Sony 3D TV buyers get free games in June

By Tom Bramwell Published 15 April, 2010

3D PS3 firmware to precede HX803 launch.

Sony has announced that people buying its new Bravia HX803 3D TV in June will receive a PSN voucher entitling them to four 3D versions of PS3 games.

The PS3 will receive a 3D compatibility firmware update before the launch of the new Bravia, and then a further firmware update to support 3D Blu-ray playback will follow before the end of 2010.

The four games will be free to anyone forking out for one of the TVs, and they are WipEout HD, MotorStorm: Pacific Rift, PAIN and Super Stardust HD.

WipEout HD is the full game, apparently, but doesn't include the Fury add-on; MotorStorm is a single-level 3D demo, PAIN will be three episodes plus the tutorial; and Super Stardust HD is the full game not including DLC.

There's no word on whether the games will be sold separately to non-Bravia 3D users, but we've asked Sony to clarify.

The new HX803 series TVs offer 1080p HD 3D support and boast proprietary features like High Speed Precision (minimises interference between left and right eye images), LED Boost (increases brightness) and 3D Up Conversion (the equivalent of DVD upscaling for the 3D era - taking 2D images and adding depth where possible).

Sony's 3D technology uses active shutter glasses, which open and close shutters so that your eyes see alternating images to create the impression of 3D.

The glasses have a battery life of "approximately 100 hours" and will be available in special sizes for children and animals, possibly.

Apparently you can pre-order the new TVs from Sony.co.uk, but we can't find any reference to them there so good luck.

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 (40) Latest comment 8 months ago

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

  • AllenSpawn #1 2 years ago

    Great, I got those games already....



    Oh yeah, i can't afford the tv any way

  • Widge #2 2 years ago

    bit of a bollocks incentive, especially when the Panny plasmas are cheaper/better.

  • davisorle #3 2 years ago

    No way on earth im buying their TV. The only way im going to use 3D glasses will be on my PC over 3DVision which has already a big number of titles compatible. Now.. Pay so much for a TV and play Stardust HD etc ( titles which already have ) in 3D is anything but worth my time and money. Rather go out and drink them :)

    3D TV will be considered for me at least over a year from now at half price and better tech specs by then and that is IF 3D tvs stay around by then when the hype is all gone.

  • DrDamn #4 2 years ago

    @Widge
    Plasma is a cheaper tech and also has it's downsides in comparison to LED - so "better" depends on your circumstance.

  • king2001 #5 2 years ago

    The 803 range is only "3D ready" which as Sony puts it "Simply upgrade with Active Shutter glasses and a 3D transmitter accessory and you’ll feel as though you’re sitting at the heart of the action as it unfolds around you."

    Only the 903 range is 3D out of the box.

    Sexy pieces of hardware those with their "monolithic" designs.

  • Madafunkola #6 2 years ago

    I think I'll wait for the Samsung 9000 series. If I can ever afford one, that is...

  • DrDamn #7 2 years ago

    @evoga
    It has echoes of Virtual Reality, but the difference here is that big manufacturers are pushing it and it has had some big successes at the cinema too.

    The manufacturers have a big interest in it being a success mind, so it balances a little.
    Edited by 1 at 15/04/10 @ 09:39

  • Raziel #8 2 years ago

    I was rather impressed when I saw Motorstorm on there, untill it said it was a single level demo.
    Doubt I'd actually buy one untill it's a bit cheaper and you don't need those silly glasses... I don't even have my current HDTV for a full year yet.

  • CallousB #9 2 years ago

    It makes me laugh that you now have to buy a new tv if you want 3D.

    3D shutter glasses would work as standard on pretty much every tv set being sold a couple decades ago (same as the light gun). The shutter glasses tech now is barely evolved from what was available on the Sega Master System.

  • Murton #10 2 years ago

    Still undecided on this, the main things holding my back are price and having to wear the shutter glasses over my regular ones, which I think could get uncomfortable after a short while.

    Think I'll wait until these things hit the market and then visit a Sony Centre or somewhere to see a display model in action for myself, the glasses problem might not be as bad as I thought.

  • Mkwone #11 2 years ago

    I fear people will take this the wrong way and complain that it's a rubbish deal. When i reality they're just to showcase what the tec can do. Like when they used to bundle in demo discs in the consoles.

