Ask questions to The Digital Bits team (Bill Hunt, Jeff Kleist et.al.)

[MerrickG]

Originally Posted by DaViD Boulet

It won't matter if 3D is only for select titles. 3D isn't a new format... the 3D discs play on all 2D players and v.v.

I'm assuming of course that 2D catalog classics remain in 2D and don't get "fake 3D processed" for 3D BD release. IMO that's the only proper way... actual 3D content in stereo 3D and 2D-original content in 2D. The exception IMO is with digitally animated titles that can be re-rendered in genuine 3D.

I know that 3D blurays will play in regular players in 2D mode, but it DOES matter if 3D is only for select titles, because the only way they can sell 3D to the masses is with content and the only way they can get content is with fake 3D processing on older titles. I just have a hard time seeing people investing in 3D if only a few select titles will benefit AND costs way more. $300 for 3D glasses on top of that. I mean.... good god.

Now, I AM curious to see what 3D can do for gaming. If Killzone 3D ends up being something special than Im willing to listen.

Now if 3D gets to regular costs or becomes mainstream (like 1080p & 120Hz) then sure many people will get it.

[MerrickG]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

For those who like NCIS, or are on the fence about the new NCIS-LA Blu-ray but like other shows from Paramount, I suggest you tip over that fence. Just saying.

If NCIS comes to bluray I'd be all over it.

[MerrickG]

Jeff,

It looks like Remedy made a terrible decision to make Alan Wake 360 exclusive. It sold only 145K and it took 5 years to develop. There is NO way they could have come close to recouping development costs.

Poor Remedy. I do hope this means it will see the light of day on the PC now.

[SpaceDog]

Surely any exclusive either involves a truckload of money or a limited window or both.

[Jeff Kleist]

It looks like Remedy made a terrible decision to make Alan Wake 360 exclusive. It sold only 145K and it took 5 years to develop. There is NO way they could have come close to recouping development costs.

Microsoft paid for the development. The PC is just a giant ball of piracy these days.

I'm pretty sure Alan Wake will eventually sell at least 4-500k, but everything in May got steamrollered by Red Dead. It was really really really retarded to stack those 3 games on the same day.

Fable 3 is going PC because they're going to try to microtransact their way to getting some money from it

[DaViD Boulet]

Originally Posted by merrick97

I know that 3D blurays will play in regular players in 2D mode, but it DOES matter if 3D is only for select titles, because the only way they can sell 3D to the masses is with content and the only way they can get content is with fake 3D processing on older titles. I just have a hard time seeing people investing in 3D if only a few select titles will benefit AND costs way more. $300 for 3D glasses on top of that. I mean.... good god.

Now, I AM curious to see what 3D can do for gaming. If Killzone 3D ends up being something special than Im willing to listen.

Now if 3D gets to regular costs or becomes mainstream (like 1080p & 120Hz) then sure many people will get it.

3D will go "mainstream" on TVs. Inn that sense, 10 years from now, everyone will have a 3D HDTV.

However, 3D content will never reach 100% because not everything is, or will be, in 3D. There will still be 2D TV shows and 2D blu-rays. However, the fact that The Wizard of Oz might be in 2D on Blu won't discourage someone from paying extra to get AVATAR in 3D on Blu-ray Disc.

[Uxi]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

Microsoft paid for the development. The PC is just a giant ball of piracy these days.

A bloody shame... just built a new rig (Core i7 930, x58, 6GB of tri-channel DDR3, etc) and it completely blows away the PS3 and 360, but PC gaming has always far surpassed consoles of the same generation.

I liked the old mechanisms they would use about taking a phrase or symbol from in the manual. Seems harder to defeat than the disc in drive thing (which is easily defeated... and annoying since direct to HDD install has always been superior from a performance, if not simply I/O standpoint). That coupled with microtransactions...

I am disappointed that the PC gaming section is so small these days, given the far superior ability. Especially in things like Flight sims. I'd kill for a modern rendition of ATF Gold.

[garyrc]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

They have 3D projectors in the works, you'll probably see some at CES. Obviously they're going to have to push a lot more lumens to be bright on the home screen.

They already have acoustically transparent screens

Oh, sorry Jeff, I wasn't very clear. I know they already have acoustically transparent screens, and I was about to buy one! I meant to ask if they could be used with 3D, now, or in the foreseeable future.

• I heard that Polaroid 3D won't work with acoustically transparent screens, and only the smooth non-depolarizing kinds of screens would -- like the grand DaLite Silver King of the 1950's, marketed for 3D slide projection, and the best of the best, best color fidelity, best brightness, just about the best sharpness -- providing you were sitting dead center in the one sweet spot chair. Any other viewers would be best off sitting in your lap, as I remember. Of course, they were not acoustically transparent!
• I also heard that the "one eye at a time" 3D would work with acoustically transparent screens, but the projectors would have to have a refresh time faster than a speeding bullet.

