Man Posted April 30, 2010 Posted April 30, 2010 Sidenote: I have been reading various techniques used for 3D viewing. I was wondering the extent of your inability to see them. Hmmm perhaps the technique used in that glassesless 3D TV will work for you?Maybe. All my optician told me was that it's something to do with the axis of my eye. And that as I get older, it may alter so I can see it again, like I used to be able to when I was younger.
ken_cinder Posted April 30, 2010 Posted April 30, 2010 They say too much masturbating makes one go cross-eyed...maybe thats why? Could affect depth perception.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now