Slashdot Mirror
Sony Teases 3D Playstation 3
Ars Technica has a brief report from CES, where Sony demonstrated the work they've done to bring 3D technology to the PS3. Quoting:
"The idea was just to show the technology to people, to see if they would be interested in sitting at home, wearing a dorky set of black glasses, watching content in 3D. I couldn't pry details about how the 3D affect was achieved, or if the display could turn any source into 3D, but what's clear is that, glasses or no, the 3D affect is amazing. Sony showed off Wipeout HD running in true 3D, and I was ready to whip out my credit card right there. Frank and I both agreed, this was one of the best demos of 3D technology we have ever seen."
I'm hopeful that Sony pulls this off and manages to get 3D-TVs to be the norm. Starting with gamers is a good way to do that, too.
Of course, if they have patents on this technology and nobody else can do it, it'll die an early death... Especially since Sony TVs are so heavily overpriced to begin with.
"If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
But it's not just the tech that's needed for these new fangled televisions and PS3s... it's the content. The whole world archive of tv/film footage would most likely be useless for conversion to 3D and I just can't see the point of buying a new TV and another bloody playstation to watch a couple of mediocre films and play a few games. If I want good 3D I'll go to the theatre (or a specialst cinema).
I'm pretty sure the author means "effect" instead of "affect".
Dorky reference: http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/affect-versus-effect.aspx
Man, I've got this bridge that would make a wonderful investment.
... they do something?
At first I was only a little incredulous that someone loved Sony products so much, but then I saw the dead give-away:
You got greedy.
Playstation 3 cries in a corner. Parents sue for therapy bills.
So is it just me or does this bear a striking resemblance to Nvidia's recent demo of shutter glasses combined with a 120Hz HDTV. To me the black glasses are a dead giveaway.
As far as the "any source" part is concerned, let's not be silly here, you need concrete depth information. Sure our brains can infer this information but the sheer processing grunt required for a computer to do this means it will not be done any time soon at least not in realtime on full motion video.
I am embarrassed for Ars Technica and more than a little disappointed.
1 million dollars on virtual furniture? Expect a sharp rise in Brawndo sales.
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
And yet it's outselling the PS3 by a fair margin (not that it matters, the Wii is beating both by far). Doesn't look like people care about secondary issues like that.
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
1) Come last in the present generation by releasing the most expensive console.
2) Release a console in the next generation that requires everyone to buy a new TV to support it.
3) ???????
4) Profit!
sorry but someoen is going to have to show me actual end user purchase rates for blueray vs population and dvd vs population over time before i will even moderatly entertain the idea that bluray is catching on faster than dvd did from vhs
'...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
Apparantly the person who replied to him/her does, or that person wouldn't have bothered replying.
Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
It's the top result returned from this search.
"There are no facts, only interpretations." --Friedrich Nietzsche.
My theory is that the success of HDTV and BluRay is entirely due to the ridiculously easy access to credit over the past few years. People get credit cards with huge limits and can suddenly "afford" thousand dollar TVs, so they go out and buy them.
HDTV and BluRay adoption rates will slow dramatically now that the credit market has collapsed, especially since HDTVs are still far too expensive for the average person to buy without credit.
I forget, wasn't Sony working with NVidia to make their graphics chip... I guess NVidia just wanted to steal the spotlight to sell more PC graphics cards...
Yes, I am obsessed with ellipses.
Now, the Playstation 3 can suck in more than one dimension!
Don't rush me, Sonny. You rush a miracle man, you get rotten miracles.
Seriously, anything that can get some more decent exclusives for Sony is a good thing. I bought my PS3 two years ago hoping for a lot. And so far I've used it mostly as a blu-ray player only. Metal Gear Solid 4 was good, as was Warhawk (Little Big Planet is supposedly cool too, but I haven't played it). But, other than that, it's mostly ports of games that end up looking and playing better on the cheaper Xbox 360 (and it doesn't help that I like Xbox Live and the Xbox controller better too). As a big fan of Second Life, I even had high hopes for Playstation Home. But even that ended up being a huge disappointment.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
It seems to me that it's something similar to the Real D technology (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_D_Cinema).
