Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Sony To Launch First 3D PS3 Games On Friday

Soulskill posted more than 4 years ago | from the how-about-games-with-a-three-dimensional-story dept.

Graphics 151

Stoobalou writes "Sony plans to show off the first 3D PlayStation 3 games in the UK on 10 June, with a retail launch on 11 June. If you were wondering why Sony is shutting down half the PSN today for maintenance, then wonder no more. We reckon the company's simply gearing up for the launch of the PlayStation 3's first stereoscopic 3D games. Unfortunately, many game developers are seemingly indifferent to the 3D revolution at the moment. In fact, EA CEO John Riccitiello reckons that it's going to be a good three years before 3D becomes a standard gaming feature. Riccitiello explained that there's a big difference between converting a game to run in 3D mode and properly developing it to take full advantage of the extra dimension."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Sony reserves the right (5, Insightful)

TouchAndGo (1799300) | more than 4 years ago | (#32520542)

to revoke this PS3 feature based on their whims

I reserve the right (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32520612)

to misuse the subject line too.

Re:I reserve the right (1)

Niubi (1578987) | more than 4 years ago | (#32521384)

to namecheck DubLi!

Re:Sony reserves the right (-1, Troll)

N0Man74 (1620447) | more than 4 years ago | (#32522398)

Careful... last time I made a minor joke regarding Sony revoking features, I got modded a troll. Some people are sensitive about their Play-Boxes.

Re:Sony reserves the right (1)

poetmatt (793785) | more than 4 years ago | (#32522768)

I suspect they'll revoke it based on the performance requirements, citing their whims.

3d by nvidia seems to require twice the graphics performance to hit 60fps - aka you have to do 120FPS and alternate it between each eye.

PS3 at this point is old hardware, to push it further with 3d will probably necessitate a hardware upgrade (PS4).

It's a shame (2, Funny)

pinkushun (1467193) | more than 4 years ago | (#32520562)

It's a shame there are no YouTube videos of this 3D game in action.

Re:It's a shame (1)

mweather (1089505) | more than 4 years ago | (#32520766)

I'm sure there will be, considering Youtube supports stereoscopic video.

Re:It's a shame (1)

gravos (912628) | more than 4 years ago | (#32521326)

You can use the cross-eye method for viewing stereo videos on youtube.

Re:It's a shame (1)

GrumblyStuff (870046) | more than 4 years ago | (#32521066)

What is this game? TFA is kaput at the moment but you'd think the name of it would be mentioned at least....

About time! I'm tired of 2D platformers (4, Funny)

noidentity (188756) | more than 4 years ago | (#32520568)

It's about time they start using their 3D graphics hardware. I'm pretty tired of 2D platformers. You can only take so many Castlevania Symphony of the Night sequels. I'd been wondering if the system could even DO polygons and 3D stuff, given the total absence of 3D games. I just don't see how Sony has done so well with a 2D-only system.

Re:About time! I'm tired of 2D platformers (0, Redundant)

Andtalath (1074376) | more than 4 years ago | (#32520982)

No, you haven't.
You've played games with a 3d world locked in by a 2d interface.

Doom would be 2,3d, quake would be 2,6d and now, finally, comes 2,9d.

Full 3D will also require multiple screens or bent screens.

Re:About time! I'm tired of 2D platformers (1)

noidentity (188756) | more than 4 years ago | (#32521054)

There are plenty of people with sight in only one eye who will testify that they see the same 3D world us two-eye-sighted people do. Two displays is just two 2D interfaces, in your terms.

Re:About time! I'm tired of 2D platformers (1)

somersault (912633) | more than 4 years ago | (#32521416)

They see the same world we do, but from only one point of view which means that they have no in-built sense of depth. Do you honestly believe a person with only one eye can perceive depth the same as a normal sighted person?

Of course 2 displays are just two 2D interfaces. Two cameras (or eyes) on the other hand, enable a new way to interpret the world around you in what some would call "2.5D".

Re:About time! I'm tired of 2D platformers (1)

xaxa (988988) | more than 4 years ago | (#32521632)

You can get a sense of depth with a single camera/eye by moving around -- perspective changes as you move.

I have two eyes though, so I don't know what people with only one eye actually do. But a friend's university project used a single, moving camera to construct a 3D scene -- I think it worked best indoors, as the software was looking for straight lines and right-angles.

