Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Antonio, TX, USA
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I personally think the wording of this poll is biased. First of all, it should be a Yes/No question. Splitting the yes's already makes the no's look bigger, but then factoring in the language, it leads you into a "no", I mean any smart person wants to "Save your money!" right? Where are the exclamation points on the "yes" choices? Also, if you were already purchasing a TV, do you really pay that much of a premium for 3D support?
Even still, I'm a bit surprised by the responses here. I see Color, Discreet Surround, High Definition and Three Dimensions all on equal ground. None make a bad movie good, but all add to the senses for a more visceral experience if done correctly, and can detract if done poorly.
I for one, totally became a participant in the "Avatar" world in 3D, and after about 15 minutes of adjustment, was more like "what glasses? I'm on Pandora!"
For "Clash of the Titans" I never lost the sensation of "I'm watching a flat screen trying to be 3D through a pair of sunglasses". So it makes a huge difference if it's done well or not, but I wouldn't let that taint my view of the technology itself.
I'm not looking forward to the $$ it will cost me to support 3D at home since my HT is pretty current except for 3D support, but that doesn't mean I don't want 3D. I'm just going to have to wait a while (which could be a blessing in disguise since there may be a format war or a few iterations until it is done right).
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.