Sony patents 3D multiplayer system

By Ellie Gibson Published 20 July, 2010

Could this be the end of split-screen?

Sony has filed patents for a new stereoscopic system that would allow two gamers to enjoy 3D multiplayer without the need for split-screen.

The patents, which were spotted by Broke My Controller, were filed a year ago and published last week.

They describe a way of rendering separate images on one screen, and depict glasses which can then filter them. Digital Foundry's Richard Leadbetter explains: "Stereo 3D is all about generating two different images - one per eye. The glasses work by making sure that the right images are sent to the correct eyes.

"The theory here is that instead of having stereo 3D, the glasses each point to either the left or right "eye" view, which will be the view of each player in-game. So two screens are being generated, one goes to each player. Simple!"

Simple indeed? Or WITCHCRAFT?

Picture of Ellie.

About Ellie Gibson

Since joining Eurogamer in the mid 2000s, Ellie has written about subjects as diverse as the fall of Gizmondo, the rise of Hollyoaks actresses in Red Alert games and the noise a bear makes under NSFW circumstances.

Read more articles from Ellie by visiting the Ellie Gibson archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (74) Latest comment 2 years ago

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

  • Osahi #1 2 years ago

    Defenitely Witchcraft -_-

  • swede #2 2 years ago

    Warning: Do not look at the screen without your glasses on. Your brain will implode.

  • Ron_Justice #3 2 years ago

    It's a great idea. Shame it's still hampered by being a really expensive one...
    Edited by 1 at 20/07/10 @ 10:52

  • consignia #4 2 years ago

    But this will remove 3d effect, with still having to wear those silly glasses. Bit of an irritating trade off.

  • M_of_the_sys #5 2 years ago

    I like this idea. I'm guessing you wouldn't get the headache that 3D gives people seeing as you're only looking at one image?

  • TeaFiend #6 2 years ago

    If it floats, it is definately a witch.

  • erp #7 2 years ago

    Hang on, wouldn't this need... MORE glasses?

    (ie. DIFFERENT glasses...)
    Edited by 1 at 20/07/10 @ 09:22

  • Diogo_Ribeiro #8 2 years ago

    So they're using 3D for something that's been done in PC for years without anciliary tech. You go, Sony.

  • Gambit1977 #9 2 years ago

    Sounds like a great use of the tech to me.

  • AaronTurner #10 2 years ago

    Won't this make it 2D rather than 3D? Anyway it's a ridiculous patent, how can a company patent something like this?

  • asphaltcowboy #11 2 years ago

    So, you're rendering 4 different images at the same time? Goodbye performance or hello weak graphics!

    EDIT: For the record, the incredibly inaccurate article is perhaps the reason why I'm being negged to all hell!
    Edited by 1 at 20/07/10 @ 17:52

  • GamesProgrammer Verified Games Team Programmer, Eutechnyx Ltd. #12 2 years ago

    The standard shutter glasses should be able to do this by just blinking at the same time instead of alternatley. But there could be cheaper pairs that dont have that functionality

  • GamesProgrammer Verified Games Team Programmer, Eutechnyx Ltd. #13 2 years ago

    So there splitting the screen in time instead of space. All sounds very futuristic.

    They could do 4 player if they split it in time and space! Can i Patent this idea?
    Edited by 2 at 20/07/10 @ 09:29

  • Malek86 #14 2 years ago

    Well, at the very least, this sounds more interesting than 3D.

  • des #15 2 years ago

    Shitty glasses tech strikes again...flop

  • patch #16 2 years ago

    Maybe it's just me, but I'm having a hard time understanding why some people are anti 3D. Yes, it's expensive (at the moment) and yes, you have to wear glasses (at the moment), but no one's holding a gun to our heads and forcing it upon us. I guess the biggest complaint I can think you'd have is that it's diverting attention away from other projects? Is that it or is there more to the anti 3D point of view?

  • dubdivision #17 2 years ago

    This could be a great idea for watching films, I could watch zombie death dealers 7 while our lass watches soppy romance no.45.

    Would need headphones and glasses though.

  • azazel_fallenangel #18 2 years ago

    Sounds like a great Idea, if as people have said, you don't need to buy another pair of ridiculouly expensive glasses.

