Why 3-D Television will flop

"Hey, Paul, glad you can make it. Pumped for the game? Yeah, us, too. Hey, did you bring your 3-D glasses? No? Ah, well, we don't have any extras. Listen, do you mind just manning the snacks and drinks for the next three hours? Appreciate it, Paulie."

Expect to hear many variants of that conversation starting in June and lasting until corporate execs come to their senses.

[Chris399]

Er, wait.

/s

Some things flop, some don't. I think people will take to this. Especially with all the marketing and companies backing it.

I am curious however, as to what solution is available for people (like me) who occasionally wear glasses. There's an auto-stereo display option, which I believe works with no glasses; but it's tricky at certain distances. That's all I know about though. Even that is kinda neat though, 3D without the headgear in the comfort of your living room.

Unlike HD tvs, I won't be an early adopter on this tech. Gonna wait a bit for all the kinks to get worked out on the display end.

[thorstein]

If anyone has seen recent 3D movies, we KNOW that it isn't the same as the lame jump out at you stuff of decades ago.

3D>HD>SD.... and if they play their cards right, they will start with gamers as we tend to be more tech savvy, have deeper pockets for gadgets and electronics, and we tend to be early adopters.

[IdleLeeSiuLung]

I think the article raises some valid points. I guess razor thin profits margins in a recession isn't profiting high end TV sellers enough so they go and create a new market.

We will see, we will see.

[kneon]

I think we'll be using the glasses for a while yet. The non-glasses solutions usually include some sort of head tracking to adjust the image so that each eye only sees what it is supposed to see. Very cool tech, but I don't see how it can be made to work for more than one person. That's fine for a PC display but a show stopper for TVs.

There are also the systems that project a fully 3D image in space that you can actually walk around and see from all sides, but this seems impractical for a TV display and so far I've only ever seen them in quite small sizes.

[morganfell]

An MSN article attacking what Sony promoted in Vegas? No mystery there.

[Lightsaber]

This will be a huge flop. The masses just went out and got HD TV. Hell a lot of people havent even jump to HD yet. Now in a decession you want people to go out and spend 1-2k on a new TV when they just did that a few months ago ? People are just not willing to buy a new tv every 6 months. Must people I know havent their tv for at least 10 years. Even the ones that are really into new tech wont buy this cause they just got HD tv's.

[Genesis5]

I don't know how much regular TV I would watch with in 3D. But I sure would like to game in it.

[Eddie20101]

Why Microsoft and its loyal fanboys want anything that is not backed by Microsoft to fail.

The Yahoo article and this one are the same article, slight flaw in N4G's approval process, maybe.

[Anon1974]

The article complains about the price. We already know the sets aren't really going to be any more expensive then regular sets, so that's not really a factor.

They complain about lack of content, but then they defeat their own point. That's just a matter of time. When HD first rolled out there wasn't much content back then either, but update the PS3 to 3D and suddenly you've got a potential audience of 30 million people with 3D machines.

Don't like the glasses? Then don't watch 3D. Having to don a pair of glasses is a small trade off for the increased experience of watching movies in 3D. Doesn't the fact that something like 75% of Avatar's 1 billion dollars so far go a long way to prove there is an appetite for 3D? People could just as easily see it in the regular theaters, but they simply aren't. What does that tell you?

The cost of producing 3D content may be more, but that's just supply and demand. If people want it, companies will spend money to make sure they satisfy that need and make a tidy profit in the process.

I don't know what you guys think, but all these points seem pretty easy to shoot down. Is this article just trying to play devil's advocate or do they really believe, even in the face of Avatar's success, that there's really no appetite out there for 3D?

[ChozenWoan]

Somebody better alert ESPN, Discovery Channel, Imax, Panasonic, JVC, Comcast, Vizio, Samsung, LG, Disney, Direct Tv, and several other companies that they are all DOOOOOOMED!

ohh and here is a nice list of movies in 3D that will make their way into your home this year.

http://www.today3d.com/

Ohh and just a heads up...
I remember when TV was still only in Black and white. Look where we are today just 25-30years later.

