AfterDawn: Tech news

Microsoft: 3D gaming too expensive for consumers

Written by James Delahunty (Google+) @ 16 Jun 2010 22:00 User comments (10)

Microsoft: 3D gaming too expensive for consumers Microsoft's UK boss Neil Thompson has responded to Sony's E3 press conference by saying that 3D gaming is too expensive for consumers for now. Sony have attendees 3D glasses to view 3D content at the conference while revealing titles that will support 3D for the PS3.
PS3 users will need a 3D television for the effect to work. Thompson feels that the price involved with 3D gaming puts it a while off being mass market.

"If you look at the costs of entry into the living room and when that's going to become mass-market, we think the offering with Kinect and the natural user-interface we're bringing, that's a more compelling proposition for consumers over the coming years than maybe looking at 3D at this point."

Of course, Nintendo also promoted the 3D effect of its new 3DS handheld console, and that doesn't require an investment in 3D glasses, but for living room gaming, maybe Thompson has a point on price for now. As for Microsoft's Kinect, Thompson resisted providing any pricing information to Eurogamer.net.

"We haven't decided to announce that at this point and we'll make that decision in due course and then announce it in due course. We haven't landed on a date yet when exactly we'll announce it, but when we do we'll let you know."

Gamestop lists the Kinect at $150, which is largely expected to be around the price point Microsoft charges for the motion-sensing system.

Topics Consoles

More news

Previous Next

Related news

 

10 user comments

116.6.2010 22:56

I'm more excited about the 3d than the motion control. Could be just me but I see more positives coming out of 3d than the kinect.

216.6.2010 23:06

I am not sure I want motion control...but if I do, then I want it with 3D. Without 3D, what is the point?

316.6.2010 23:45

I honestly would prefer the Kinect over 3D gaming. I think the Kinect could do some great things to bring the gamer into the game play. 3D is just to expensive. Without the proper equipment you wouldn't even be able to see it. The Kinect just seems more reasonable right now. I don't plan on getting one but I think it's a great step towards something that can change the way games are played.

417.6.2010 3:40

prefer 3D,but as he said too expensive. gotta settle for kinect for now

517.6.2010 5:47

I just don't see what the Kinect is for. When it was first coming out, I assumed the kit would include 3D glasses...otherwise, that whole "interactivity" would be ruined by the fact that you are moving in 3D, to control a 2D plane (and 2D planes are better controlled by a mouse, or at least a game pad).

Now it seems that the 360 might not have 3D at all, virtually negating any benefits of Kinect. I can't say that I want PS Move...but at least I can imagine wanting it if it was paired well with 3D; if the 360 is staying 2D, then Kinect is nothing but a Wii with better graphics and fewer available games.

[rant]
With all the work they are putting into making these kinds of controls, I have to ask: Why can't I use a mouse in any game other than Unreal Tournament? How long would it take to make a driver that converts the signals from a usb keyboard and mouse into something that reads as sixaxis input? Why must I keep using a controller that is too sensitive to use a sniper rifle, yet is too slow to turn around if someone is sneaking up behind me? It would be so easy; and adding keyboard and mouse support would probably kill off about 1/2 of PC gaming...as many PC gamers don't care so much about superior graphics or game modding; they just want the good controls. [/rant]

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 17 Jun 2010 @ 6:02

617.6.2010 15:02

How many people will put their nice new 3d tvs through after trying to strike at that last object using their motion controller... hahaha ur going to need accidental damage insurance fur sure.

717.6.2010 15:26

Good point plasma247... with 3D, things sure going to get more realistic and exciting, hence more "accidents."

However, the thought of zombies actually right in front of you is really creepy. With a good surround sound system, you're gaming on the next level.

"3D is too expensive" argument in gaming is true, but it's only half expensive if you also count 3D movies/shows/sports... Buying 3D TVs just for gaming is just silly as buying a PS3 for Blu-rays only.


817.6.2010 16:10

Having tried both yesterday at E3 ... They both suck ! they're both cumbersome and a waste. 3D may have a brighter future just because its 3D , but when using it on the GT5 demo , it was more of a distraction and did not truly give me a sense of depth of field.

917.6.2010 22:10

Of course, MS will downplay ANYTHING until the next Xbox in 2012-2013 has it.

1018.6.2010 7:02
Fuzziwuzzi
Unverified new user

Should be noted, though, that Xbox 360 supports stereoscopic games and movies. James cameron's Avatar, or Crysis 2 from EA (announced at E3 in 3D for Xbox 360)... The article is a bit misleading, as it could be interpreted as Xbox 360 does not support 3D, which is obviously not true.

Comments have been disabled for this article.

News archive