  • alcides #19 2 years ago

    It's still 3D! I daresay it hasn't been done on PC yet, let alone without glasses.
    I don't know, from what I get, this is about a screen right?
    and two players right?
    seing different images, right?
    But on the same screen?
    In 3D?
    Avatar-like 3D?

    Are we clear or did words just stop making sense? I might be the one who's lost here.

  • mingster #20 2 years ago

    For gods sake STOP trying to make us wear glasses.
    I might have to buy shares in Specsaver.

  • ryandsimmons #21 2 years ago

    Obvisouly you don't need to buy different glasses. and obviously it displays the image in 2d.

    Do people actually read the article?

    Instead of one person seeing Left/Right/Left/Right/Left/Right they just see Left/Left/Left/Left

    The other person sees Right/Right/Right.

    And no, there won't be 4 images.
    It's not exactly complicated and is explained in the artice.

  • SteelPriest #22 2 years ago

    Clearly you wouldn't need new glasses, they're controlled by the TV, so all it would have to do is synchronise the frequencies of both eyes rather than alternate them.

    If you've got a 3d TV, this sounds like a pretty good use of it for games that don't support 3d. It could concievably let someone watch telly on the same screen while you're gaming too.

  • Osahi #23 2 years ago

    No more 'oh, I was looking at your screen, that's why I lost'-excuse anymore :(

  • alcides #24 2 years ago

    @alphacowboy

    It's called a patent, it's only just that. Don't get all negative for people inventing amazing stuff. There's a new wave of consoles comming up on 2012-2013's horizon.

    I seriously doubt this will come through as it would need a sceen that is able to generates 4 images (admitedly?)... and glasses.
    I have more faith in that 3D camera system that tracks people in front of the screen and morphs its surface to offer you it's sweetest spot.

  • WizenWolfBain #25 2 years ago

    Let me get this straight.
    Sony 3DTV £2000
    Console £240


    OR

    2x HDTVs £1200
    2x Consoles £480.

    Hmm. Hmm indeed. I think i'd rather just fork out for another setup if split screen bothered me that much. So once again, no thanks Sony... Keep your 3D.

  • alcides #26 2 years ago

    @ryandsimmons

    "Sony has filed patents for a new stereoscopic system that would allow two gamers to enjoy 3D multiplayer without the need for split-screen. "


    EDIT: Ok, I read english, and english that makes sense. This article DOESN'T make sense, since the above quote refers to something entirely different. (basically multiplayer 3D on one screen, then plain multiplayer but on the same screen)

    Please Elie, fix that :D. It's like contradictory concepts that would require chips in our brains for stereothinking.

    Besides, this already exists on small GPS screens, without glasses. And there have been user comments everywhere that 3DS might do that too for multiplayer.


    Edited by 1 at 20/07/10 @ 10:05

  • Spunkweazle #27 2 years ago

    Instead of buying an expensive tv and another two pairs of silly glasses, why ddnt they just add a second HDMI port, LIKE THEY ORIGINALY SAID

  • chrisjm #28 2 years ago

    which is it? half the definition or half the frame rate. either way i expect it to be less kind on your eyes than traditional split screen.

  • Segnit #29 2 years ago

    From what I understand, for stereo multiplayer to work, 4 images will need to be generated = Pricey TV because:
    - You'll need TV's that have 4 times the refresh (60Hz x 4) for 30 frames per second gaming
    - 8 times the refresh for 60 frames per second.
    If my math is right.

    If it's for 2D multiplayer, then surely a different type of glasses are needed to then the default polarized stereoscopic ones. If that's the case, then having different sets of glasses in the living room sounds patently unappealing.

    Although I do love the sound of having the full screen to myself in local multiplayer, I think that the added horsepower needed for a console to render at least 2 instances of a game separately at full resolution, added with the trend of the slow decline in prices (slow for me anyway) of a high-end TV's. I think that this tech is at least 10 years away from being a reality for me (If ever, as wearing two sets of glasses is just too inconvenient). This coming from a self proclaimed graphics whore.

  • ryandsimmons #30 2 years ago

    @ Alcides.

    I'd suggest you reread the article:

    "Instead of having stereo 3d... two screens are being generated, one goes to each player.