360 is only failing in Japan. I'm in Europe and most of my friends have a 360. I only know 3 people with a PS3, compared to 11 with a 360. VGchartz might not be totally accurate, but theyre pretty close. In comparison shots, most games have better graphics on 360. Also, I wonder who loses more money on it's console, MS or Sony. Hint: It starts with an S. Now go back under that bridge from where you came. The hobos are wondering where you went.
That is the greatest website ever
See those underlined words in the post above?
Those are called "hyperlinks".
When you position your "pointer" on them, using your "mouse device", and "click" on them they will take you to another "web site".
There is text on these "web sites".
Read it.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
i do not belive that only 5% of homes in the US have a DVD player while 7% have a blueray player..
Who is trying to get you to believe that? Did you bother to read the title of the chart? It's the number of homes that have it after 3 years of the technology being released. It's pretty easy to believe that for example 5% of homes would have a PS3 and another 1 or 2% would have dedicated blu-ray players, that kind of thing.
which is totally what she said
In 2006 Ken Kutaragi proclaimed that with the PS3 came "4D gaming". It seems that his retirement from Sony in August 2007 has stripped the PS3 of 2 entire dimensions. Sony engineers have only now been able to recover one of the lost dimensions via the use of specialised goggles, and it is not clear if the PS3 will ever return to 4D status.
When asked for comment, Mr Kutaragi noted that "Dimensions are but an illusion. Inside all of our souls is the true energy of dimensionality," before deep-throating the microphone and phasing back into the universe from whence he came.
Wait, let me guess! You get your console 'sales figures' from vgchartz...
Let me guess, you're getting yours from your ass. Sure, "fabricated". The whole world is involved in a conspiracy to make Sony look bad! Everyone is trying to deny the superiority of the PS3! It really sold 100 million!
The PS3 is dead last because Sony is a bunch of arrogant assholes who thought that throwing tons of features noone wants into a system and upping the price accordingly (while talking about how people will get a second job to buy one) is the winning combination. They're getting obliterated by a cheap, in the eyes of the increasingly irrelevant hardcore gamers crappy, console that improved the part about the whole experience that people actually wanted improved: Accessibility!
Meanwhile "hardcore" gaming is going down the toilet with ever increasing budgets that the sales can't make up for (leading to bankrupcies and downsizings), games becoming more and more passive in order to pull of their cinematic moments because players by themselves aren't particularly cinematic so everything has to be automated or cutscened, difficulties drop because noone wants to rewatch scenes from a movie and lengths are going down because every damn hallway takes forever to make while the player runs through it in 5 minutes. Oh and exclusivity? Not gonna happen with these budgets, every single game is 360/PS3/PC all at the same time with the PC version 25€ cheaper. And if you pay those insane 70€ per game prices you get to buy horse armor and more for additional money. PS3 vs 360 flamewars are getting retarded anyway with both consoles being practically the same ("baaaaaaw 50€ per year online service!" "baaaaaaw 400€ console!" "baaaaaw prettier graphics!" "baaaaw Final Fantasy 13 no longer exclusive!"), it's a ridiculous battle fueled by both companies that drives up their presence in the internet media in order to hide that both are being obliterated by a console that completely ignored all the "advantages" of the next generation.
XBox 360 vs PS3 is a red herring, they want you to forget that they didn't even put up a fight when the Wii came along. The "HD" companies listened so much to the internet circle jerk they completely lost touch with what the masses out there wanted.
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
Haha, I certainly didn't expect this. Is this common?
Very common, unfortunately... but always posted by anonymous cowards, so it can be filtered out.
Tasty herring, eh?
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
To me the black glasses are a dead giveaway.
Why? Polarized glasses like you would get at a 3D movie are also shaded like that.
It's too bad they didn't look more closely. The telltale of a shutter would be if you could find some sort of transmission to the glasses to synchronize the shutter. The NVIDIA system uses IR which would be a piece a cake to spot using a digital camera. Alternately, if it was IR they would be able to block the receiver with their hand, stopping the 3D effect. If they were using RF, it would be harder to spot, although it is possible they might see a flicker if they looked at a florescent light.
Polarized glasses would be even easier to check for. I doubt they would be normal polarized glasses, because then the image would degrade if your head was exactly perpendicular to the display. They would more likely be circular polarized, which could still be easily checked with a pair of glasses or a mirror.
