Sony: "Games will lead the way" for 3D

By Tom Bramwell Published 26 May, 2010

Andrew House on 3D, Other OS, GT5, PSN.

SCEE president Andrew House has said that "games are a perfect fit with 3D" and expects them to "lead the way in consumer understanding of how 3D enhances the entertainment experience".

"Games can be adapted into 3D relatively easily and with this technology we can add depth and make games more immersive than ever," House told the PlayStation.com website (thanks VG247).

"As well as the games that will be available in June [to coincide with the launch of a new Bravia 3D TV], WipEout HD, Super Stardust HD, Pain and a demo of MotorStorm Pacific Rift, we have some very exciting games on the horizon."

Asked whether there was much point in Sony getting behind 3D yet given that most people have only just bought an HDTV, and plenty haven't even done that, House defended Sony's strategy.

"It is important to us that we are always moving forward with new technologies, especially where there is the potential to redefine the entertainment experience," he said. "As far as 3D is concerned, the potential for 3D gaming is huge and we are only scratching the surface.

"Of course, as with all new technologies, initially there are barriers to entry, such as the cost of the TVs. Regardless of that, we feel that it is our responsibility to offer all consumers a choice. If you want to spend the money on a new 3D TV, then we will provide you with 3D content to play.

"That is not to say that out priorities have changed. Our priority is still very much our key traditional Blu-ray Disc titles, and that does not mean that we can't offer some 3D fun as well."

Speaking of choice and shiny new trends, House also said that while digital distribution is wicked, Sony plans to keep on supporting discs despite building its online business.

"At the moment, disc-based content is still very much what the consumer is used to and wants. However, there has been a change in attitude and technology that is making digital delivery far more feasible and far more attractive," he explained.

"It is our job to ensure that consumers have the choice between the two where possible. How this area will evolve, I can't really say at this time, as we are relying on many things outside of our control, such as broadband speeds. Things are changing quickly and we have to make sure we are ready for those changes."

One change we may see soon is a new premium model for PlayStation Network, but House was careful to make it clear that people won't suddenly be charged for what they are already offered for free.

"I can assure you that the current PSN as you know it will remain a free service," he said. "It is something that our competitors don't offer and something that shows our loyalty to the PlayStation Community.

"However, Kaz Hirai stated a few months ago that we were looking at a premium service to sit alongside the current free service and that objective has not changed. You'll learn more about it very soon."

At E3 presumably, where we also hope to see Gran Turismo 5. On that front, one of the questions (apparently from four PSN users) was "Is Gran Turismo 5 just a myth?", to which House responded: "Absolutely not. It's looking amazing and will be out soon." Righto.

Something that won't be out soon, having been booted in a recent PlayStation 3 firmware update, is the Other OS option that allowed gamers to install Linux on their consoles. House was asked about the backlash and had these words for people who still feel aggrieved:

"We are very aware of how vocal the community has been about this. I can assure you that it was a very difficult decision for us to take, but one that we fully believe is in the best long-term interest of PlayStation and the PlayStation community."

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. Follow him on Twitter.

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

You may also like...

Comments (68) Latest comment 2 years ago

Comments for this article are now closed, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • LHH #1 2 years ago

    Got to admit as much as I'd like a 3D tv I don't think I'll be affording one anytime soon. Nice to know you can make the console 3D with just an update though

  • systems #2 2 years ago

    @LHH - same here. Nice they're doing it, but I won't be buying a 3DTV until my HDTV dies out of warranty, and even then I might just get a good "normal" HDTV.

  • altitude2k #3 2 years ago

    Ignoring the expense and the ropey-looking system in place for 3DTV at the moment (flashing glasses, flashing TV, all sync'd together with same technology that my TV remote uses including direct line of sight.....seriously?!?), watching a 2 hour film in 3D is great when I have zero input and I can relax and let the 3D work.

    Increase the time watching 3D to match that of a gaming session, then add in the strain of paying the attention to what's going on onscreen required to play a game effectively, and it all sounds like a big headache waiting to happen.