[beardpapa]

probably not too bad, with a month's pay after taxes you can afford about 10 low end hdtvs and 1-2 high end ones. Most families I know nowadays have an hdtv or plan to fill up their bedrooms with one. Other people nowadays are more inclined to "donate" or throw away their hdtvs in favor of upgrading. It's not like back in the day where people bought one huge CRT and never thought of getting another tv after that PITA move thru the front doors.

Nowadays, it's black friday, lay tv flat in back seat of suv, drive home, set up new baby, love new wife.

[Narutone66]

I can choose the design of my 3D glasses. I want mine to look like ones designed by Oakley.

[morganfell]

Anyone know what a decession is? And for the record most people do not own a HDTV ...yet.

[Opie211]

Look at how long it took HDTV to gain mainstream appeal, and not even half the market has one yet. Hell, Homer Simpson was referencing HDTV more than 10 years ago in some episodes. That being said, I belive TV manaufacturers realize they don't want people to take 10-15 years to adopt this technology and will price the 3-D Capable TV more reasonably than the original HDTV's.

I find it pretty fishy that MSN.COM runs this article the day after Sony makes a big splash on the news about 3-D. Seems like someone is a little nervous about this being successful.

[orakga]

I always cringe when people claim something isn't being adopted fast enough when it "takes XX years for it to reach YY% penetration".

Do people have any idea how long it took CDs to reach 80% penetration? Do they remember WHEN CDs were introduced? And how long it took for that technology to reach "mainstream" status?

I hate late adopters who are vocal.
They're the most ignorant bunch on the internet.

[Optical_Matrix]

Lmao, not even 24hours and the pro-Xbox media is spreading FUD like butter on toast.

[XxDeathDoctorxX]

lol r they idiots sony workin on a way u dont need the glasses dumb idiots

[Omega4]

How do they plan to have 3D without glasses, i dont think thats even possible

[thor]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...

[Omega4]

Wow it does exsit. But eye-tracking 3D HDTVs sound extremely expensive, and everyone doesnt even have HDTVs yet.

3D got at least 5 years to go before it evens gets to the stage HDTV is now and thats if it even gets accepted outside of cinema.

[AEtherbane]

Apparently everyone and there mother has one on display at the CES. think about it, in 20 years, maybe even less, the traditional household will have goggless 3D TV's.
I think this will happen because if you look at the PC, nobody wanted one, but Bill Gates and Steve Jobs basically said "its our goal to put a pc in every household."
it will happen, and im happy i get to see it in my lifetime :D

[mrv321]

'Wow it does exsit. But eye-tracking 3D HDTVs sound extremely expensive, and everyone doesnt even have HDTVs yet.

3D got at least 5 years to go before it evens gets to the stage HDTV is now and thats if it even gets accepted outside of cinema.'

Seeing as last I check for a TV to support 3D it must run at 120Hz-200Hz, since most TV's can do that now I don't regarding the uptake. I mean I will be looking for a new HDTV soon and given the choice I'll be going with the 3D one.

[Doc Sony]

You don't think it's possible. And that is why you fail.

Jump Out, Play B3YOND and MAKE.BELIEVE

[cliffbo]

@Omega4

philips have already made a 3d lcd tv without the need for 3d glasses but it is very expensive and is only being shown to at shows so far and is not for sale at the moment but it may come out if they can get the tech price cheap enough

[Narutone66]

demo for 3d display without glasses personally on a 14" screen. I read about one with a bigger display. The price is a little bit expensive because of the fairly new technology. But just like the LCD TV it will come down in prices as time goes on.

[unrealgamer58]

lol this guy must be thinking about the old movies when you had to put youre 3d glasses for two seconds and never put them on for the rest of the movie

[Yomiro]

This is not the same old 3D tech.

[Ninji]

It won't. You just can't afford it so you're butthurt about it.

[DelbertGrady]

Cause we all know that technology people can't afford == instant success.

[facelike]

Some people may not be able to afford....for now. First, when people want something bad enough, then will find a way of getting it. If this tech is that much better, then people will find a way to buy one.

Second, from a business standpoint, if this recession end next year and the company you invested money is has a good business model, good 3D products and at the right price, then you are in a position to make a lot of money.

Investing money is like gambling, Sony is gambling this will take off and companies like Phillips, Disney, ESPN, etc like that bet and are putting money into it. If it flops, so be it, they all know the risk. But if it's successful, then these companies will make a hell of a lot of money.