Given Sony's expertise in TV/monitor manufacturing, and the fact that all the press releases talk about a new display, it seems more likely to me that they created a display with alternate polarization on each column. Without the glasses and with a normal video source this would appear like a normal display. But with the glasses, each eye would see an image with half the horizontal resolution of the display, and the output source could interlace these images to provide a different image to each eye.
Belief or lack of belief is not a very convincing argument here. I would focus on the fact that the chart says BluRay/PS3. All that chart really tells you is that the PS3 has been selling about as well as can be expected.
I bought a PS3 in March of '07, and in that time I have watched exactly one BluRay movie on it. Even that was because a friend of mine was curious to see how it looked, and rented 300. I'll bite if someone shows some real numbers about software sales, instead of a roundabout way of saying 20 million people own a PS3.
I mean yes up close 3d stereoscopic visuals is nice and all but once things are even a little bit away I don't think you eyes use parallax to gauge distance anyway. (I don't know of the top of my head what the actual distance where parallax no longer works in the real world for human vision.) Admittedly I'm kind of jaded on this, they tried it in the 80's with TV when I was a kid and it didn't work that well. They tried it on the NES and SMS and it didn't work that well. (The SMS had a cool liquid crystal shutter system though.) I saw versions on the PC in the 90's which didn't work that well. So I'd figure this one would be kind of pointless.
Did you know 80 to 90% of the moderators on slashdot wouldn't recognize a troll even if one dragged them under a bridge.
The glasses in the picture look like Circular Passive Polarized ones sold by RealD. These glasses are used either with Passive-Polarized LCD monitors or more complicated passive-polarized dual projection systems (or an actively polarized Z-Screen if you're really rich).
The advantage of this technology is that you DON'T need a high refresh rate, and the technology does not cut the refresh rate in half (instead, it cuts the resolution in half, but you hardly notice when you're playing the game).
Google Arisawa P240W (high end, $2000, best I've seen on a 24" monitor) or Zalman Trimon (low end, $500, still acceptable).
I hope Sony puts 3D capable PS machines on the market. Then 3D will make sense for game parlor type of places, which is where it is most suited right now.
Disclaimer: I own a company that distributes these monitors...
"Nyah, nyah, 3-D Playstation 3... Yo' momma had a card reader, and enough USB ports for everyone to hook up..."
Bow-ties are cool.
Neeeeerrrrrrdd rrrraaaaagggggeeeee!
Sony's check is in the mail.
I recently had a discussion with a friend who works at Id. He says that their new engine has virtually identical quality on both the PS3 and 360, which fixes one huge issue with the Unreal engine that so many companies have been using. So, hopefully, as more games come out using Id tech, there will be greater parity between the consoles. For Id's latest game, the DVD capacity vs Bluray capacity supposedly hurts the 360 graphics relative to the PS3.
Yeah, I want an 802.11n router with web bittorrent support, external harddrive support and eventually wireless audio to.
It will be hard to find one though so I'm starting to considering getting a netbook with an external HDD and eventually an OS supporting airfoil and max it with RAM and use that one instead.
I assume all wireless cards can work as accesspoints? Or do I need anything special for that?
Netbook = Not that high energy consumption, lots of processing power for the purpose, lots of RAM for handling lots of torrents.
External drives = Awesome for time machine backup purposes and bittorrent.
Whatever unix(-like) OS and some web interface for torrents = No need to download files on my laptop.
Airfoil = Works as wireless "speaker" for my laptop, no need for cables.
It works on XP and Vista with the vast majority of games available today. It's completely changed the way I game. Check it out. http://www.nvidia.com/object/3d_stereo.html
I was all psyched on the nVidia glasses until I pictured my fat ass sitting in the middle of the living room, dawning them and headphones playing video games. I think this TV would be the better way to go.
Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
Check out this clown's idiotic post history and the irony of him fretting about filtering out garbage...
Please do!
id give you modpoints if i had any.
Dungeon Tactics : Free Open Source SRPG
Because if you cant back up what you say with references, then you are just blowing smoke out your ass. It really comes down to what you were taught in grade 3 when you did your first research report and had to cite sources. Every fact had to be cited, and what wasn't was deemed to be fabricated. So it doesn't matter whether you care or not, you took the time to post a "fact" and should defend it.