Re:About time! I'm tired of 2D platformers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32522248)

I have two eyes though, so I don't know what people with only one eye actually do.

If only there were some way to find out... like closing one of your eyes or wearing an eye patch.

You could advance science and sport the pirate look that chicks dig.

Re:About time! I'm tired of 2D platformers (2, Funny)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 4 years ago | (#32522868)

If only there were some way to find out... like closing one of your eyes or wearing an eye patch.

There's also the fork method, but it's permanent.

Re:About time! I'm tired of 2D platformers (2, Interesting)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 4 years ago | (#32521930)

Do you honestly believe a person with only one eye can perceive depth the same as a normal sighted person?

Yes. I've seen it.

One eyed archer. He looks downrange and moves his head side to side. and can tell me the range to target. Same as the two eyed people can.

Re:About time! I'm tired of 2D platformers (1)

insufflate10mg (1711356) | more than 4 years ago | (#32522098)

Right because of PARALLAX, not stereoscopy.

Re:About time! I'm tired of 2D platformers (0, Redundant)

poetmatt (793785) | more than 4 years ago | (#32522182)

hahahaha what? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallax [wikipedia.org] says that it involves stereoscopy or two viewpoints.

Parallax is an apparent displacement or difference in the apparent position of an object viewed along two different lines of sight, and is measured by the angle or semi-angle of inclination between those two lines.

Nobody talked about the guy moving around, especially considering archery.

Re:About time! I'm tired of 2D platformers (1)

somersault (912633) | more than 4 years ago | (#32522144)

Yeah I tried going one eyes earlier and you can tell depth with side to side movement, but that's not exactly efficient when you're doing something like driving for example... then again I can drive fine on 2D computer games so driving with one eye for real probably wouldn't be much different..

Re:About time! I'm tired of 2D platformers (1)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 4 years ago | (#32522728)

It may not be efficient, but it's a pretty cool dance move.

Re:About time! I'm tired of 2D platformers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32522286)

If you have to move your head from side to side to get some sense of depth, then its not the same as two eyed people

Re:About time! I'm tired of 2D platformers (2, Funny)

Barny (103770) | more than 4 years ago | (#32521228)

Bleh, I will wait till 4.5D when they are bringing out more classes and such, I bet they will have a whole new set of books to buy too.

Wait, what were we talking about again?

Re:About time! I'm tired of 2D platformers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32522026)

That fact that I got right away out of context that makes me sad...

*rolls d20 to determine next emotion*

Re:About time! I'm tired of 2D platformers (1)

Barny (103770) | more than 4 years ago | (#32522730)

*watched you roll a 1*

Looks like you have to go Emo now, thats -4int and -8cha

Re:About time! I'm tired of 2D platformers (1)

HalAtWork (926717) | more than 4 years ago | (#32522862)

You can only take so many Castlevania Symphony of the Night sequels

I actually wish there were more... and I would love to see a true high definition sequel or remake of Symphony of the Night (the planned Harmony of Despair [gamekicker.com] actually recycles sprites from the standard def games and the DS games, so it is not true high def).

First 3D games? (2, Funny)

dangitman (862676) | more than 4 years ago | (#32520578)

Sony plans to show off the first 3D PlayStation 3 games in the UK on 10 June

That's weird. I've had 3D games on my PS3 for years. Even had them on the PS2 as well.

Re:First 3D games? (2, Funny)

Psaakyrn (838406) | more than 4 years ago | (#32520660)

But we're talking about real 3D graphics, not those fake simulations on a 2D image.

Of cause, how to implement this 3D without it being a mere add-on is the question. For some reason, I'd think Nintendo would do it better, seeing their extensive forays into worlds which implements 3D environments in a not-just-2D-planes-stacked-on-top-of-one-another manner.

Existing games which I'd think would benefit from 3D:

Flight sims (like X-Wing vs Tie Fighter)
Atmospheric games (like Shadow of the Collosus)
3D platformers (in the vein of Super Mario 64)

Re:First 3D games? (3, Informative)

dangitman (862676) | more than 4 years ago | (#32520738)

But we're talking about real 3D graphics, not those fake simulations on a 2D image.

You mean, Sony has implemented holography? I don't think so. They are talking about stereoscopic imaging, which is pretty much a slightly advanced "fake simulation on a 2D image," hardly "real 3D graphics." Anyway, "3D graphics" has been a term used to describe 3D perspective renderings on a 2D plane for decades.