  • menage #4 2 years ago

    I couldn't care less about 3D, it's more distracting than adding stuff with movies at least. Trading depth of content for depth of field so to say.

  • linksdad #5 2 years ago

    The console is not magically becoming 3d with 'just an update'

    3d is created by alternatively rendering 2 different viewpoints and alternatively displaying them, any current console can already do that. The update is probably to do with the HDMI spec enabling left/right sync.

    These shutter glasses are very much a stop gap tech, which will be surpasses by passive glasses and eventually/hopefully no glasses.

  • Arwin #6 2 years ago

    Very excited about this. Won't buy a new TV before something like April 2011 and then only if they're priced at under 1000 euros. But definitely will be looking out for this, and if in the meantime I come across a cheap but decent 3D supporting LCD screen that I can share with my PC then I may just jump in a little sooner.

    Being able to play something like Gran Turismo 5 in 3D is definitely a killer-app for me. I went to drive on the Nurburgring again last Monday and it's such an awesome experience - and one of the big differences between real life and the game currently is that you just don't get the same sense of speed and depth (Nurburgring is a wildly up-and-down affair) in 2D ... it really is a rather huge difference.
    Edited by Arwin at 26/05/10 @ 10:16

  • Dizzy #7 2 years ago

    No.

  • LostGamer #8 2 years ago

    I don't really like 3D. Even though the technology is reduced to consumer level it still looks like a dumb gimmick the has persisted since 40 years ago.
    What i do like about 3DTVs however, is that it makes current HDTVs obsolete. So when 3DTVs do roll out HDTV will be cheaper SOONER than it was before. I may even be close to getting that 60" HDTV that i always wanted. So YAY! GO 3D TV!

  • GamesConnoisseur #9 2 years ago

    Likewise applauding them for doing it and nice knowing it is available, but another one not going to take advantage as doesnt felt the outlay is affordable.

    With us all being beyond the simple 'Credit Crunch' and into the long marathon of the financial austerity, would be interesting to see if how much 3D TV thing will takes off in spite of that?

  • mr_shoe_uk #10 2 years ago

    I don't really want to play everything in 3D.

    I hope they don't make it too integral a feature. Many gamers are not even in HD yet, but the majority of releases are so poorly optimised for SDTVs nowadays that they're full of illegible text and indicators to small to be of use, yet it would rarely alter the game much if they could accomodate SD gamers.

    Those people who do have HDTVs have generally got them pretty recently, and another upgrade to 3D looks less likely. I wonder when we'll need brain implants to play. I'm happy with HD for a good while yet.

  • Gregolution #11 2 years ago

    Love it, will pre order as soon as they're available. All common sense goes out the window when it comes to gadgets, I just can't miss out in this revolution in gaming. You can say it's a gimic all you like, couldn't care less. I think it'll be bloody brilliant

  • Miths #12 2 years ago

    Personally I can't wait until the prices of 3D TVs drops to a level where I feel I can justify the expense (and looking at the first models from Samsung, at "only" around twice the price of similar regular HDTVs, I assume it might only be a couple of years, perhaps even less).

    Aside from being wowed by Avatar in 3D at the cinema, the last few weeks I've been experimenting at home with the TriDef Media Player (real time 2D to 3D conversion for videos and photos) and game drivers, combined with anaglyph red/cyan glasses. And despite the horrible butchering of colors and the fact that I can't actually stand wearing those colored glasses for more than 10-15 minutes at a time, I'm so hooked on the added 3D depth that I'm seriously longing for the day where I own a proper shutter (or polarized) glasses based 3D setup.
    Or at the very least for the next major 3D title to show up in the local cinema - but aside from a few animation movies and some bad conversions from 2D, I think we're looking at Autumn before that happens, with the new Resident Evil and Tron movies?

  • TeaFiend #13 2 years ago

    3D makes my head and eyes hurt. I am one of the small majority that suffer.

