Sony’s 3D Display Tech Is So Not New

21 responses to “Sony’s 3D Display Tech Is So Not New”

1. 

   Dissection

   June 8, 2011 at 4:01 pm

   So based on that, all this “new technology” and glasses that require charging are made redundant by the normal 3d glasses you get at the cinema and a mod on said glasses that takes 5 minutes tops?

   Way to go, Sony!

   Reply
   1. 

      Steve0410

      June 8, 2011 at 4:54 pm

      Correct me if I’m wrong, but Sony’s technology isn’t the same one that Real 3D cinemas use.

      http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Why_do_Real_D_3D_glasses_work_in_the_cinema_but_they_wont_work_with_any_other_3D_images_at_home_Are_there_any_images_that_do_work

      Reply
      1. 

         Dissection

         June 8, 2011 at 5:47 pm

         Okay so it’s new technology that gives the same result but with less bang for buck…still seems redundant…

         Reply
2. 

   markd

   June 8, 2011 at 4:02 pm

   The concept isn’t new at all, it’s just very different story when you can buy it manufactured instead of frankensteining it yourself. You can go cobble together a hydrogen fuel cell car right now if you really want to, but I think I’ll wait til Toyota can sell me one.

   Reply
   1. 

      Dissection

      June 8, 2011 at 4:07 pm

      Actually, in this instance it’s the same story. Except you don’t have to charge your glasses for use and you can get a better 3D TV for a better price.

      Reply
3. 

   Cray

   June 8, 2011 at 4:07 pm

   This was one of the only things I was actually excited about from E3. How disappointing to learn that it’s a bit old hat.

   Still, if this is old news, why are they only doing it now? This is something I would have paid out the nose for years ago.

   Reply
   1. 

      Alinos

      June 8, 2011 at 4:24 pm

      because as he shows it’s cobbled together they had to go and get 2 pairs of glasses and break them just to use split screen on the one screen.

      you can’t use either of those pairs to go and watch an actual 3d movie with later.

      instead the bulk of the cost is in the glasses. Which can have the charge altered on to polarise the lens to one image or to 3D. is the cost worth it i dunno up to the person really.

      Personally 3D is still just a fad to me, so long as i still need glasses im not interested.

      Reply
      1. 

         Kyle_Katarn

         June 8, 2011 at 5:16 pm

         The fact is, those glasses are basically the cost of a 3D movie. You go there, see a movie, get some glasses, then the next day you go see the same thing. You can also buy them for roughly a dollar each off Ebay or something.

         3D might be a fad (and it is, in my eyes). But there’s something to this.

         Reply
         1. 

            Tapek

            June 8, 2011 at 10:30 pm

            It’s not like you have to pay to see a 3D movie just to get the glasses, just keep them when you go to one. Then ask everyone who walks past if you can have them instead of getting thrown in the bin. Would have enough lenses to last a lifetime.

            Active lenses suck, and for the price – so does Sony’s half the size TV!

            Reply
            1. 

               Dissection

               June 8, 2011 at 10:46 pm

               Exactly, for the price of US$499 combined with Resistance 3, the fancy (but pointless) glasses and with how Sony price their TV’s already, this will only be a 60Hz 3D ready TV. God knows how bad the rest of the specs will be.

               So for $499 you get a small, sub-par “3D” TV. A game that only Sony fanboys care about and 3D glasses that are made redundant by cheaper, simpler, readily available ones.

            2. 

               Kevin Little

               July 30, 2011 at 5:01 am

               “this will only be a 60Hz 3D ready TV” Im sorry, but if you look up the specs for the display, it is 240Hz 1080p 3D. Also the 24″ is not a bad size considering that you can splitscreen without dividing the screen in half. That means that you and your friend both have your own personal 24″ display for coop. Also throw in a $60 game, an HDMI cable and a pair of glasses included. That is about $150 so the display is only $350. The glasses are rechargeable, so who cares if they need power, and an extra pair only cost $70, which is almost half the cost of glasses for the bigger 3D tvs.

4. 

   Frenchy

   June 8, 2011 at 4:27 pm

   So what if its not a ‘new’ idea. Its the first practical use of the idea to a mass market.

   I mean if games can be developed with this feature or (I can dream) have their split-screen modes altered with a patch to support this. It would all be thanks to the announcement of this product.

   I for one think it is a great idea, however I think it would be better suited if it supported all 3D televisions (All you had to do was buy the PlayStation branded 3D glasses) Or at least any Sony Bravia 3D television.

   As well if I want to play split-screen I’d rather do it on a 40″ display in a large room, not cramped around a 24″ tv.

   Just my 2c anyway.

   Reply
   1. 

      Alinos

      June 8, 2011 at 4:36 pm

      yeah though by the way it’s setup at e3 in the demo it kinda seems like they are trying to market it to people who don’t have a large living room.

      So you could play split screen with your roomate in your dormitory and both would have a full 24″(since fitting a 40″ in their would be difficult 😛

      Reply
5. 

   TvZ

   June 8, 2011 at 4:37 pm

   it SO is!! And my dad is SO bigger than your dad!

   Reply
6. 

   Tezz

   June 8, 2011 at 5:07 pm

   This isn’t new at all I saw a Microsoft research video where they used head tracking with the kinect to render different images for each person and if I remember correctly it didn’t require a 3d tv.

   Reply
7. 

   Tezz

   June 8, 2011 at 5:15 pm

   http://www.kinectaku.com/news/2011/02/microsofts_head_tracking_experiments_make_3dtvs_look_old
   There is tr proof

   Reply
   1. 

      mattroe

      June 8, 2011 at 8:00 pm

      That’s amazing… thanks for posting that

      Reply
8. 

   Peter Richards

   June 8, 2011 at 5:53 pm

   We did this at uni ages ago with Halo on the original Xbox.
   http://caia.swin.edu.au/genius/021224A/

   Reply
9. 

   InformedGamer

   June 9, 2011 at 1:22 pm

   Correct me if I’m wrong, but this youtube user will only be able to see 2D images, as one user has both left eyes while the other has both right eyes…

   Sony’s allows both users to see 3D by having P1Left, P1Right, P2Left and P2Right.

   That’s a big difference

   Reply
10. 

    Gabe Romo

    June 10, 2011 at 9:03 am

    The one advantage of the active shutter glasses tech here is that you can use the same glasses to do the full screen split screen thing and then watch a 3d movie with the same glasses later. All it probably requires is some sort of firmware update to allow you to do it. The passive 3d tvs will require an entirely separate set of glasses for the split screen and for the 3d watching later either way should work it all depends which is cheaper to me. Definitely the new way to play split screen though. We should give kudos to Sony for actuallly bringing it out to people’s attention instead of being sony bashing fanboys.

    Reply
11. 

    Gabe Romo

    June 10, 2011 at 9:06 am

    Oh informed gamer i don’t think both players will be able to see 3d when they do split screen this way only 2d. I might be wrong but I think the 3d tech won’t allow for that and 3d at the same time.

    Reply