Even then, it's still not the first stereoscopic gaming on the PS3 - for example, G-Force [wikipedia.org] used red-blue anaglyph stereography on the PS3 and Xbox, and there were many other stereoscopic games on older platforms such as the PS2 and PC.

Re:First 3D games? (1)

Psaakyrn (838406) | more than 4 years ago | (#32520760)

I'd think a system which delivers separate images to each eye is sufficiently 3D, but I'll admit it's just schematics. Still, this is more of to go with the stereoscopic technology which many TV makers are trying to sell these days.

Also, a nitpick: I wouldn't call the PC an "older platform", since it is essentially an evergreen, evolving platform. Probably more suitable to use "generations", which technically would go all the way back to the NES days... (and the Virtual Boy for a dedicated console, for that matter)

Re:First 3D games? (1)

Barny (103770) | more than 4 years ago | (#32521246)

PC has supported multiple types of stereo vision for quite a while now (from the old days of taping a piece of cardboard to the middle of your screen and resting your head against it, to colour glasses to the newer shutter glasses systems).

As for your "fake simulation on a 2D image" is like calling video a "fake simulation of moving pictures using still frames", technically its correct, but if its enough to fool the eyes, its very much the real deal :)

Re:First 3D games? (2, Insightful)

Merls the Sneaky (1031058) | more than 4 years ago | (#32521608)

As for your "fake simulation on a 2D image" is like calling video a "fake simulation of moving pictures using still frames", technically its correct, but if its enough to fool the eyes, its very much the real deal :)

Only if you have two functional eyes. Non- depth perception 3D is perfectly acceptable to use with only one eye. New polarised glasses do nothing for those with only one eye, if games start going in the direction of requiring depth perception of the type requiring two eyes, that just fucks up gaming for them. Sure they could still enjoy a movie but playing a game where they have to interact at $distance?

Re:First 3D games? (1)

gblackwo (1087063) | more than 4 years ago | (#32521802)

I don't see how a game could rely on depth perception to the disadvantage of a one eyed person any more than those people are already at a disadvantage in real life. Unless your idea of a game is, guess how many meters away this pole is...

Re:First 3D games? (1)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 4 years ago | (#32521980)

Yup just like how one eyed people cant aim and fire a gun, or shoot archery, target practice....

Oh wait, they do. lack of 3d does not hamper them at all as they learn to adapt. and the cheesy 3d we will get with video games will not affect gameplay.. it's only going to be put in as a "by golly" effect and nothing more.

Re:First 3D games? (1)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 4 years ago | (#32521968)

shutter glasses systems have been around for PC 3d far longer than the cardboard and 2 color glasses. It's not new.

I had a set from Sega that plugged into the printer port back in 1995....

They sucked then.... They suck now. Until you can eliminate the glasses it will continue to suck.

Re:First 3D games? (1)

Barny (103770) | more than 4 years ago | (#32522712)

Cardboard... I was playing a modified version of mechwarrior 1 on my 286 with cardboard down the middle of the screen ;)

Re:First 3D games? (2, Interesting)

xtracto (837672) | more than 4 years ago | (#32521664)

Bah! as always, Sony keeps imitating Nintendo. I played 3D games in the original NES almost a quarter of a century ago [wikipedia.org] .
That's REAL 3D games ... as real as what GP called real (using some type of glasses)

Now, regarding holographic games, I remember playing such an arcade game around 1991 [wikipedia.org]

Re:First 3D games? (1)

protektor (63514) | more than 4 years ago | (#32522540)

Time Traveler wasn't holographic. It just used a cute trick with a curved mirror and a regular monitor of mostly black background video to make you think it was holographic. It wasn't even close to holographic. They even sell a similar "holographic" trick science kit in most gift shops at museums and science centers.

http://www.chinaberry.com/prod.cfm/pgc/11900/sbc/11907/inv/16066/tid/628021801?zmam=7946946&zmas=2&zmac=40&zmap=16066 [chinaberry.com]

There is a company that sells one of those kits that is just a set of mirrors that fakes out your eye to make you think it is hologram when it isn't.

The black backgrounds in Time Traveler are what help to sell the trick, other than the special mirrors. If the background in the videos had been full multiple color backgrounds then the trick would not have worked.

Re:First 3D games? (1)

Per Wigren (5315) | more than 4 years ago | (#32521982)

Head tracking [youtube.com] is also an option. Skip to 2:28 if you are impatient. It only works for one person at a time though...