    :[

  • DonnieDarko333 #14 2 years ago

    The stupid over-priced glasses aren't that stupid! Jeez...some people just follow the crowd and say whatever everyone else is! Not me! I have a 3DTV and it's the best thing i've bought! I'm pleased Sony are brining out some 3D Demos next month and have games out in the future!

  • FooAtari #15 2 years ago

    As with others, I'm not about fork out for a 3D setup. Not worth the outlay, and still not sure how 3D will work in the home. I think this will be a little used gimmick and will be next generation of consoles at the very earliest before we see decent implementation of it. Look how long it's taking HD TV and films to reach wide spread adoption.

    I quite often do other things while watching TV (although doesnt apply to games so much) such as browsing the net, or wondering around doing stuff about the flat. That doesn't really work when I need a pair of glasses.

    I guess it would work a little better for Films and Games where usually all my attention is on them. But I dunno, I'm still not sure it's practical. Make it work without glasses then we can talk.

  • Miths #16 2 years ago

    "Look how long it's taking HD TV and films to reach wide spread adoption"

    That hasn't stopped some of us from enjoying Blu-ray movies and games in HD for a couple of years or more. Just as filthy rich people get to enjoy their Ferraris and Aston Martins while I envy them from my seat on the bus :p.
    But it is probably safe to assume that it might be a while before we start seeing a decent number of games and movies in 3D, so lack of content could prove an initial hurdle for the first year or two.

    Some of the 3D TVs have on the fly 2D to 3D conversion features similar to what Nvidia 3D Vision or the TriDef software does though, haven't they? I seem to recall seeing that mentioned for the Samsung models?
    It's obviously never going to be as good as content created/shot in 3D, but from what I've seen with TriDef in simple (and ugly) anaglyph red/cyan 3D, the depth effects can certainly still be quite impressive in both games and video.

  • CallousB #17 2 years ago

    I'm perfectly happy to wear 3D glasses at a cinema for a blockbuster "event" movie..but wearing them at home on a daily basis would become rather tiresome.

    If I game in 3D in the next 12 months ...I suspect it'll be on the 3DS.

  • Feanor #18 2 years ago

    Soon better equal 2010.

  • bodypopper #19 2 years ago

    Give it 18 months and 3D will just be another badge on the box for most new TVs. They'll be half the price they are now and more films, games and channels will be available to justify the investment.
    The tipping point for 3D will be Christmas 2011. Assuming we're not all bankrupt by then ;-).

  • ParanoidZombie #20 2 years ago

    Weird... HD is still young, Blu ray has failed to kill DVDs, and manufacters are already moving on to the "next step"... I'll pass, and wait for the inevitable 4DTVs and smelloscopes, which will be unveiled as soon as 2015, probably.

  • d00dl #21 2 years ago

    Reality: "Price will lead the way" for 3D. WipeOut HD and Motorstorm would be nice in 3D but come on people, a 40" 1080p TV costs £550 and a 3D equivalent costs way, way more than that. I can't see a kid persuading their parent (or a husband persuading the mrs) to drop an extra grand so that they can play KillZone 3 and watch Coraline in 3D. That and you still need the glasses and be at a specific small angle and etc.

    I guess we can't use the GT5 argument to persuade the mrs as that has been delayed again so Sony can offer 4D support.

  • Shikasama #22 2 years ago

    I care about 3D even less than I care about HD.

    And I don't care about HD an awful lot.

  • TeaFiend #23 2 years ago

    Does anyone else nick the glasses after a 3D film?

  • megurushi Verified Consultant, 2e2 #24 2 years ago

    The PS3 can struggle with 720p games so adding in the performance hit for 3D will mean some shoddy looking or simplistic games. Wipeout won't look as smooth, they will have to drop the resolution on that!

  • Miths #25 2 years ago

    "Does anyone else nick the glasses after a 3D film?"

    For what purpose? Those polarized glasses only work with special dual projector setups.

