EA Sports has "nothing at all" for 3DTVs

By Robert Purchese Published 29 January, 2010

Moore's focusing on Natal/Arc this year.

Peter Moore's revealed that EA Sports has "nothing at all" to offer 3D gaming this year.

"No, no, no. I have a point of view and that's about as much as we have," Moore told GamesIndustry.biz. "You've rightly pointed out that, from Howard Stringer down, Sony has made it a strategic imperative for the company. And when Sony does something of that nature then we as a company need to sit up and take notice.

"But believe me there's nothing going on right now that would say I'm ready to demo a 3D sports game. Nothing at all."

Peter Moore's attention is instead on Project Natal and Sony's PS3 wand, which is rumoured to be called Arc. Expect to see all of EA Sports' core IP there, although when exactly, Moore wouldn't say.

"We're getting in sync with Sony's motion controller and Project Natal with what Sony and Microsoft want to do with their publishing partners, so stay tuned for further information on that as we get closer to the date," added Moore. "And as you can imagine, EA being EA we're going to have our core intellectual property represented in some shape of fashion on those platforms.

"I do not know when they're launching. Certainly Sony has made no public pronouncement at all, and Microsoft has said 'holiday', which obviously gives fudge room, so stay tuned."

Earlier today, Peter Moore unveiled a free-to-play version of FIFA, which will enter beta testing this June.

Picture of Robert.

About Robert Purchese

Bertie is Eurogamer's Senior Staff Writer. When he's not hunting down news stories he's often found playing with his kids or gabbling about fantasy games and strange online worlds.

Read more articles from Robert by visiting the Robert Purchese archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (34) Latest comment 2 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • Mkwone #1 2 years ago

    3D fifa 11 at E3 this year then :p

  • altitude2k #2 2 years ago

    I've got something for 3DTV gaming...

    ...and it ain't no "point of view", that's for sure.

  • Xinch #3 2 years ago

    "We're getting in sync" O_o

  • Darren #4 2 years ago

    I don't understand this push for 3D at all. A survey conducted last year by Epic revealed that most Xbox 360 owners played Gears of War/Gears of War 2 on non-HDTVs and Sony still sell the PS3 minus any HD cables at all. Now here we are in 2010 and everyone except EA seems to think 3DTV is going to be the next big thing!?!

    With whom exactly?

    I'm buying a new Sony TV in the spring when they launch their new models, which includes a range of 3DTVs. However, I will be buying a normal HDTV as I don't think the extra expense is worth it for the few games and movies that will use 3D. It's a gimmick really, one that worked well for the cinemas but I think will have a hard time doing the same in the average home.

  • metalangel #5 2 years ago

    Fuck 3D, and fuck motion controls too. In fact, how about this: since they introduced their wanky two-stick control methods for stuff like FIFA and NHL, I haven't bought any of those either.

  • Darren #6 2 years ago

    @metalangel - You did realise that FIFA's right control stick used for only for trick moves, which you don't necessarily need to play the game properly, and that NHL's can be changed completely so that you don't have to shoot and whatnot with the right-analogue stick?

  • linksdad #7 2 years ago

    In commercial terms, developing for 3D is a no brainer - you have no brain if you think it is a good idea.

    If a game is coded to specifically require 3D then the tiny minority of early adopters would be the only up sale and your downside is over 95% of the audience.

    Let Sony take this one on the chin and once (if!) there is a tipping point of adoption then go for it. For the most part I would imagine the 3D display bit is essentially free as it doesnt take much to ask for an additional render from a viewpoint two inches to the left or right of the main one.

    Utilising 3D in novel and game enhancing ways will decide whether this is anything more than additional eyecandy at the expense of halving the frame rate.

  • Sunyavadin #8 2 years ago

    Releasing 3D games in the next year would be akin to releasing games with 720 and 1080 resolution in 2004. By the time the penetration of the market is sufficient to justify the additional investment, you'll be releasing the sequel. Better to do what most developers are doing and either (a:) just add a little bit of code to handle rendering what is basically a 2D game with a 3D effect. Not "real" 3D. or (b:) Don't bother with it yet, and see which form of 3D (polarised, shutter, etc) becomes popular, THEN develop games designed for it.
    Edited by 1 at 29/01/10 @ 16:05

  • GamesConnoisseur #9 2 years ago

    Would Sony be overstretching themselves if 3D proves to be only a minority success? In term of uptake and users compared to the mass market.

