Nash said:
Red/blue glasses *is* stereoscopic 3D. As said before the black/white glasses work with polarised light and aren't possible at home.
The only alternative are shuttered-LCD glasses which aren't supercheap. Also, all forms of stereoscopic 3D would look like a blurry mess to anyone watching as they are showing both left and right eye images alternately or at the same time. Any spectators would have to have the glasses and also a controller for the glasses to sync with the display. A flip down display would need to have it's own screen and visuals streamed from the Revolution (unlikely to be done wirelessly), or have it's own display hardware (expensive). Any of these things are possible as add-ons (although problematic), but I don't think they'll be a major focus or supplied with the console.
And I just don't see the need for Nintendo to have any more 'hook' than the controller. It's already radically different from what's come before. And because of the controller there really is no point in showing the games unless you also show how they play. They said they'd wait until the games were ready to be shown, and that's all they are doing in my opinion. They may have shown the interface, and tech-demos, but not how it would be used in say a Mario or Zelda game. If they have a Mario64 style game in devlopment that uses the controller to create a new genre then it's understandable that they'd keep it under wraps until it's playable/close to release.
Well...you sound like you know more about how 3D works than I do...but I *sware* I've seen black'n'white glasses packed in a movie somewhere. Yes...yes I did...can't remember which movie, but they were cardboard (like the red'n'blue ones) with celiphan lenses. The one lense was basically see-thru, while the other was tinted. From the way I saw it the movie was normal without the glasses on, but with them, the left eye (clear lense) saw the normal picture while the right eye (tinted lense) is how certain images jumped out at you. That's where I got the idea of just one eye-peice that flips down from a communication headset, 'cos the other eye didn't even need anything special when I fooled around with the black'n'white glasses I used.
The 3D wasn't *that* great with the black'n'white glasses, but the overall color of the picture was less distorted than with red'n'blue 3D glasses. The best results I got from them were when the lights were out like in a theater.
You're saying that stereoscopic 3D is what red'n'blue glasses use, yet stereoscopic 3D is undoable? The NES, PS2 & PSP have all done it, so I don't see how the Revolution can't? You're also saying that spectaters would have to have 3D glasses or else it'd be blurry to them, which is something I already agreed to in my theory...cheap-o 3D glasses wouldn't be too much of a problem. I'm not suggesting a flip-down screen or LCD or anything either so I dunno what you mean to say there either.
The MAIN problem I see with my 3D theory is that it'd be hard to advertise the 3D aspect of it...that was a big problem with Virtual Boy too...you really couldn't get the point with a screenshot or even a commersial.
So maybe that kills the idea just from a practical stand-point. Plus, if Nintendo made a big deal about it, it would make no difference 'cos the competiting systems would also be able to do it too.
Maybe I'm wrong about 3D being the "surprize" as to why the games/visuals haven't been shown yet. I would love a 3D Star Fox though, even if was just with some goofy red'n'blue glasses. Maybe you're right, the controller is already pretty revolutionary and while 3D would be bad-ass for some games, it wouldn't really be a selling point for every other game.
The only other visual related theories are:
1) an official Revolution LCD that makes the system double as a mobile gaming system/portable DVD player...would explain what happened to that old GCN LCD project Nintendo was working on, the lack of a next GameBoy for the time being, the 480p stance (cheaper) & the systems small/quiet/low power consuming design would fit well with this
2) outputting to multiple screens for intant LAN gaming...would explain the PC monitor feature & the 480p stance (it might be too expensive to output to multiple screens at higher resolutions)
3) some form of hardware specific feature (like that cube-mapping idea) that helps give Revolution an edge despite being the "less powerful" of the 3...would explain the "wow" comment, why they've waited 'til after they unveiled the interface & fits with the Miyamoto clue in where he said that the controller would be easy to copy, but not the chipset
4) somehow, some way, the Revolution is easily on par power wise & visually with the other 2, thus surprizing us...doesn't fit with what Nintendo's whole philopophy or what they've been saying though & would be totally expensive to fit that into the Revolution shell