  • FogHeart #26 2 years ago

    The time is right for 3D tech - it may be a long way from where we want to be, which is, of course, when games can trivially run in 3D at 1080p, 60FPS, on TVs which don't need any kind of glasses (I think we're seeing many years before that last one!) but none of that will happen until we start churning out hardware for the first generation. No tech is ever released in its 'final' form, we don't wait for perfect hardware before making it commercially available.

    The first uses of any new tech are clumsy and haphazard but still loads of fun. We'll see uses of 3D that are as misguided and imprecise as many of the first few motion control games on the Wii. But it will see less gimmicky and more sensible uses soon - already we know that racing games are far more comfortable in first person once you have 3D for example. Give it time.

  • kangarootoo #27 2 years ago

    "including direct line of sight.....seriously?!?"

    I'm not quite sure how you would consider that to be a problem with something that you are looking at,

    Maybe I'm missing something here, but is direct line of sight not already a requirement when looking at your TV (or looking at anything for that matter)? Surely the clue is in the title.

  • bodypopper #28 2 years ago

    @Miths
    Not true. They're the ones used in pubs for Sky 3D which is shown on LG tellies.
    Edited by bodypopper at 26/05/10 @ 12:26

  • Dave52 #29 2 years ago

    3D tv (with the shutter glasses) is pretty stunning. Go to your local Commet or Currys, a lot of them are demoing now.

    I suspect the addition of this tech to gaming will be pretty incredible (KZ3 for example). Love it or hate it - it's coming.

  • TeaFiend #30 2 years ago

    @Miths:
    Well I am paying more for the film, so I want more in return.

  • Collymilad #31 2 years ago

    As much as I would love to have 3D, as others have said it's a stop-gap tech, and truth is no-one really knows how long it will be before they have ones that do not require glasses. I'm not going to do the whole "have something a year and then you have to buy the next thing" again. The technological cycle is getting tiring, and I'm sure they deliberately hold back so they can make money 2 or 3 times rather than once. Sure they are businesses, doesn't mean I have to be one of their chumps.

    I'll wait until there are no glasses, and the price comes down. So probably next-gen consoles for me before I get 3D.
    Edited by Collymilad at 26/05/10 @ 12:34

  • kangarootoo #32 2 years ago

    @TeaFiend

    And you don't consider watching the film in 3D to be "more in return"?

  • richardiox #33 2 years ago

    ""Games can be adapted into 3D relatively easily and with this technology we can add depth and make games more immersive than ever,"

    ^^ I think you mispelt "expensive" in the above sentence

  • Miths #34 2 years ago

    "Not true. They're the ones used in pubs for Sky 3D which is shown on LG tellies."

    I don't live in the UK so I'm not familiar with Sky 3D, but if we're talking about the RealD 3D glasses from the cinema, I'm 99% certain they require a dual projector setup with polarized filters in front of the lenses.

    Let me see if I can dig up an article I read a month or two ago... Yep, here it is: [link url=http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/3d-polarized-projector,review-31849-4.html
    ]http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/3d-polariz...[/link]
    They build a home theater setup using passive polarized glasses and dual projectors.

    "... This technology makes use of the polarization of light, a relatively old and commonly-used technique implemented in garden-variety sunglasses. A dual-projector polarized theater relies on two projectors to deliver video to the screen, with each projector delivering a unique perspective for a specific eye. Each projector lens is attached to its own polarized filter. The viewer has to wear glasses, but the glasses contain no electronic parts. Instead, the glasses simply employ passive polarized filters. The filter over the right eye will block out the polarized video that is intended for the left eye, and the filter over the left eye will block out the polarized video intended for the right eye. This way, each eye only sees its intended perspective, even though both perspectives are displayed on the same screen."

    The next paragraph does say however that:
    "Dual-projector polarization is used not only in theaters, but also in some specialty monitors designed for the PC. When used in a monitor, a polarized filter is located directly on top of the monitor's screen. Two examples of this are the iZ3D and Zalman 3D monitors."