    Regardless 2.5k is out of my price range.

  • Widge #12 2 years ago

    the entire plasma vs lcd thing has a new dynamic now with the ghosting of lcd causing crosstalk and other artifacts. hands on that i have read say that the sony and samsungs aren't too hot while the panny is pretty great-

  • zuljin #13 2 years ago

    @CallousB
    "It makes me laugh that you now have to buy a new tv if you want 3D."

    Even if the shutter tech hasn't evolved, the reason you need a new TV is because most TVs just don't have a good enough refresh rate. I don't know what the standard is/will be for marking a TV "3D ready", but it'll probably just be a minimum of 120Hz refresh rate.

  • Stuz359 #14 2 years ago

    I just have a feeling this tech is too soon for the games industry, even though traditionally it has been pioneers in tech terms.

    The problem of course is HD uptake, let alone 3d uptake. I read on digital foundry I think that only about 40% of 360 owners had a HDTV to go with it. I think we need to slow down and let the mass market catch up to geeks like us before making them upgrade again to 3d.

    Another problem of course is, is this going to be the standard for achieving 3d? Or are loads of companies going to come up with their own unique solutions, and leaving early adopters having to buy new hardware?

  • cyacomini #15 2 years ago

    I will not be buying a 3DTV until at least 2012 - I was an early adopter in the HD era and I am not going to make that mistake again.

  • Whatsfor #16 2 years ago

    So what happened about 3 weeks ago when I said in a comments section that I had just played a single level of motorstorm pacific rift in 3D at a sony tech demo... I got marked down to oblivion because people said there wasn't such a game being made...

    Cunts!

  • zuljin #17 2 years ago

    @Stuz359
    There is no too early. People will always moan that they don't need a new TV. You don't get content untill you have a userbase, and you don't get a userbase till you have content. Its never an easy introduction.

    If it is true you can simply buy the glasses and a decoding box for any 120Hz telly, then that will massively help the the introduction of 3D. After all, people spend so much money on gadgets such as PlayTV/Console cameras/Guitars etc, that this'll be a drop in the ocean.

  • callum9999 #18 2 years ago

    stuz359 - really? Virtually everyone I know has an HD TV. And if you wait for them to buy HD then release the 3D versions people will get in a strop saying its a conspiracy to force you to buy a new expensive TV.

  • sjmlondon #19 2 years ago

    Flatscreen, HD, HD Ready, True HD, LED LCD, 3D TV. The other guy is right, you could end up buying a new flatscreen every six months to keep up with the latest technology.

    Like many people though, I do feel the whole 3D experience whether at the cinema or possibly now at home is totally overrated so no having a 3D is not a priority.


  • Retrogamer101 #20 2 years ago

    At The Gadget Show Live last week and was blown away by the HD sports footage being shown in 3D on the Panasonic TVs. Sony and and Samsung displays looked terrible in comparison. Still far too pricey, though. The cheapest way to get your 3D gaming kicks appears to be on PC where you can get an Nvidia 100hz monitor/ graphics card/ glasses bundle for less than £400. I tried Avatar, Street Fighter 4 and Battlefield 1943 and apart from some HUD issues all looked pretty sexy. As far as HDTV uptake is concerned, as the boss of a videogame store I always ask my console buyers if they need a hdmi cable for there TV and in all honesty, less than half the people who buy a 360 or Ps3 actually own a HDTV. My prediction: HD 3D TV 32" less than £500= Sold to the masse

  • rprince #21 2 years ago

    So by 4 free games, they mean 1 biggish DLG, 1 smaller DLG, and 2 demos? What a pile of bollocks.

    I can't wait for 3D to die on its arse. HD was an upgrade I was willing to do. No way will I be tempted into a more pointless TV upgrade within 5 years!

    I must say though, the 3D football on Sky's 3D advert that's in 3D cinemas at the moment is quite nice. Even though it looks like a bunch of 2D cut outs floating on the surface. I can't even afford Sky though, let alone Sky 3D HD + !

  • OldK1ngCole #22 2 years ago

    Anybody know if these Active Shutter Glass thingys will work on my Panasonic NEOPDP Plasma?

