Comment on By technical standards were 3D TVs impressive, Why didn't they catch on back then?
IonTempted@lemmynsfw.com 16 hours agoYeah but it’s ten times as immersive as 3D, How would you replace it.
Comment on By technical standards were 3D TVs impressive, Why didn't they catch on back then?
IonTempted@lemmynsfw.com 16 hours agoYeah but it’s ten times as immersive as 3D, How would you replace it.
froh42@lemmy.world 15 hours ago
I had a TV that was 3D capable along with a PS3. I think I played 30 minutes of 3D games on that TV before I got a headache from the flickering shutter glasses and then they staid in the drawer below them tv for a year ar or two. Next time I wanted to try the batteries were empty.
I also saw a number of 3D movies in the cinema but it’s more for block busters and after a while it just is “meh”.
It’s a wow effect in the beginning, but in the end it’s just a gimmick.
Son_of_Macha@lemmy.cafe 12 hours ago
Also you go to watch a movie on a giant screen and walk you can see are the frames of the 3d glasses.
IonTempted@lemmynsfw.com 14 hours ago
How do you compare it to VR.
froh42@lemmy.world 14 hours ago
I don’t have a lot of VR experience, but for me being “in” a scene does it for VR, while 3D Glasses are still meh.
Try non-stereoscooic VR by just closing one eye while using your headset - it’s still great. The difference is the one between stereoscopic tvs and normal ones.