Japan's PS3 3D game updates next week

By Tom Bramwell Published 1 June, 2010

SSHD, WipEout and PAIN. PAIN's to cost.

Sony has announced that the first 3D updates to PlayStation 3 titles will be released in Japan next week.

Patches for Super Stardust HD, WipEout HD and PAIN will be released on 10th June according to the Japanese press release.

While the 3D-specific updates to Super Stardust HD and WipEout HD will be free, gamers will need to pay 300 yen to grab the PAIN 3D update.

There's no immediate word on European release timing or pricing for the 3D patches.

Sony is not expected to release a firmware update relating to the 3D functionality, having already covered that off with April's 3.30 release.

The company is also shipping new Bravia 3D TVs this month and has promised to provide four games free to people who buy them: full 3D-enabled versions of the three mentioned above, along with a single-level 3D demo of MotorStorm: Pacific Rift.

Picture of Tom.

About Tom Bramwell

Tom is Operations director of Eurogamer Network and Editor-at-Large of Eurogamer.net. He joined the company in February 2000.

Read more articles from Tom by visiting the Tom Bramwell archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (20) Latest comment 2 years ago

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

  • el_pollo_diablo #1 2 years ago

    Nutters. All this effort for the 8 people in the world who have a 3D telly.

    Clarification: all I'm saying is that, in my opinion, it's early days for struggling games companies to be jumping in for the big 3D push.
    Edited by 1 at 01/06/10 @ 11:27

  • DonnieDarko333 #2 2 years ago

    THERES MORE THEN 8 PEOPLE!!!! Because you don't like it...doesn't mean everyone agrees with you.

  • penguin_overlord #3 2 years ago

    3D is going to be a slow, upwards climb, even more than the uptake of HD was. With HD, it was far easier to see the immediate benefits of HD and even if you didn't have much HD content to start with, chances are that by moving to an LCD screen you did at least benefit from a bigger screen than the CRT one you replaced. I think it's gaming where HD will see the first successes because gamers are a very dedicated bunch who aren't shy about buying the latest tech.

  • coolbritannia #4 2 years ago

    Complete and utter waste of resources. No one cares.

  • masterson #5 2 years ago

    I think some people do care, and the only way to get more to is to ensure there is content.
    3D is with us (whether we like it or not) and no TV manufacturer can afford to be left out of the race in case it does take off.
    I think to many consumers, the benefit of 3D is perhaps even clearer to them (no pun intended) than HD was/is - as evidenced by the amount of folks that experience their "HD" via a SCART cable...

    In any event - I'd love to see them in action, as I'm keen to have my cynical take on 3D replaced with frothing excitement.

  • sonicyoda #6 2 years ago

    Someone has to innovate otherwise gaming will go nowhere. I can imagine your reaction would be a lot different if Microsoft got in there first.

  • alcides #7 2 years ago

    @penguin_overlord

    Gamers HATE change and lastest techs! Because change costs money, and is only for the richer among them. It's a playground community where the cool kids are the ones with the latest gadgets, but you still can't be cooler than everyone else on such standards, lest you be shunned by the herd.

    **Don't you know 3day is for squinting tards and gives you headaches and shrinks you knob? Makes you sterile also. And lawl, it's just a fad anyway lol! And it doesn't work although I never saw it in action. And it's no value added to movies, because Avatar was such a dud, visually and commercially.**

    (also there was no way to experiment HD without seeing it, and people still bought into it)

    3D will work. 3D already works. It's not a fad. Trolling to the contrary was already annoying a year ago. Now it's just... despicable.
    Edited by 1 at 01/06/10 @ 10:27

  • Beano #8 2 years ago

    Ah yes, the memories.... I remember when people bitched about Sony hyping 1080p and bluray 4-5 years ago.. "Useless tech, we don't need it for games, games look FINE on my std. def. TV!" etc.

  • RandomTerrain #9 2 years ago

    Only thing that puts me off is having to wear the 3D glasses all the time.

    But if this really does go well, I look forward to playing games in 3D once it's affordable. Sounds like great fun :o)

  • penguin_overlord #10 2 years ago

    I still maintain that HD is an easier sell than 3D. HD provides a picture quality several times better than SD (4x for 720P and 6x for 1080P) whereas picture quality for 3D can actually be degraded. When you see a 3D movie at the cinema, the colour is up to 20% inferior to the 3D version. Even PS3 games are going to lose some graphical quality as the hardware can't yet maintain the performance needed for 3D.

    It's the next gen of consoles that are really going to push 3D. Let's be honest. The 360 and PS3 have even struggled at times to maintain 2D 720P graphics with DigitalFoundry showing that many games are actually running at a lower resolution than that but then upscaled. So much for the original promises of native 1080P graphics on every game. The next gen should be able to handle 3D 1080P graphics but we're still looking at a minority of people who are going to be able to experience it at home. Over 90% of the people who buy a new TV right now are going to go for a 2D model because they're much better value. Even in a year's time that won't change significantly.