    So I guess that could explain how passive polarized glasses could work with special TVs, however, a few pages further into the article it also says:
    "On the glasses front, we have good news and bad news. The bad news is you can't use the glasses you kept from the last 3D film you watched, as it was probably shown in the RealD or Dolby 3D standard, and both use unique non-linear polarized filters. The good news is that regular polarized glasses can be purchased for under $1 a piece and are much cheaper if you buy them in bulk. Fancier models with plastic frames are also available at a reasonable price. Let's attribute $20 for this expense as this will get you a lot of cheaper glasses or a couple high-end models."

    Though some kind of special deal between LG (or the pubs) and RealD (or whatever 3D standard they use in UK cinemas, but I believe there are only a few more, with IMAX being another) could be in place of course.
    I'll have to take your word for it that it works of course, but given what this article says (and Toms Hardware tend to be fairly reliable on.. well, hardware) it's definitely a unique case if those polarized RealD glasses can be used outside of their proprietary dual projector setup.

  • Madafunkola #35 2 years ago

    This 3DTV is £963
    [link url=http://www.amazon.co.uk/Samsung-LE40C750-Widescreen-Allshare-Internet/dp/B003JEVQRK/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1274874103&sr=1-1
    ]http://www.amazon.co.uk/Samsung-LE40C750...[/link]
    Admittedly, you need to buy the glasses too, but considering I bought a 40" 720p Samsung 3 years ago for £850, I don't find that price tag out of the realms of possibility* for "BRAND NEW TECHNOLOGY", give it a year or 2 and that'll be down near current HDTV prices.

    *But then again, I do prioritise my tech over things like holidays, cars, clothes, food etc...
    Edited by Madafunkola at 26/05/10 @ 12:46

  • Darren #36 2 years ago

    Great for those that want it (I hope they bear in mind they'll need to purchase a new 3D HDTV to use it though) but it's not something I'm personally interested in as I've yet to see any 3D movie that actually works for me other than the polarised glasses making the picture look duller. Guess my eyesight just isn't good enough for the effect to work. As such the technology is completely wasted on me and there's no point in me buying a 3D TV even if I wanted to. :(

  • Max_Powers #37 2 years ago

    Expert says this: http://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/panasonic...

    Shutter glasses technology providing better 3D experience then the polarized glasses (or cinema) version. In a couple of months time every new tv will support 3D anyway. Whether or not you want to use it, is up to you.

    Me? I'm so looking forward to 3D games and movies at home!
    Edited by Max_Powers at 26/05/10 @ 13:16

  • TeaFiend #38 2 years ago

    @kangarootoo:
    Not overly. I doubt it costs an extra £3+ a person to run the second projector.

  • kangarootoo #39 2 years ago

    @TeaFiend

    No doubt it doesn't cost them that amount in electricity, though it does cost a huge amount to install the facilities in the first place.

    Anway, that is beside the point. What it costs to provide the service is something for the cinema and their bank manager to discuss. It has nothing to do with what we pay for the service - goods are always priced at a market rate. The mona lisa probaly cost a few quid in oils and canvas, and that coffee in Star Bucks cost them about 14p in beans and milk, but what they are worth is defined by what people will pay.

    I'm not saying you are wrong btw, if you feel 3D cinema is poor value that is perfectly valid. I am just saying that your experience is (should be?) what is valued, not what it costs to provide it (I tend to think that knowing what it cost to make something just tends to make us upset with little positive result).

  • Mkwone #40 2 years ago

    I don't rearly get the glasses argument. How many people play games sitting in front of the TV with a headset and mic on front of them. Whats the difference, bar the fact you don't get fat american kids shouting swear words?

  • alcides #41 2 years ago

    I think the factor in the cunts who walk out with the expensive glasses.