These risks are what brings us all the technology we have today, and if we, as people, stop trying to push the boundaries and take risks, then we would have nothing.

[DelbertGrady]

Not saying it won't be successful, just pointing out the lack of login in Ninjis comment.

[SCThor]

Not instant but in the long run, yes. Look at PS3 or Blu-Ray

[Red Eyed Gamer]

PS3 will only sell 10m in its lifetime.
Blu ray will fail.
3-D TV will flop.

The media love there reverse psychology!

[frankymv]

This is a new MS viral marketing campaign....bash 3-D

[mattygamefreak]

..it's an option. What's wrong with variety? Give it five years and every T.V will be 3D enabled. No one is forcing you to buy a 3D T.V.

[thor]

We've had 3D technology for years and years. Why is it so great now? It's not as though a 3D image is completely lifelike because you can't focus yourself. It's a cool gimmick and you might go and see a short IMAX-3D film to experience it. It's not worth shelling out money on a new TV for.

[iiprotocolii]

If anyone has seen Avatar in 3D DLP, they wouldn't be saying that 3D will fail. And as thor posted above, they are doing it so we *won't* need any headgear. 3D has remained a success for years in the theaters; there just wasn't an efficient way to bring the technology to the home front that was appealing and inexpensive. With every passing day, people want to experience things in the most realistic ways possible. 3DTVs, depending on the price and how it's marketed, might do well. It all depends on whether or not our current market calls for it (and it would be a great thing in gaming).

[AEtherbane]

3d TV's will flop just as much as they said HD tv's would.

[LostDjinn]

http://www.n4g.com/tech/New...
Duplicate flop flop is flop.

Sorry. Everybody else was doing it.

[deno]

Yeah good luck watching the news and wearing glasses 24/7 3-D is good for about a couple days and then you get nausea and headaches. It will flop believe me.

[kneon]

Just like many news broadcasts are not in HD even on stations that are, I don't expect to see too many news broadcasts in 3D either. I try not to watch TV 24/7 but if I did, and I had a 3D capable TV, then I'm sure I could chose to watch it in 2D. It should be trivial to display 3D content in 2D, you just ignore every other frame.

3D will likely only be used where it makes sense, I don't need to watch the weather channel in 3D but there are plenty of movies that are or would be awesome in 3D.

[DethWish]

It definately won't flop, it might just not be adapted as quickly as some say/hope. Give it time.

[Ares84PS3]

I highly doubt it though. Many people love 3D. Let's hope they can work out a way to loose the glasses though.

[xcox]

let's be serious here, who would ever think this could be good for games???

[silverchode]

the same people who tought mgs4 would be the end for the 360

[ReBurn]

My personal feeling on 3D is that it isn't going to be as big as hoped, but it will enjoy moderate success as a niche market. I know that I have no desire to have to sit in front of my TV with special glasses. And if they don't fit over my regular glasses then the whole thing is useless to me.

But I understand that some folks are excited about this and are looking forward to it. I hope that they enjoy it when it is available.

[Neo604]

without Sony you all will be stuck in lasdtgen.

[Jdoki]

"...did you bring your 3-D glasses? No? Ah, well, we don't have any extras."

What a lame argument - you could just as easily switch '3-D glasses' with 'controller' in that sentence.

Plus I'd be shocked if every major game released for the foreseeable future didn't have a non-3D mode/option.

This 'article' is nitpicking.

[Godmars290]

An article from two different sites, which just happen to have connections to MS, written by the exact same author.

[avengers1978]

Price, the TV's themselves will be expensive, and the first generation won't be good, plus you got to buy the glasses, and Hell there are 6 to 8 people that regularly watch movies and play games at my house...who can afford that crap.

[bjornbear]

oh come on....spare me.

same site...same author...ehm =P who's MS been paying eh? EH? xD

[Godmars290]

Same article, but different sites.

Please pay attention :p

[bjornbear]

dude its confusing enough to consider WHY....=S

[DitkaKenobi]

Philips has already created a TV that does 3D without glasses.

http://www.markstechnologyn...

Also, if someone makes a RealD 3D(used in Avatar)TV, I don't see the glasses being an issue, since they're so cheap to produce. If I can have that in my living room, I'm down for it.