    Can understand why with their involvement in selling TV and movies, and so would seem a natural sync to include PS3 into the equation. Also as something extra that PS3 can do that other doesnt but I really doubt that we would see widespread adoptions.

    Still it may have influences in making sure that PS3 is more postively associated with being in front of the technologies even if most people doesnt use 3d, in same sense as SD TV users doesnt exactly use the capacity for 1080p but still factors in the purchase consideration as a future proofing.

  • schnide #10 2 years ago

    This has completely just clicked for me - motion control and 3D gaming really is the future. I don't want it to be, I don't like the state of either technologies as they are at the moment, but there really isn't going to be much avoiding it in the end.

  • jack_klugman #11 2 years ago

    The back end infrastructure hasn't even caught up with HDTV yet (how many people have access to all their favourite channels in broadcast 1080p?) so I don't see 3D gaining traction in the mainstream for years - it'll need a lot more than just games and the odd movie to make it a viable concern. The need to wear glasses is a bit of a deal breaker too.

  • curtlikesmeat #12 2 years ago

    I guess Peter is too busy deleting all the complaints off his blog about the Fifa 10 bug fest!

  • metalangel #13 2 years ago

    @Darren: I might have missed that option in the FIFA 10 demo, it seemed like you had to flick the right stick in order to do passes and shots with it.

    I stand by my aversion to 3D and motion controls, though. *grins*

  • NinjaWilliams #14 2 years ago

    When you don't need to wear silly 3d glasses those tv's then it'll be the day id be interested!

  • Liam64 #15 2 years ago

    "Feels like I'm wearing... nothing at all!

    Nothing at all!

    Nothing at all!"

  • ronuds #16 2 years ago

    I'd say this is a smart move for EA. They aren't doing well enough to take a chance on something as unproven as 3D.

    Maybe next year.

  • Retroid #17 2 years ago

    @Sunyavadin: "Releasing 3D games in the next year would be akin to releasing games with 720 and 1080 resolution in 2004."

    I have several console games from 2004 or earlier which were 720p / 1080i:

    PS2:
    Gran Turismo 4 (2004 in Japan)

    Xbox:
    Scarface
    Soul Calibur 2
    The Warriors

    :)

  • Sunyavadin #18 2 years ago

    I take it you have the HD output pack for the XBox then? Or did you hack yours before that hit the market?

    I suppose my analogy wasn't the best, as setting up a game to output in higher resolution (Or rather, not in a low resolution) is a bit simpler than setting up scenes to render in two frame buffers with particular differences so as to make certain constituents of the scene appear to be at different depths. But if it did take a bit more coding work (synching the framerate on both, etc) then the analogy would have held, making a mass-market product with special consideration for the early-adopter market. The point being that doing something when most customers aren't even able to appreciate it is a bit more of a waste, and you have to strike a balance between having enough customers to make it a worthwhile selling point, and delivering something special with that bonus selling point.

  • dirk_aircool #19 2 years ago

    I don't know anybody that has even heard of 3D TV in the ' real world ' . its only us game geeks , even then its not all of us, SEE @Darren .( I remember reading that too.) and on top of all that how many of the 1st gen HD TV's were FULL HD?. And they've only just adopted the LCD over the plasma so what hope of a 1st gen ' 3D ' ready TV. its years away from mainsteam consumers.

  • bonker #20 2 years ago

    I'm utterly bemused by this 3dtv talk, if it ever happens it's going to be 5+ years away before it hits anything like mass market penetration ...

    On the other hand, I'm equally bemused as to why we don't have 3d headsets available for either the current gen or apparently not in dev for the next gen - the limited experience I have had of this gave me the most immersive games experience I've ever had, it's astonishing when well implemented and not expensive to produce these days I'd have thought ...

  • penhalion #21 2 years ago

    First sensible thing to come out of the EA hype machine in a long while. Only hope they have the intelligence to stick to the wait and see plan.

  • peterfll #22 2 years ago

    I wish Sony would put there resources into making something like OLED a viable commercial product before starting another revolution.

  • Negotiator #23 2 years ago

    Sony back another dead horse.

  • makeamazing #24 2 years ago

    "Feels like I'm wearing... nothing at all!