    Edit: what? The guy asks why would he have to pay 3 extra quids for 3D? Maybe for the glasses he admits to have already "nicked".
    Edited by alcides at 27/05/10 @ 00:41

  • Sanxo #42 2 years ago

    @TeaFiend

    Typically isn't a second projector, more likely one of the special 3D projectors from RealD or such; to be sure they're making profit from it.

  • SEVQA #43 2 years ago

    In the old days cars used to be the status symbols of one’s financial situation, this coming generation 3D TV's are going to be the new status symbols it seems.

  • AusFreelancer #44 2 years ago

    Dear Sony,

    I value my eysight, please release GT5 now-ish for those who couldn't give a truck about 3DTV.

  • Miths #45 2 years ago

    @SEVQA

    Sorta odd really, seeing as I could buy around ten 3D TVs for the price of one new entry level car here in Denmark. In fact at 33 I've still yet to own a car - I just don't feel I can justify the expenses when there are so many other things I would rather spend my money on. Such as a 3D TV within the next couple of years :).
    Hell, just yearly insurance for a cheap car could buy me one - or two - of those TVs.

  • kangarootoo #46 2 years ago

    @Mkwone

    I've always felt that the need for glasses makes great ammunition for people who have already made up their mind about not liking 3D, but for those who enjoy the experience, the glasses are a non-issue.

    I'm not saying glasses are an ideal solution (you need a pair per viewer, and they cost money, and you have to take them off if you wander off into the kitchen. However, I've seen video games in 3D, and believe me the glasses are a welcome concession to make. I would liken it to complaining that your wallet is heavy because it is stuffed full of money. Yes you wear glasses, and yes you might prefer not to, but the game IS IN 3D! For me personally, the glasses are easily coped with given the result.

  • SEVQA #47 2 years ago

    @Miths

    Well good for you, your clearly loaded and money is no issue for you as the economy is doing so well in Denmark. I guess you can also afford pints at £4.81.

    "seeing as I could buy around ten 3D TVs for the price of one new entry level car here in Denmark." I suggest you move country!

  • TeaFiend #48 2 years ago

    @Miths:
    But how do you get the TV home from the shop?

    And having nicked the glasses I can hope to one day have a TV that is compatabile with them and have friends round to watch it. Justifications?

  • kangarootoo #49 2 years ago

    ""seeing as I could buy around ten 3D TVs for the price of one new entry level car here in Denmark." I suggest you move country!"

    Cars are pricey in Denmark, but then I believe their schools and health service are very good and wages are high. Why would anyone want to move out of a stable and affluent country with good services? :)

  • Miths #50 2 years ago

    "Well good for you, your clearly loaded and money is no issue for you"

    I think you must have misread something somewhere :), because if money was no issue for me, I would think I would have had both car and 3D TV, rather than choosing not to stretch my budget to afford a cheap model of the former, and delaying my purchase of the latter until prices have dropped a bit.

  • Miths #51 2 years ago

    "But how do you get the TV home from the shop?"

    You don't have a postal service or other package delivery services in your country? :)

  • SEVQA #52 2 years ago

    @Miths - >>>>>>>>> [link url=http://www.eurogamer.dk/
    ]http://www.eurogamer.dk/
    [/link]

    @Kangarootoo - >>>>>>>>>>> http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0092115/

  • Miths #53 2 years ago

    @SEVQA

    So you're suggesting that people should stick to their own little localized corner of the web, so we don't inadvertently end up annoying the rest of you? Yeah, right :).

    Besides, the last time I looked this was Eurogamer, not UKgamer, and even if it was the latter it should surely still be open to anyone willing to communicate in English. Even if they boldly resort to using the odd example from the Great Big World beyond the borders of whatever happens to be your home country.

  • ignatiusjreilly #54 2 years ago

    Besides, the last time I looked this was Eurogamer, not UKgamer, and even if it was the latter it should surely still be open to anyone willing to communicate in English

    Amen brother. Hopefully it was just a joke, because "Go back to your own country ('s website)" is not the EG way :)

  • Chazmeister #55 2 years ago

    Until they ditch the glasses, I'm not interested. Speaking as someone who already has to wear glasses to watch TV and play games, the last thing I want is another pair perched on my face. Keeping one pair of glasses grime and smudge free is nuisance enough without the added bother of another pair to worry about.