That said a biased report was just released at CES 2009 showing that Blue-Rays 3 year adoption rate is actually 3% higher than the DVD at the 3 year mark. Good news for Blue Ray right? Well the problem comes when comparing DVD Movie sales to Blue Ray Movie Sales and the results aren't so close. The number of Blue Ray movies sold is 30 million after 3 years of sales. DVD movie sales however were at just under 130million movies sold after 3years. Why the difference in numbers?
Well I couldn't really find too many reliable explanations, most point out the fact (along with other posters in this thread) is that Blue Ray hardware is being given away for almost free. Buying an LCD TV? Take a Blue Ray player for 50bucks with 3 movies. The PS3 includes a Blue Ray player which COUNTS under the Blue Ray associations numbers. Much like the PS2 counted under the DVD sales numbers. Anyways this is all just speculation, but just thought Id do the GGP's homework for him/her as I was interested to see if he/she was actually correct.
"PS3 vs 360 flamewars are getting retarded anyway"
I totally agree. So are rants about how much better the Wii is doing over either of those systems, as though there's some kind of point in a statement like that. Miley Cyrus and Britney Spears sell a lot of records. That doesn't really testify to the quality of their music, though, does it?
I don't have anything against the Wii. In fact, I think the Wii serves a vital purpose, which is to pull in new gamers and help insure future relevance for the gaming industry. That's all well and good, but as someone who's been gaming for over 15 years, I've long since passed the point where mini-games and simple games can hold my attention for very long. This is not a trend specific to videogames. Growing up, I watched cheesy Nickelodeon shows with joy. I went to movies with generic plots and walked away happy. I read R.L. Stine and thought his books were awesome. But as with most things, eventually I grew tired of the simplicity and generic quality of such things and moved onto things with a little more complexity and emotion.
A common trend in a lot of Wii-friendly posts (including yours) is that Nintendo got it right by creating a system geared more towards simplicity. If we're speaking in terms of dollar signs, then it's hard to disagree. But if we're speaking about stretching the boundaries of what games are capable of doing, I have to give the edge to the 360 and the ps3. I'm sorry, but aside from the awesome control scheme (hands down the best thing about the Wii) I have to give the edge to the other systems in almost every other aspect. Online console capability is a relatively new dimension, and the Wii is easily the farthest behind in this aspect. Graphics, memory, performance; you speak about such things with such contempt, as though they don't matter. I'm sorry to say, but they do.
I always say, there is such thing as a good silent movie (I love Charlie Chaplin), but I never regretted the day movies acquired sound and color. A more powerful system doesn't guarantee more creativity, but it does broaden the potential for it. Need proof? Portal probably couldn't have been done on the Wii. The new Prince of Persia, Mirror's Edge, Left 4 Dead and Little Big Planet probably couldn't have been done on the Wii. All of these games were released this year and they all have an aspect of freshness and originality to them that couldn't have been accomplished as successfully without the technical prowess to accommodate them. From what I've seen on the Wii, there are very few games that don't feel very reminiscent of titles I've seen many times before. Instead, the Wii is filled with mini-games and established Nintendo franchises. Again, that's not necessarily a bad thing if one considers that such a direction can (and obviously does) appeal to less veteran gamers who are less discerning. In time, these so-called "casual" gamers could find themselves in search of more engaging games, and then, without even knowing it, they'll find themselves nestled comfortably beside the rest of the "hardcore" posse. But I hardly think that that sentiment alone justifies such contempt for the two other, more powerful systems. And financial success is even more irrelevant. There's more to it than sales figures.
Damn I wish I had some mod points. Cue me getting twenty in the morning.
A lot of people are proclaiming blu-ray as a success because of all the PS3s sold that no-one watches blu-rays on. Show us actual disk sales, not player sales. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if because of the PS3 including a blu-ray drive there have been more blu-ray players sold than blu-ray disks :P. Ok, that's not likely, but you can see how much the PS3 could skew the results by.
Or even the title.