    @Liam64

    Very funny... that scene in the Simpsons makes me laugh all the time

    Do i like the idea of 3D TV, not really, but with Sony's involvement in TV and games, you can see why they are implementing it. I dont think its a short term plan, but its something that will make them look like leaders in the field and another reason to get a PS3 (albeit a small reason as i dont see 3D tv being a massive uptake initially). But you can never tell, the USA usually lead the field in TV (widescreen and HD way before the UK got them), so perhaps its a double wammy to sell more PS3 in the USA. Who knows, but it will certainly be interesting.

  • afghan_jones #25 2 years ago

    3DTV is a fucking joke and any company putting substantial resources into it is ludicrous given that it will take about a decade or more to actually get standardised, and start turning a profit. Not to mention that it is going to have a mass market penetration of about 5% at best.

  • polar #26 2 years ago

    3DTV. The worst idea ever. Who even wants one?
    Edited by 1 at 30/01/10 @ 15:21

  • Syrette #27 2 years ago

    Fudge room eh..

  • Sunyavadin #28 2 years ago

    I wish Sony would put there resources into making something like OLED a viable commercial product before starting another revolution.

    Damn right. One of the main reasons I'm holding back on HD is that Plasmas are too expensive and LCD displays have an annoying tendency to break into horrific technicolour messes of light when I look at them. We need a good solid display technology like OLED established before we start worrying about doing other shit with it.

  • Retroid #29 2 years ago

    @Sunyavadin: "I take it you have the HD output pack for the XBox then? Or did you hack yours before that hit the market?"

    A tiny hack to make my Xbox think it's NTSC and one of those multi-console component cables which came out a few years ago. Soul Calibur in particular still looks quite nice outputting in 720p, albeit with black borders down the sides to preserve aspect.

  • geoffw22 #30 2 years ago

    Thank god,

    FUCK 3D

    Biggest pile of over hyped shite in years.
    Edited by 1 at 31/01/10 @ 01:49

  • silentbob #31 2 years ago

    Sunyavadin wrote:
    I suppose my analogy wasn't the best, as setting up a game to output in higher resolution (Or rather, not in a low resolution) is a bit simpler than setting up scenes to render in two frame buffers with particular differences so as to make certain constituents of the scene appear to be at different depths. But if it did take a bit more coding work (synching the framerate on both, etc) then the analogy would have held, making a mass-market product with special consideration for the early-adopter market. The point being that doing something when most customers aren't even able to appreciate it is a bit more of a waste, and you have to strike a balance between having enough customers to make it a worthwhile selling point, and delivering something special with that bonus selling point.

    You might want to go and read Digital Foundry's article on exactly how developers are tackling the issues. In my estimation it's actually a smaller leap rendering to discreet views of the same same scene than it was to move from 480 -> 720 -> 1080p. As the article states, it doesn't require twice the horsepower to do this, in fact it's far, far less.

    RE your other point on market penetration and why developers shouldn't bother, are you familiar with the chicken and the egg analogy? You can't have hardware acceptance without compelling software, you have to develop now to encourage people to adopt. One doesn't happen without the other.

    Someone also mentioned that 120Hz screens are 'years away' and compared the technology to the HDReady Vs FullHD debacle. It's nothing like it, either the TV is capable of displaying 120 discreet frames per second or it isn't, there is no middle ground. Every major TV manufacturer has 3D panels for delivery this year. There will be a premium at first, but if the already existing 120Hz Monitors (which you buy NOW) are anything to go by, it won't be much at all.

    I've said multiple times that I don't see 3D being a revolution akin to HD. However, people are naive if they believe that the industry aren't fully behind the technology and just what these companies can achieve when the stakes are this high. I reckon we could have a significant niche by the close of 2012.

    Another interesting year for home entertainment then, can't wait!

  • Shadders #32 2 years ago

    I can't help but feel they're going to ruin FIFA by including half-baked Natal controls. :(

  • NotSoSlim #33 2 years ago

    Why are Sony being bashed for backing 3D gaming?

    They make tv's so gave to back it especially when broadcasters are pusinf it example sky screening Arsenal/United yesterday in 3D

    It may not take off for games but movie studios are backing it as well and as gaming is basically on par with movies in the revenue stakes Sony as a tv and movie provider would be stupid not to support it.

    People need to take fanboy glasses off and realise certain companies have there toes in different ponds and in order to make money have to be in on certain new technologies

  • Shadders #34 2 years ago

    The expense for a developer to make their game "3D ready" isn't much of a blocking factor either, it's surprisingly cheap and would almost certainly be offset by the number of people who'll buy your game for the novelty factor.