    Edit: See my post below sorry.
    Edited by 1 at 20/07/10 @ 10:07

  • ryandsimmons #31 2 years ago

    I'd like to apologise. I was reading the article itself, I just noticed that EG have an innacurate headline and don't understand the article they are reporting. Ellie states that both players see 3d, but the article clearly states differently. Sorry folks.

    Very very por journalism there on EGs part.

  • RodHull #32 2 years ago

    Great idea. Although part of the fun of split screen is sneaking a peek at what your mates up to or where he's hiding out.

  • alcides #33 2 years ago

    you are right, and so am I

    unfortunately for me, you see beyond the nonsense of the article, therefore you are right-er, sir.
    Please allow that I was mislead by the headline.
    I humiliate myself before this great community of conoisseurs.

  • ryandsimmons #34 2 years ago

    @Milky1985.

    I did apologise for that and address it in my post above sorry.

  • davisorle #35 2 years ago

    Hell. if it can barely render at 30FPS with graphical sucrifises ( those later on mostly on current gen ) in order to do this it will have to do a x4 image ( one for each player's eye ) instead of x2 for a single player in 3D. Requirements will be WAY too high and probably half impossible for this gen's consoles.

    Good and really simple idea indeed though :) Will be great implemented for visually good games next gen ^^ By THEN 3D will be generally somethign easier to talk about turning mainstream too. Right now its too early.

  • malmer #36 2 years ago

    Everything would be better if patents were removed completely.

  • Nuronv #37 2 years ago

    "Sony has filed patents for a new stereoscopic system that would allow two gamers to enjoy 3D multiplayer without the need for split-screen."
    This is Wrong Ellie, close that farmville window and look at the patent you linked in the article!

  • AaronTurner #38 2 years ago

    I'm not sure why I'm getting negative points on my comment but let me explain why it's a ridiculous patent. Basically Sony are patenting a configuration of existing technology, it's like me putting in a patent for a 2 player PS3 game where people share 1 PS3 pad to play a multiplayer game. I just don't see how they can patent 'technology' like this.

  • HandOfBeadle #39 2 years ago

    If you're so short sighted that you're going to deride this concept by using today's prices as if this patent expires in 4-6 weeks, rather than thinking ahead 4-6 years, then it's likely 3D won't work for you anyway.

  • Sunyavadin #40 2 years ago

    Now this is a VASTLY superior use of the tech than 3D.

  • SilentNinja92 #41 2 years ago

    Thats a brilliant idea for so many reasons!!!

    I mean for starters you have a full screen each so having a smaller tv doesnt matter so much, but more importantly cheating will be eliminated!!

    Think about it, COD4 splitscreen would benefit hugely. Its so easy to see where the other players are making it impossible to use real tactics in some situations.

    Plus as tvs operate at higher refresh rates put the fps rate up and you could add more glasses in all operating out of sync so you could have 4 people all going at once.

    This is actually something which really excites me. Makes me want a 3D tv!!!!

  • TheApologist #42 2 years ago

    Some people are just so clever. Never would have thought of that application...

  • ryandsimmons #43 2 years ago

    @SilentNinja

    I imagine wouldn't work.

    It doesn't matter how much they increase the frame rate, you won't be able to have 4 players as you would only be seeing 25% of the frames, ie your eyes will be effectively blind for 75% of the time, I dread to think of the effects that would have.

    At that point I'd rather every just have the images displayed within the glasses, skip the TV altogether.

    Please note I am not an optician, I just play one on tv so take what I say with a bucket of salt.
    Edited by 1 at 20/07/10 @ 11:08

  • kangarootoo #44 2 years ago

    "Sony has filed patents for a new stereoscopic system that would allow two gamers to enjoy 3D multiplayer without the need for split-screen."


    BAAAALLLLLLSSS!!!!

    I invented that, right here on these very pages.

    That will teach me to keep my big mouth shut :(


    Edit: of course, I didn't invent it really, someone else almost certainly had the idea before me. Still, it felt like I had invented it, if only for a little while. Boohoo.


    Edit 2: "were filed a year ago". So I definitely didn't invent it, not even for a little while. Double boohoo.
    Edited by 2 at 20/07/10 @ 11:22

  • Darren #45 2 years ago

    Have they even considered the audio here for people with surround sound setups?