    [link url=http://www.currys. co.uk/gbuk/panasonic-viera-tx-p42g20b-42-full-hd-plasma-tv-0 4853532-pdt.html
    ]http://ww w.currys.co.uk/gbuk/panasonic-v...[/link]

    Thats it in the link above, scroll down for full tech specs, most notable though in this instance is the 600hz refresh rate.

  • Skooch #23 2 years ago

    3D or no 3D that is the question. :-D

    Until 3D technology, without any glasses or extras, is available at a decent price then uptake will be slow. For me, I don't want to have to put on special glasses to watch TV, and that's just how it is.

  • Jelly_Head #24 2 years ago

    Couple o' questions...

    1. How much do extra pairs of active-shutter glasses cost?

    2. Isn't 3D Ready, inevitably going to be followed in 2 years' time by True 3D?

  • FuzzyDuck #25 2 years ago

    Recession, anyone?

  • FireMonkey #26 2 years ago

    @stuz359 - The reason I hadn't upgraded my TV to HD (I have now as my old TV eventually broke) was that I had a perfectly good TV at the time and just going up to HD wasn't exactly a good reason for me to scrap that TV and spend loads of extra cash.

    Many people can't even see a big enough difference to upgrade to a HD tv from a SD. Don't believe me? Then why does 1 in 10 of the population of the UK think they are watching HDTV when they aren't? If the difference was that obvious surely they would know? (source - http://ww w.bva.org.uk/news-press-release... )

    To me 3D would be a better reason to upgrade my TV than HD and it will be a hell of a lot easier for shops to sell as it has an instant wow factor and is completely different to anything a lot of people have seen before.

  • smelly #27 2 years ago

    (as posted in the 3ds thread.. i'm DISGUSTED by this..)

    Im deaf in one ear. I think it's DISGUSTING that games makers make games in stereo because i cant personally hear any benefits to it.

    it's about time they STOPPED this stereo GIMMICK and did EVERYTHING in mono!

    (or dumb words to that effect which sum up some of the REALLY dumb-ass posts on this topic)

  • alcides #28 2 years ago

    I heard the sound speakers were.... not included. I mean LOL at that if it's true.

    I think 3D is the future of gaming.

    BUT! WipEout HD only does 30fps per second and yes, this looks terrible in comparison with the full speed version. I don't want glasses when clearly there are screens out there already that don't need them. I have never had 500 spare euros to fork on a low quality HD ready screen. So 1500?

    Lawls.

    Besides I already own all of those games.

  • alcides #29 2 years ago

    @FireMonkey

    HD looks GREAT on SD TVs, waaaaaay better than SD images. Fact.

    Just download any promotional video from the PSN on a SD TV and compare with your experience of it ingame. It looks better in the trailer than it actually does ingame.

    edit: why, you ask? Because the trailer default output is HD, whereas with games, it's not. I haven't look behind the curtains but one does not need to check on the obvious?
    Edited by 1 at 15/04/10 @ 18:43

  • smelly #30 2 years ago

    >HD looks GREAT on SD TVs, waaaaaay better than SD images. Fact.

    erm.. um.. erm..

    um..

    *Facepalm*

  • FuzzyDuck #31 2 years ago

    @alcides

    Um, if a trailer/game is in HD it won't display on yer SD tellybox. Hence the need for HD tellyboxes.

  • ozzzy189 #32 2 years ago

    lcd just cannot do 3d as well as plasma, it's just not responsive enough and the viewing angle andresolution loss under motion will be made even worse by the glasses. unforunately lcd is pushed on consumers who just do not have a clue. The number of folks still buying hdready and hdready1080 tv's and going home thinking thay have hd is still worringly high. 3d will take ages to take off, if at all, and the fact that sony samamsung and panasonic have already got 3d bluray exclusives, and the fact that the tech is different across the maunfacturers and sony glasses won't work with pana tv's etc etc, is only going to force this already tiny market, into even more of a niche.

