Rockstar's Dan Houser still cold on 3D

If 4D is time, and I have a copy of Prince of Persia, I think we're already there.

Wait a sec. How did we get 4D before 3D?

/not serious

Kinect is probably the one kind of tech that I would love to see 3d games with.

But everything else, I don't even think about it for games. I tried playing Black ops in 3d on the PS3, I felt like I was falling the entire time! OH THE VERTIGO!

his comment makes no sense, "no one has solved the riddle" ? what riddle? do you doubt its existence, or maybe its purpose? well let me help you , 3d is just about on the same level, as graphical evolution on games, it also serves the same purpose.
I can hear people flaming right now : "graphics don't make a game better"
well hotshot, next time you wanna use that line imagine U3, GOW3, MW3, Batman, Skyrim, ect, with 8 bit graphics and tell me that those games would have the same accolades that they are recieving.
3d is the future, whether you like it or not, its not there to enhance a game, gameplay wise, its there to enhance it graphically, just the same as 7.1 surround enhances the sound.
my 2 cents.

While I could live without 3D. Games like motorstorm and wipeout look fantastic and play really well on stereoscopic 3D, cut out the glasses, price and/or headaches and I'm game..

Also just a note to 3D artists. Stop drawing attention to 3D i.e make something fly at the screen. Games are usually better when 3D is just an optional extra dimension to view games in

Of course you can't integrate 3D into gameplay yet genius, the vast majority of the players don't have 3d enabled screens, it's a whole other story lacking a pure graphical advantage/gimmick than lacking in terms of gameplay experience!

i agree. I am not impressed with 3D tech for the most part. I have a 47" 120hz HDTV and nothing really is at 120 fps so its kinda pointless. TV is not in 3D for the most part hell, 1/4 of my cable channels arent even in HD yet.

Anyways until we can get tech like the Nintendo 3DS onto a big screen tv it will never be adopted. Sorry majority of people do not want to wear glasses (other than prescription for those that need it) to watch TV. "Hold on honey dont watch yet i have to put batteries in my glasses...wait crap we are out" or "dang it the dog ate my glasses how am i suppose to watch tv now."

I saw a 3D movie in theaters and it totally sucked. i have seen a football game in 3D, didnt really make me feel like i was there in person. I have seen/played killzone on 3D....NOT IMPRESSED.

I will not be dropping $3000 on a new 3D tv anytime soon.

Max Payne's Willem Defoe-esque grin is not a thing I'd ever want to see in 3-D, let alone 2-D.

We heard you wanted 4D so we made glasses for your glasses to give you that extra D.

At least, that's how I imagine it'll go.

"We want to say here and now that the moment 3D has a purpose, we're gonna start pushing for 4D, and just wait until you see the glasses you'll need for that."

That's easy, the Glasses of Nerdicon from Adventure Time.

"We want to say here and now that the moment 3D has a purpose, we're gonna start pushing for 4D, and just wait until you see the glasses you'll need for that."

That will require a brain implant and a continuous connection to The Matrix.

I understand peoples' point of views, but at the end of the day, they're just that: opinions (which are generally interesting and sometimes insightful). I'm not saying “2D to 3D” equally compares to “Stereo to 5.1”, or “Standard Definition to HD”, but for me in every case I've experienced, I prefer playing video games in 3D, just like I would choose 5.1 and HD given the choice. It's not that it enhances game play, as much as it enhances depth of field, immersion and the net entertainment experience (for me). I wish all games were in 3D, and I always purchase the 3D version over the 2D version if there's a choice (movies, games, etc.). Perhaps this issue is a case of "beauty" being in the eye of the beholder. I don't mind the glasses, or get headaches, which I'm sure helps my experience.

He's not cold on putting any old game on touchscreen devices.

This guy is a moron..why do you have to develop specific gameplay elements for 3D? Just the depth perception adds to the immersion. When I played Crysis, just seeing tracers zip down the street towards my target made it that much more exciting!

3D Brings you inside of the game, your spacial awareness is better. Why does this fool think they have to come up with something special because they are implementing it in 3D?

I'm convinced that there is a nation of nerds who dispise 3D...one because they already wear glases and glasses on glasses make them feel like 4x's the geek they are...and 2 because people who try 3D never calibrate their set up..so the 2 minutes they took to try it, it looks off and they foolishly give up on it.

PS and 3DS type of screen can only work for one person viewing it...or, several people will have to sit around the room in specific spots or distances to see the screen right...it also will not have the pop out feature nor be in HD..so wait for that all you want...I'll be enjoying the games they DO release in 3D

Not a Max Payn fan but if it was in 3D I would definitely buy...content is scarce right now.

So many individual elements in games do nothing for the actual gameplay but are still improvements. Ocarina of Time is a more pleasant experience in 3D and I'm looking forward to Super Mario 3D Land (which, by the way, actually does seem to integrate 3D into the gameplay).

I probably wouldn't play Max Payne in 3D just because I don't like 3D glasses, but I can see what it could add for people who don't mind the glasses.

I'll give an excellent example of 'solving the riddle':

Make a 3D Kinect Rubik's Cube game.

The Cube floats in front of you, the Kinect allows you to interact with the 3D cube. You can solve the cube, turn it around , toss it up and catch it, etc.

There.

Now... what current 3D game has such a thing?

None?

Then riddle is left unsolved and 3D is still bullshit.

I have a GT30 with Panasonic's 3rd generation active shutter glasses and I will tell you that Arkham City is a richer experience in 3D based solely upon the added sense of depth. There's no gimmick and trust me there's no lag, or graphic detail tradeoff. In all honesty, it's not so much about what more you can see as what more you can feel. I feel the distance to the next building far more than I did without the effect and for that I love it.

You really do need to try it. I won't play Arkham City without it now. It's not necessary but it's in no way bullshit. It's more of a luxury to optimize the experience along the same lines as surround sound.