If you have heard, or hear in the future, any info about these matters, I'd be interested in hearing about it. Thanks

If 3D were more subtle and matter-of-fact, I would like it better. When there is a shot of extraordinary depth, even though I like it as a shot, it breaks the spell and takes me out of the story, like any other kind of photography that calls excessive attention to itself. In the rare film, it's O.K., as in Hitchcock's Dial M for Murder, with the scissors. Hitch was being playful, as usual. In a more serious film like Citizen Kane, Schindler's List, 2001, or Ben-Hur, I'd be afraid it would be a distraction.

[Jeff Kleist]

# I heard that Polaroid 3D won't work with acoustically transparent screens, and only the smooth non-depolarizing kinds of screens would -- like the grand DaLite Silver King of the 1950's, marketed for 3D slide projection, and the best of the best, best color fidelity, best brightness, just about the best sharpness -- providing you were sitting dead center in the one sweet spot chair. Any other viewers would be best off sitting in your lap, as I remember. Of course, they were not acoustically transparent!
# I also heard that the "one eye at a time" 3D would work with acoustically transparent screens, but the projectors would have to have a refresh time faster than a speeding bullet.

Polarized Polarized would not work with most current screens, you need a really high silver content and they would be EXTREMELY expensive compared to the regular, and hypothetically should work fine with existing screens. Obviously higher reflectivity=brighter and it has to get through the glasses. Any screen specifically designed for 3D is going for the tippy top of the high end and they'd be silly not to make them transparent

Any near-future consumer level 3D is going to use the same system the flat panels are

[MerrickG]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

Microsoft paid for the development. The PC is just a giant ball of piracy these days.

I'm pretty sure Alan Wake will eventually sell at least 4-500k, but everything in May got steamrollered by Red Dead. It was really really really retarded to stack those 3 games on the same day.

Fable 3 is going PC because they're going to try to microtransact their way to getting some money from it

Alan Wake will eventually probably make its way to PC.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by merrick97

The thing about 3D is that it will more or less be limited to new movies and not for old ones since they weren't filmed with 3D in mind. If they are going to charge a premium for 3D (they will) the discs had better do something unbelievable.

Unfortunately there is only one movie you can buy in 3D, cloudy with a chance of meatballs,(so the data is very thin) but the original 2D and now the 3D have the exact same MRSP.

[MerrickG]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

Unfortunately there is only one movie you can buy in 3D, cloudy with a chance of meatballs,(so the data is very thin) but the original 2D and now the 3D have the exact same MRSP.

the 3D version cost more than the regular 2D version.

On amazon the regular edition is $20 and the 3D is $28

I paid those prices during the format war and I am not going to again.

[spartanstew]

Originally Posted by merrick97

the 3D version cost more than the regular 2D version.

On amazon the regular edition is $20 and the 3D is $28

I paid those prices during the format war and I am not going to again.

What something costs at Amazon and MSRP are two different things.

The MSRP on them is the same ($39.95)

[MerrickG]

Originally Posted by spartanstew

What something costs at Amazon and MSRP are two different things.

The MSRP on them is the same ($39.95)

I don't get the point you are trying to make.

What I have to pay out of pocket is what matters to me and other consumers. The MSRP may be the same, but the cost to you and I isn't.

Am I missing your point? 3D has a chance if the cost of a 3D bluray is the same as a regular and/or the 3D bluray is the only edition released, but amazon at the moment is demonstrating that is CLEARLY not the case.

[Jeff Kleist]

What I have to pay out of pocket is what matters to me and other consumers. The MSRP may be the same, but the cost to you and I isn't.

Well, that's going to be the reality until there's enough volume to justify Amazon lowering that price.

[MerrickG]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

Well, that's going to be the reality until there's enough volume to justify Amazon lowering that price.

So does this mean that we will likely see seperate 3D AND 2D bluray discs when a new film is released? Or is this just a special case where the previously released 2D films are getting 3D re-releases?

Afterall, according to spec all bluray players can play 3D blurays as a 2D film.

Im ALL for 3D films being released on bluray, but I won't be buying it if there is a price premium, which there likely will be.

[MerrickG]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

Well, that's going to be the reality until there's enough volume to justify Amazon lowering that price.

Yep and thats what matters to me and everyone else.

[spartanstew]

Originally Posted by merrick97

Am I missing your point?

Yes, you are.

I bought cloudy with a chance of meatballs 3d from Fry's a couple of weeks ago for $19, so by your logic 3D is cheaper than non-3d, right?

The MSRP is the same. Different retailers will charge different amounts and that will always fluctuate from retailer to retailer and day to day. To compare true prices between products, you need to look at the MSRP. It's not a complicated process.

[MerrickG]

Originally Posted by spartanstew

Yes, you are.

I bought cloudy with a chance of meatballs 3d from Fry's a couple of weeks ago for $19, so by your logic 3D is cheaper than non-3d, right?

If this ends up being common then Ill buy the 3D version every time, but Im not naive enough to think that the 3D version will often be cheaper than the 2D version.

[Jeff Kleist]

So does this mean that we will likely see seperate 3D AND 2D bluray discs when a new film is released? Or is this just a special case where the previously released 2D films are getting 3D re-releases?

They're re-releasing, the entire idea is that they can put both on one disc