  • SEVQA #56 2 years ago

    @Miths

    My original comment was about cars being status symbols where nowadays technology such as the mobile or how big and many HD TV’s we own and I was foreseeing 3DTV to continue the trend that's all. Status symbols change with time and countries – so yes my comments were based on what the UK/US economic and technological development was and not that of the inflated prices of just about everything in Denmark.

    You based your reply to my comment on the reflection of your own localized corner of the world. As you say!

    I said nothing, you interpreted everything!

  • miiiguel #57 2 years ago

    I'd rather play a game in 3D than watch a film in 3D.

    How many games have you played in 3D? Does it work in 5-6 hours sessions ?
    No bs'ing, I realy want to know.

  • funkateer #58 2 years ago

    "I said nothing, you interpreted everything! "

    Well, we all interpret everything and say nothing, unless you read out loud and have a direct psychic link with the people that post here.

  • fknetwork #59 2 years ago

    "If you want to spend the money on a new 3D TV"

    I don't, you can fcuk right off with your 3D shite....
    Edited by fknetwork at 26/05/10 @ 20:08

  • sega #60 2 years ago

    Yeah, no matter how good their 3D is, I'm not interested if I have to wear glasses.

  • SEVQA #61 2 years ago

    "...direct psychic link with the people that post here"

    I go for the in-direct psychic link, it's much safer!

  • DVR #62 2 years ago

    I seriously hope that 3d does not catch on, not because I think there is anything inherently wrong with the technology, but because after seeing how it is being used in recent 3d films sends a cold shiver up my spine! To clarify, in years past, 3d has been demonstrated by over use of stuff thrusting blatantly towards the viewer, in the "new" push for 3d, there is a blatant use of parallax scrolling that is every bit as stupid as the thrusting previously mentioned.Watching Avatar and Jaws 3 in 2d perfectly demonstrates the unsubtle effects and how they are employed, as well as how cinematography suffers when a director tries to sell a technology in film. In my opinion, we should be focusing on making improvements to how things like colour and light/shadow are resolved by a screen, rather than gimmicky technology which is promising to revolutionise viewing, in the hope that we all go out en mass and buy new TV's!!

    / shakes fist vigorously at random stuff

  • Stuz359 #63 2 years ago

    I wouldn't mind the glasses so much if they made them prescription...

  • sega #64 2 years ago

    Oh they're just going to become a pain if they catch on. Ever had a group of friends round to watch play Fifa/Pro Evo with some beers? Thrown a movie night? I'm not going to keep a bunch of 3D glasses around the house for such occasions - plus there'll always be one more person than pairs of glasses leaving someone out. And quiet nights in watching a movie with your partner? Yeah big thick nerd glasses are really going to set the mood.

  • callum9999 #65 2 years ago

    I watched a 3D demo in a Sony Store today, and 3D did seem to genuinely make the games I saw look better (especially Motorstorm).

    sega - 3D TVs have a switch to turn the 3D bit off. If a group of friends come around then just switch to 2D mode, then buy more in a few years time when the glasses are more affordable.

    I also thought the glasses were pretty comfortable - Sony have their own technology in them that makes the picture clearer and brighter apparently. Plus everyone around commented on how stylish they look - though I would expect that at the inevitably high cost!

  • Weezer #66 2 years ago

    Saw a video demo on a PS3 hooked up to a 3D TV - flickery as hell and uncomfortable to watch. Shan't be investing any time soon. Sorry CE companies, you'll have to try and sell me a different thing I don't need.

  • kangarootoo #67 2 years ago

    @SEVQA

    Me a troll. That is funny.

  • kangarootoo #68 2 years ago

    @SEVQA

    "I said nothing, you interpreted everything!"

    And you consider that reflects well on you?