In a presentation detailing Sony's plans to become profitable by the end of 2010, Sony revealed plans to upgrade Playstation 3 consoles with full 3D support.
The news supports previous reports on Sony's 3D PlayStation 3 strategy, suggesting that a firmware upgrade would introduce the capability to existing consoles. Not only does Sony plan on upgrading the console to support 3D, but release games in 3D as well in order to take advantage of the enhanced capabilities.
Of course, 3D games and 3D televisions would go hand-in-hand, so adding the capability to the PlayStation 3 would definitely help drive at least a few television sales.
Would you purchase a new television to support 3D gaming, or is Sony seeing things?
I've only just bought myself a HDTV recently... so no I won't be buying any 3D tv anytime soon. I might be interested in purchasing some third party peripheral that would enable 3d gaming if any such thing becomes available, although I would wait and see what what games would take adavantage of it first though.
I don't get it. Here in the UK there have been quite a few shows on TV recently (including in HD) where they were showing 3D images. Why do we need a 3D television set to get 3D? Surely the PS3 could just output the image in the 3D style, and we could then use 3D glasses to see it?
What does getting a 3D TV bring us over the current method of 3D glasses?
I don't get it. Here in the UK there have been quite a few shows on TV recently (including in HD) where they were showing 3D images. Why do we need a 3D television set to get 3D? Surely the PS3 could just output the image in the 3D style, and we could then use 3D glasses to see it?
What does getting a 3D TV bring us over the current method of 3D glasses?
The new TV's can do 3d similar to the way theaters do. It is a more effective 3d simuylation and it has the added benefit of not overly killing the color.
A regular TV can't do this.
3D Ready means that the TV uses a new Texas Instruments' DLP system for 3D glasses.
There is a socket connector on these HDTV sets for wireless 3D glasses.
1 stripe purple belt in JiuJitsu (good grief this takes FOREVER hahah)
I see, so it's down to the quality of the image - it being better if you have a dedicated set. I guess i'll need to wait to see just how poor the quality and colours are without a dedicated set. Would make sense for Sony to implement the functionality for people that don't have a 3DTV but are happy with their HDTV and a set of glasses...
I see, so it's down to the quality of the image - it being better if you have a dedicated set. I guess i'll need to wait to see just how poor the quality and colours are without a dedicated set. Would make sense for Sony to implement the functionality for people that don't have a 3DTV but are happy with their HDTV and a set of glasses...
The 3d wont work without a dedicated set if it is for 3d ready tvs only.
And, DLP 3d still requires glasses.
Its a totally different 3d system than the blue/green type.
1 stripe purple belt in JiuJitsu (good grief this takes FOREVER hahah)
If this is the same technology that uses the shutter glasses then I'll pass. It's pretty amazing at first, but something that you can really live without. I got a pair of those that are collecting dust in the corner right now. I'm hoping they have something else up the sleeve.
This is the 120hz HDTV/60hz per-eye stutter glasses, yes, not the old 60hz monitor/30 per-eye stutter crap that we had in the 90s. This is the only technology to have 3D as far as I know, that's how IMAX3D projectors work (there is also to polarization but it's nowhere near as good).
How many monitors did you own that are locked at 60Hz, especially in the 90's? The crap you are talking about was used on CRTs which work well above 120Hz. HDTV doesn't matter as the slow ass card I used for those was easily capable of HD and beyond. There is nothing new about this. It's fun as a gimmick, that is all.
btw. IMAX3D never used the shutter glasses tech. It's a movie filmed with two cameras, displayed by two projectors and all comes together using polarized lenses.
Last edited by nerrd on Sat, 21st Nov 2009 01:41; edited 1 time in total
Haha I remember people like you saying that 3D graphics accelerators were gimmicks back in the day. Then people said HD is only a gimmick.
You know what, even if it is a gimmick, if it makes my experience as a user better than without (and I can actually afford this stuff ), then who the hell cares if it's a gimmick or not.
Of course I used it. They were called ELSA3D or something, and I used them a lot until they broke and I couldn't find a replacement (I wasn't as tech savvy back then). You seem to think everyone has the same taste as you, and whatever you find uninteresting, everyone else does as well.
But hey, who am I to try and stop you from tilting at windmills.
Man. I enjoyed the glasses, and used them for quite some time. But I'm not anymore, although I could easily plug them in right now. Having said that, I don't miss them at all right now. Thats what makes it a gimmick. If you think everyone will jump on this tech (like HDTV or 3D accelerators, by your example) you are truly mistaken.
I don't know if everyone will jump. I just know it's something enjoyable, and I know a lot of cinema is pushing toward that direction. Sure, most is done not that effective, but more and more are moving toward that. Avatar and Battle Angel, for example, huge deals (and serious things, not kids stuff) have been shot entirely with such tech in mind. So calling it a gimmick is a bit silly, when you have such a huge movement toward it.
My mom to this day wonders why I bought an HDTV, when she sees everything just fine on her huge CRT. To her this new trend of HDTV and LCDs is a gimmick. Who is in the right? Just like calling the Nintendo motion sensing controller a gimmick, when you have both Sony and MS scrambling to get a similar controller. So you may not like it, but there is large enough audience that thinks it's good and necessary for their enjoyment.
Avatar was shot in 24fps per eye, so its still a stutterfest. Whats shown in cinemas i dont know. But arent both frames displayed at the same time ?
Games in 3D on the ps3 ? That doesnt sound possible with current shutter or polarising stuff. I mean the Ps3 struggles with 30fps games, now it would need to render 60fps...
Current TVs cant produce the images for the shutterglass technique, as they are to fucking slow.
2010 3D LCD TVs still seem to be too slow, as ghosting and what not has been reported.
2009 Plasmas were to slow as well (stupid phosphor retention), but so far there was no review on 2010 models and im still waiting for that.
Avatar is displayed with 72 fps per eye (L1 R1 L1 R1 L1 R1 L2 R2 L2 R2 L2 R2 L3 R3...) - 144 total refreshes.
Playstation 3 will use shutter glasses with 60Hz per eye. Actually FPS will be interpolated between those.
Signature/Avatar nuking: none (can be changed in your profile)
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
), then who the hell cares if it's a gimmick or not.