    Unless the two players are next to each other throughout the game you're going to have a problem with the position of the audio since it can only come from one place for one person. It would make it difficult to, say, work out where gunfire is coming from for the other player in a first or third-person shooter. Considering how effective surround sound is in most games I'd personally find it restrictive.

  • DrDamn #46 2 years ago

    Nice idea and hopefully the tech is already in the glasses they make now, otherwise it will be ...

    Player One please close your left eye ... Player Two please close your right eye ... 3 ... 2 ... 1 ... GO! :D

    @WizenWolfBain
    Or a Sony 3DTV including a PS3 and two pairs of glasses for £1600 ... Link

  • DrDamn #47 2 years ago

    @Darren
    Darren meet Splitscreen gaming, Splitscreen gaming meet Darren - he's been around quite a few years, it's a wonder you've not met him before.

  • mcbi4kh2 #48 2 years ago

    @Darren

    Stealth, I have no friends post.
    Edited by 1 at 20/07/10 @ 11:42

  • Xardan #49 2 years ago

    Enjoy your daily 3D related article.

  • ryandsimmons #50 2 years ago

    It would really be nice if EG fixed this. It's bad enough that they would print such innacurate tosh, but worse that they would leave it up there.

  • Sanxo #51 2 years ago

    So if the glasses weigh the same as a duck, Kaz Hirai is a witch?

  • gingerlink #52 2 years ago

    wait wait wait,

    to all the people saying you WON'T need different glasses, then surely if both players are using the same type of glasses, then they'll both see the same image. Therefore, you would need different glasses (both from each other and from the cinema glasses.

    And if watching it without glasses is going to be trippy, then imagine trying to watch it with regular 3d glasses (one image to each eye)...

  • plastickitty #53 2 years ago

    I remember seeing something similar on top gear not so long ago. There was a screen on the dash board that from the driver's perspective was a sat nav where as a passenger saw a tv screen which they could watch a DVD on. I assume the technology is different though as there was no need for glasses.

  • JGreene #54 2 years ago

    Jaguar has something very similar in ther XJ with the dual-view screen (single screen where the driver sees one image, passenger sees another) which doesn't require special glasses.

  • Coughthulu #55 2 years ago

    @Darren:

    The patent shows glasses with earbuds in.

    I believe the Bravia teles are all use active stereo glasses, don't they? So the tele controls which shutter is open at any one time, it's not polarised. I guess this means you could use the same glasses as long as the tele knows to blank both lenses at once, instead of alternatively.


  • Paulie_P #56 2 years ago

    @patch

    I'm not anti 3D but you have to recognise that theres a reason why people are so against glasses. Say I had a few mates round to the house and we had a movie on, I may not have glasses for everyone and it would just be uncomfortable for everyone sitting around nattering to each other while the movie is on. Also what about long term effects for people who aren't wearing the glasses, does it affect young children's eyesight - especially from newborn to toddlers, their eyes are still developing at that stage in their life, will looking at these images without glasses affect them?

    Yes, they're not holding a gun to our heads but this 3D thing is being rammed down our throats as if it was the 2nd coming of Christ. I went to see Avatar in 3D, yes the 3D was impressive but I don't think it greatly enhanced the experience. Maybe there are ideas or concepts involving 3D that I have not seen yet or can't think of right now but at the moment theres nothing to make me think it was to be the be all and end all of my movie/gaming experience.

    Heck the only reason I moved to HD was because I couldn't read the text in Dead Rising! - I watched Friday the Thirteenth in HD, very impressive all that darkness in HD glory - I could've got the same experience if I just turned off the tv!

    End rant.

  • asphaltcowboy #57 2 years ago

    @ryandsimmons - Yeah, just realised that the headline is what makes it confusing - it's inaccurate! 8)

  • rprince #58 2 years ago

    Argh! They don't use polarisation for home TV! Think about what that would mean. Magical pixels which emit light in two polarisations. That's expensive. These TVs are using the LCD shutter glasses which have existed for at least 10 years, which is why it's now being mass market commercialised. Argh!

    With regard to EG's headline claim. The patent does seem to say that it is only doing 2D images, just one per player (which is perfectly possible, as the PS3 tells the TV over the HDMI protocol which image is which and for who; then the TV shutters the appropriate eye(s)). However, it is perfectly possible to run a multiplayer game in 3D, it just probably won't be Crysis!