  • YoungPayters #33 2 years ago

    well they will all have to conform to a standardised 3d tv format. LaserDisc vs DVD, HDDVD vs Blu-Ray. History shows that there can only be one excepted format. Im gonna put my money on Sony winning this one again to be honest, not because of the better tech(not really who has the best tech) but the fashion statement that comes wit a sony. Cause it will be the rich that will kick this off and when they buy things, they will always go with the most expensive ones and sony is the one most likely.
    plus 4 free games :D

  • FireMonkey #34 2 years ago

    @YoungPayters - "well they will all have to conform to a standardised 3d tv format"

    A standard has now been agreed upon by the big players and this is the HDMI 1.4 standard. Any DVD / Blu-Ray players, Consoles or TV's adopting this format will be able to work together. As this is a data format you still have the choice of any viewing method the TV's use be it Linear Polarised, Circular Polarised, Active Shutter, Lenticular or any other method they come up with (as long as it only needs 2 views to work - some more advanced systems need more than 2 views but I doubt that'll catch on as it'll be to costly to develop for).

    This is the format that Sony have adopted and are using in all the new TV's, Blu-Ray players and the PS3.

  • spiritsnake #35 2 years ago

    i beg to differ,ive got an SD 21inch in my room,and wen i hook up the ps3 to it and watch videos ive downloaded of gametrailers which are in 720p they are crystal clear.now wen i start playing a game,the game is being output in SD coz thats what the ps3 is set to display games when connected to an SD tv.the videos are source 720p being displayed and adjusted correctly to display on the SD tv. the games are being output in source SD thus they arent really same clarity wise as they video.im not saying SD is better than HD, anyone knows HD is the clearest,all im saying is that games when connected to SD tv output lower quality than if you play a 720p video on the same ps3 on the same tv.

  • spiritsnake #36 2 years ago

    moderator,remove the shoes ad above

  • FireMonkey #37 2 years ago

    @spiritsnake - To get the original 720p video onto your SD TV the video must be getting downsampled as your TV has not got enough pixels. To do this the TV must remove pixels to counter for the lower resolution.

    When the PS3 is set to output a game in SD to an SD TV you are getting exactly the correct pixels at a 1:1 ratio and so the image is exactly as intended by the dev.

    The TV can not do any intelligent adjustments to the screen as it does not know what is what. One common issue is that any small text or horizontal lines (such as with HUDs and overlays) will be getting thinned out and look really bad. The game on the other hand knows the output is SD and so can adjust the actual resources before it renders to make them look better.

    Saying that though what you may be seeing is the fact that most decent TV do not just remove lines, but will do some sort of averaging of the lines before removal so that some of the data in them is spread to neighbouring lines. This would have the effect of giving a blur to the screen which would help remove any jagged corners.

    As an extreme example, imagine if your TV output at a stupidly small res such as 100 x 80. Imagine what the HD image would look like on that and how much data would be lost! It would look horrible, yet any artefacts or jaggies would be completely gone.

    What looks better is completely down to personal opinion, but what is fact is the SD -> SD will show the true image as the devs intended and HD -> SD will lose data.

    Note: I just reported SpiritSnake (Edit: no I didn't sorry, I reported the person who posted the ads) to the mods. For anyone who doesn't know, you can do this by clicking on their name and then there is a 'report' button.
    Edited by 2 at 16/04/10 @ 10:48

  • jambo74 #38 2 years ago

    My TV is 3D allready, watch as I walk around to look at the back....

  • vizzini #39 2 years ago

    @FireMonkey
    “What looks better is completely down to personal opinion, but what is fact is the SD -> SD will show the true image as the devs intended and HD -> SD will lose data. “

    You are failing to take account of the original desired signal; the HD output is the reference signal (for the game) in this situation, whether HD natively, HD video displayed on SD, or SD shown natively. They all must be compared to the same HD reference signal.

    The HD video, downscaled and shown on an SD TV (signal processing by the ps3) is typically closer to the HD reference signal, than the game natively displayed in SD. So what spiritsnake said I would agree with.

    And which looks better can be calculated. If the difference of the output signals to the reference signal are statistics analysed, you can conclusively say, that one is a better reconstruction of the reference signal than the other.

    But like you said, that doesn't guarantee, it will be humanly perceived as a better likeness, as some details lost by noise, can be more discernible to humans than others.

  • gaggan #40 8 months ago

    3D may be all the rage in theaters right now, but I just don't think people who barely bought a HDTV will shell out more cash to buy yet another expensive television just to have 3D. It's one thing to have 3D when you go to a movie, and having everything provided for you Software Reviews, but having it yourself, just means more money to spend, and money I don't believe people are willing to spend at this moment in time games collection.