  • potter73 #11 2 years ago

    Have to say, I was one of those that could not see the benefit of 3D (for home use at any rate) This was not really helped by seeing Clash Of The Titan '3D' (not the best example of 3D being used)

    However, after going to the Gadget show in Birmingham and checking out the 3D TV's....I have to say I'm pretty impressed. Sure, I think the cost of TV's is going to have to come down to around the same levels as current LCD TV's (which will most probably take a while ). Also, there is the question of what type of 3D tech will take off. Passive (which only requires the cheapy 'cinema' glasses) is probably going to appeal to the masses, as the glasses are dirt cheap. The Active ones (glasses that require charging) are a bit more expensive , I've heard costs of £50 - £100 mentioned.

    As for Sony releasing 3D updates.....no harm in that, though I don't think they should be charging for them, especially if they are hoping to really push the whole 3D experience

  • el_pollo_diablo #12 2 years ago

    @DonnieDarko333

    I shall be reminding you of your stance when the first round of figures come in! :)

  • 3william56 #13 2 years ago

    The only thing crazy here is getting Wipeout and SSHD for free, two of the best games on any system, whilst expecting to pay for a tard fest like Pain.

    Sooooo penguin - how much time have you actually spent playing in 3D? I'm gonna guess.... none. And you don't seem to know much about 3d, because yes, the frame rate (in WOHD) suffers a little, but the colour issue is not there as TV is a much brighter, much closer source. Check Jimbo Cameron's comments on how Avatar looks on a TV vs in the cinema if you don't believe me.

    I'm personally not going to buy one at the moment, but (a) gonna hotfoot to the nearest shop to have a go of WO as soon as it comes out here, and (b) will be thinking very hard if i need a new tv for the games room.

  • penguin_overlord #14 2 years ago

    @3william56

    With regards to colour degradation, I was referring specifically to cinema. Some movies have been able to compensate better than others, and it also depends on the projection technology used (e.g. 2K or 4K) but it is true that 3D movies often lack the clarity of 2D ones.

    And I actually have already played 3D games on a PS3. Impressive but it's rather like watching 3D movies at the cinema. With the exception of Avatar, few movies have really been filmed with 3D in mind - it's been an afterthought during post production. It's the same with the first batch of games like Wipeout. It's questionable how much extra it actually adds to the game over and above playing it on a big 50-inch HD screen with good speakers around you.

    Killzone 3 may be the first proper 3D game to be released.

  • jonsaan #15 2 years ago

    Unless a game is developed specifically to take advantage of whatever 3D caming can take advantage of then I don't care. This is like adding stick control to Lair. It's anice option to have but ultimately who cares, it doesn't change the game.

    Anything that requires putting specific glasses on to see it is doomed to the cinema or a niche market at best. What are you going to do? Have 5 pairs of glasses for when you have friends round? pffft.
    Edited by 3 at 01/06/10 @ 12:18

  • alcides #16 2 years ago

    @penguin_overlord

    I like that you point to very real concerns about real trifles >:o)

    The difference between a game and a film not thought with stereoscopy in mind is that a game is based on 3D objects within a 3D environnement, that is calculated more than made present - rendered. There is no way you can render it on a flat screen, but it is still build as a 3D universe. Except for the reticular lense and hud, and some lighting effects not needed in a flat 3D game but necessary in a depth rendition of it, there wasn't more to add to wipeout.

    There are 3D flatscreens, though, that transform 2D movies, games and TV and process them so they will look 3D based on a series of 2D pictures. It's magic!

    Avatar was hardly thought for 3D, by the way, in that although it was filmed in stereoscopy, it relied heavily on CG and harldy set a new standard about the benefits of 3D for cinema as art. There was this shot of a droplet that guided the viewer's eye, but other than that, 3D wasn't made into something pertinent for narration.

    That is possible, however, and maybe its gimmicky nature in Avatar led gamers to think that there could be no benefit for gameplay in stereoscopy. I think we will see new creative modes of narration and gameplay mechanics in the future, thanks to stereoscopy.

  • djed #17 2 years ago

    if i have to wear glasses anyway, why not just make screens in the glasses, so easy and i think cheaper than 50" bravia tv.

  • penguin_overlord #18 2 years ago

    Glasses are going to be the biggest challenge for 3D to be successful in homes. The move to HD didn't require any change to people's viewing habits. They could carry on watching programmes just as they always did before, only in high definition. But 3D requires you to wear glasses and focus on the screen and comes at a time when many people do other things while watching TV, including surfing on laptops. That won't be possible when wearing the glasses.

    This is again why I think it will be gaming that takes off first for 3D because when you're playing a game you're concentrating on the screen and not getting distracted by other things.

  • dubdivision #19 2 years ago

    The ps3 doesn't support my 3d monitor (zalman 22";) which pe's me off as I already have stardust hd and wipeout hd.

  • DAN.E.B #20 2 years ago

    what glasses will i need to play these games? the expensive ones for my tv (samsung) or can i just use the free cimema ones?