Sony Teases 3D Playstation 3
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_3#Stereoscopic_3D
Stereoscopic 3D
In December 2008, SCE confirmed that they intend to support stereoscopic 3D games and Blu-ray movies in 2009.[186] This functionality will be introduced to the PlayStation 3 via a firmware update making the first and only games console capable of generating high definition 3D images.[187] This technology was first demonstrated publicly on the PS3 in January 2009 at the Consumer Electronics Show. Journalists were shown Wipeout HD and Gran Turismo 5 Prologue in 3D as a demonstration of how the technology might work if it is implemented in the future.
As for refresh rate and glasses...
HD does not go over 60Hz at the moment. And that only with 720p and 1080i.
And while 120Hz TVs are relatively new - 100Hz TVs have been around for a decade or more.
So, unless your TV's remote comes with a cord - there are pretty good chances it has a rather comfortable refresh rate.
Which is actually - irrelevant.
Those "no shutter job or anything" glasses are actually circularly polarized glasses.
In fact, if you look closely at the photo in the original article you can make out the Real D logo on the glasses.
Circularly polarized glasses
To present a stereoscopic motion picture, two images are projected superimposed onto the same screen through circular polarizing filters of opposite handedness. The viewer wears low-cost eyeglasses which contain a pair of analyzing filters (circular polarizers mounted in reverse) of opposite handedness. Light that is left-circularly polarized is extinguished by the right-handed analyzer; while right-circularly polarized light is extinguished by the left-handed analyzer. The result is similar to that of steroscopic viewing using linearly polarized glasses; except the viewer can tilt his head and still maintain left/right separation.
Real D Cinema System (used recently with the sterescopic Disney movie, "Chicken Little 3D") uses electronically driven circular polarizers that alternate between left- and right- handedness, and does so in sync with the left or right image being displayed by the (digital) movie projector.
So, refresh rate - irrelevant. If it works in 2-D it will work in 3-D.
So, that "massively higher cost" you are talking about comes down to $1.95 for the glasses while that "lower image quality" does not even exist - since it is the case of only displaying a "doubled" image as can very well be seen in the photo in the article.
Unless you refuse to fork over those 2$ cause it is an outrageous case of bait and switch making the consumer spend extra on hardware just so he/she/it could play the game.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
The problem is that the whole "HD" crap is getting more expensive (70€ for a game! No game is worth that much) without a corresponding increase in value. It's also becoming more and more focussed on the core audience, the genre variety on the HD consoles is much more limited than it has been on the PS2 and if you don't like (first/third person) shooters and sports games most of the library is of no interest to you (whereas the PS2 had a massive number of games in any genre). The people who were alienated by the increasing aim for the 12-24 demographic outnumber those who appreciate it. That's what sales numbers show, that more people liked the Wii's approach than the HD consoles'.
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
I use my Nvidia based lcd shutter glasses to play DX games in 3d, it's truly brilliant. The only problem one has with off the shelf games is that 2d HUDs are not 3d entities so are sometimes hard to read / get in the way.
Also you need a 100Hz CRT monitor that runs interlaced but they are easy to find.
Popping rockets off and seeing the trajectory is such fun. Driving is better. I love it.
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
With respect, this is the Internet. If you cite sources, you're at a disadvantage.
I've tried debating using pure facts to support every assertion I make. The problem is, even the more technically minded people on the Internet are so full of shit they'll say ridiculous things without citations.
It's like bringing a knife to a nuclear war. You've got facts, they've got megatonnes of explosive bullshit.
It's been a long time.
Laserdisk was promoted pretty heavily too. Nobody I know ever owned one.
It's been a long time.
I agree, but they are slowly getting better. The initial cost of 800 dollars was insane. I'd rather buy a used car than a PS3 at that price point. It's more fun bag driving a vehicle than playing video games anyway. Now you can get a pretty nice version for around 400-500 bucks, They're almost there.
I haven't heard about enough cool games on the PS3 to justify buying one yet, but as the price goes down, it's only a matter of time before the games get there. If my PSP is any indication, they've also got the now standard on-line store, which means once you get the console for the bigger games, you won't have to worry about having a console that literally can't do anything. Among the three consoles, it seems like Sony's store has the best games for the lowest prices, which is a nice perk.
It's been a long time.