Freeman's Mind 3D?

[sheridanm962]

AFAIK 3D vision technology has changed and has less strain on the eyes as much as the older technology.

 

Although I wouldn't care, either way we still have Freeman's Mind.

[Doctor Felix Whooves]

I think the 3d would just wast too much time and would not be worth it

[Alyxx Thorne]

Yeah it just seems like a waste of time for basically nothing.

[DeWolfeJV]

3D works for some things. For others, however, it does not. So it just depends how it looks really.

[Ross Scott]

My thoughts on S-3D (stereoscopic 3D):

 

GOOD 3D is flat out amazing. It's like you're in another world. I was using the Elsa Revelator shutter glasses back around 2000. When it worked well, it's been about the most immersive experience I've experienced in a game. I also saw an old 1950s alien movie in 3D before that was again, fantastic. There was real depth, things would pop out of the screen, it would make you duck and jump, etc. Very engrossing.

 

I have not seen good 3D in any modern movies so far. I've seen Avatar, Tron, and Pirates of the Caribbean 4 in the theater in 3D. All adventure movies that I felt had a chance to show off some eye candy. At best, they would have one scene that had any real depth at all, at worst, it's like it wasn't even on. Most of the time everything felt too flat and blurry. Avatar should have given me vertigo with the cliff scenes it had, instead it felt more like paper cutouts positioned at various depths, not wanting to push things too far.

 

My attitude on 3D is you either need to go all-out and make it the most immersive experience you possibly can, or not do it all. Do it half-assed (like the industry appears to be doing) and it's the worse than leaving it 2D.

 

I don't think I'll do it for Freeman's Mind, but I have had an idea of doing 3D for a Civil Protection episode for a couple years now. I wouldn't make it a regular thing, but I thought doing one episode to show people what GOOD 3d is like would be interesting. At the time it wasn't really possible with the Source recorder with any of the S-3D drivers, but that may have changed with SFM or by porting things to UDK. It's the sort of thing I can revisit at a later date.

[Alyxx Thorne]

I feel that 3D is just a gimmick that takes away the focus from the actual story and the actual content in what you are watching. It feels like a distraction most of the time instead of making you immersed, and I can feel immersed in any 2D movie if the story is engrossing and the characters are well written, so in most cases 3D feels just gimmicky and superfluous. I guess it's because of most 3D these days being half-assed as you say but it's hard to focus on the story with a migraine and barely being able to watch the movie because it's so dark compared to 2D screenings.

[Aldibar]

TRU DAT!! If you're going to go 3D you better go FULL ON ASSED!

[Vapymid]

I've confirmed that HL:S does indeed work with TriDef. If it can be recorded in a 3D format, which I'm fairly sure is possible, it can be done in 3D.

 

Somebody put a bunch of Black Mesa pictures, apparently made using TriDef, here.

 

I have to say that it looks like it works...

 

Regards

[Chuckthe2nd]

The only 3D film I have any hope for is The Hobbit. Given the fact that it's shot in 48 fps, instead of the usual 24, the problem with "blurry" 3D should be taken care of.

[Alyxx Thorne]

Dredd 3D was pretty awesome.

[scott155]

Hey, maybe by the time Half-Life 3 is released, affordable virtual reality will be available.