View Single Post

Re: Nintendo Announces 3DS
Old 03-26-2010, 07:31 PM   #14
manasecret
aka George Washington
 
manasecret's Avatar
 
manasecret is offline
Location: New Orleans, LA/Houston, TX
Now Playing: CSS
Posts: 2,670
Default Re: Nintendo Announces 3DS

Quote:
Originally Posted by Typhoid View Post
Avatar was 3 hour 20 dollar movie.
The 3DS is a handheld game system with a screen smaller than your hand.



I don't know what you're not getting about the fact that the 3D illusion is ruined when you look off screen. 3D in any movie is shit when you're looking at things not in 3D.

Being that the screen is so small, the real world will always be in your peripheral vision, unless you're jamming your face against the screen.

I wasn't saying people aren't ready for 3D as a whole. 3D has been around for 20+ years.
I said 3D hasn't been tested in consoles or handhelds, so nobody including myself can definitively say it will or will not work. Which is why I'm stating opinions which you feel have to be needlessly argued with.
I'm not arguing your opinion on the matter. I'm arguing about sales. Which you still are dodging the issue on, I think. As for "needlessly arguing", well yeah, this is all in fun, I'm just having a bit of a fun (IMO) discussion.

Quote:
3D is tacky. It's a fad.
The reason Avatar sold well was because it wasn't standard 3D, it was like 3Dplus, not to mention it meshed real visuals with CGI seemlessly.
It didn't sell well because of 3D.
3D being viewed as successful is a by-product of Avatar releasing it in 3D.
If they didn't do it in 3D, and just had the human/CGI mesh, would you say that the next handheld should combine CGI and real life characters? Why not focus on that, instead.
Well, I agree with that, but I think our terminology is differing. I would say movies in 3D before Avatar, broadly speaking, were a fad. Avatar, in my opinion, is 3D. Anything else shouldn't be considered so.

(I am probably overstating that a bit, because Avatar is actually the only movie I've seen in 3D, though I've seen some clips of crappy versions of 3D in 3D.)

But, in my opinion, that doesn't mean Avatar's combination of CGI and real life characters is the only 3D worthy of the name 3D. I would consider any film that is filmed in 3D and meant for 3D, as worthy of the name 3D. The Dragon movie probably being one of them.

So, real 3D is not a fad, in my opinion. It is here to stay.
__________________
d^_^b
  Reply With Quote