    A 3D TV runs at 120Hz, so that's up to 60fps per eye. If you wanted to do 3D multiplayer, it would run at 30fps per eye. That's still an acceptable framerate, especially for multiplayer. You rarely get 60fps multiplayer as it is!

  • rprince #59 2 years ago

    The real issue, as mentioned, is sound. Either everyone hears everything (though I guess that worked fine with GoldenEye) or the glasses need headphones. The patent images suggest headphones are the solution, but that would require different glasses to the regular 3D ones, which would make the idea infeasible. I guess the solution is to just munge all the sound together like GoldenEye!

  • TheChieftian #60 2 years ago

    I wouldn't assume this won't need new tvs / glasses, at least in some cases. I'd say the hard part isn't telling both lenses to blank at the same time but telling 2 different pairs of glasses 2 different things at the same time. Can the current tech talk to each pair of glasses individually or is it (as I'd assume at least for wireless glasses) more of a broadcast signal that all glasses get?

    @rprince
    30fps may be perfectly playable but having glasses that refresh at 30fps certainly isn't. 60fps is barely acceptable for glasses without causing headaches.

  • CrispyLog #61 2 years ago

    But be careful when playing splitscreen, for if your two lines of sight cross then all life as you know it will stop instantaneously and every moelcule in your body will explode at the speed of light!

  • MORZTAN #62 2 years ago

    Shit.....

    I wrote this idea in a Eurogamer forum a while ago... Should have filed a patent.

  • JJrabbit #63 2 years ago

    I'm slightly confused by some of the comments, or I'm just not understanding. Why are there 4 images being rendered? Surely, it's just 2 - one for each player? The actual system isn't 3D, it just uses the theory of how 3D films are generated (i.e. one image to each eye). Have I got the wrong end of the stick here?

  • DrDamn #64 2 years ago

    @JJrabbit
    No you've got the correct and obvious end of the stick labelled handle. The headline and text of the article are a little confusing though.

  • bugalinho #65 2 years ago

    Don't know about u guys but I smell somthing awesome. That is really innovative stuff. I'll continue to split my sceen 4 local MP though. 3D is waay too expensive, adding to the fact that it requires me to wear goofy glasses.

  • alexbulluk #66 2 years ago

    This is an awesome idea. How can people not be excited for this?

    I play split screen a lot, and I can tell you, if wearing some glasses means I'll get a full screen to myself (and my brother can't cheat) then it seems well worth it.

    Good move by Sony.

  • Ryze #67 2 years ago

    Brilliant stuff!

    Now I want to wait for these glasses before investing in 3D!!!!

    :D

    Nice one Sony! Hate on this one, haters!

  • Darren #68 2 years ago

    @DrDamn - OK so I'd forgotten about splitscreen gaming, probably because the last time I even used it was Halo on the Xbox and that was before I got a surround sound system. Whatever, the system Sony are proposing seems pretty rubbish to me with obvious limitations and I doubt it'll ever catch on, simply because most people won't have the hardware to use it. I'll say the same for 3D as a whole actually.

  • holloguts #69 2 years ago

    I remember in the late 70's early 80's a similar idea was invented for people to view different tv channels on the same screen. This used a pair glasses that set a shutter speed to filter in the intended channel and allowed headphones for sound. A working product was created but of course failed to go any further.

    Possibility of a patent infringement coming up in the future against Sony?

  • SG #70 2 years ago

    So rather than half a screen in 3D you get the option of having a whole screen in 2D. Good idea IMO.

  • DrStrangelove #71 2 years ago

    Sounds like it will only work with shutter 3D like those Sony makes, and won't work with polarised 3D, which is actually far superior.

  • DrDamn #72 2 years ago

    Far superior in a half the resolution kind of way?

  • smelly #73 2 years ago

    So you're running and rendering the whole game twice at the same resolution?

    Sounds like it'd nuke the frame rate.

  • monkfishjoe #74 2 years ago

    Sounds ace. Very clever. Splitscreen multiplayer wouldn't work in 3D, but I can't see how this will be 2 3D images?

    Edit: Why the fuck is this negged?
    Edited by 1 at 26/07/10 @ 22:18