Re:First 3D games? (1)

Pawnn (1708484) | more than 4 years ago | (#32522058)

Rad Racer for NES FTW!

Re:First 3D games? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32520916)

God I can't wait to play X-Wing vs. Tie Fighter in 3D. I've dreamed about this day for so long.

Re:First 3D games? (1)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 4 years ago | (#32521944)

News flash: It's still fake.

Another news flash. It's gonna suck unless you own a TV capable of it or a 120hz tv that really IS 120hz and not all marketing hype like most of the sets that touted it were.

I.E. Displays 120hz! but wont accept a signal that is 120hz refresh rate....

YOu got them on a 2D television... (2, Interesting)

aepervius (535155) | more than 4 years ago | (#32520678)

Those game used a trick to make your brain think stuff looked in 3D when in reality they are all flat. Now they want to gear up to be able to send *stereoscopic* signal to a TV, which is another trick to make your brain seeing a 3D image by sending two different image to the right and left eye. This is theoretically better than the trick 3D we have on 2D TV since actually the eyes are really seeing different perspective. In other word Sony climb up on the 3D TV bandwagon.

Re:YOu got them on a 2D television... (1)

dangitman (862676) | more than 4 years ago | (#32520746)

Those game used a trick to make your brain think stuff looked in 3D when in reality they are all flat. Now they want to gear up to be able to send *stereoscopic* signal to a TV, which is another trick to make your brain seeing a 3D image by sending two different image to the right and left eye.

But as I noted in my previous post up-thread, this is definitely not the first stereoscopic imaging in PS3 games. There are PS3 and PS2 games that used stereography via red-blue anaglyph.

Re:YOu got them on a 2D television... (1)

mweather (1089505) | more than 4 years ago | (#32520778)

In other word Sony climb up on the 3D TV bandwagon.

Weren't they the first ones to sell 3D TVs?

Re:YOu got them on a 2D television... (1)

iainl (136759) | more than 4 years ago | (#32521242)

Actually, Samsung got their one to market about a month before. In the UK, at least - I'm not sure which came out first internationally.

Re:First 3D games? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32520724)

I had them on my 32X.

Cross-Media (2, Funny)

Lord_of_the_nerf (895604) | more than 4 years ago | (#32520582)

Does this mean the producers of Clash of the Titans can rush in some crappy 3D DLC to go with their crappy rushed movie 3D as well?

Late to the niche market by some time (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32520632)

the 3-D adventures of world-runner (by square) on the NES already had this feature, just press Select button.

And IIRC, it wasn't the only game on the NES to showcase 3-D.

And does anyone wonder why it's been mostly forgotten?

Re:Late to the niche market by some time (1)

Psaakyrn (838406) | more than 4 years ago | (#32520680)

Other than it being essentially monochrome because of the 3D technology being used at that point in time?

Because it didn't work well (1)

Sycraft-fu (314770) | more than 4 years ago | (#32522116)

The problem that past stereoscopic stuff has had is that it was based on the red/blue anaglyph techniques which suck. Even at the best of times, it still messes with colour and doesn't give all that convincing an image. So while it was toyed with, it was never really used much. Also games had to be specially designed to do the 3D. Since they were just sprite based, you had to take the time to implement whatever 3D effects you wanted in a game.

The new 3D technology does it with high speed shuttering. Each eye is shown 60 fps, out of phase with the other eye, so 120fps total. Net effect is a slight loss in brightness but no colour or other problems. Works pretty well. Also essentially all games are 3D now. They all use the 3D rendering of the GPU/console. Because of this, because they are storing Z data anyhow, there's little to no change that needs to be made to make them work with shutter glasses. Occasionally there's one that has problems, but by and large they all work out of the box.

nVidia played around with it some back in the CRT days, but the problem was refresh rate. You needed insanely high refresh (100Hz absolute minimum, 120Hz realistically) to eliminate the appearance of flicker and few monitors could handle it. Also video cards got easily over loaded by having to produce double the number of frames.

Now however video cards are more powerful, and some LCDs can pull 120Hz, so it is more feasible.

All in all I still think it is likely to be a passing fad because it still requires glasses, and requires them for all viewers. If I'm watching a 3D movie or playing a 3D game, anyone who comes in to the room is going to see a blurry mess on the TV unless they also wear glasses. Makes it less usable in many situations.

We'll see though, it is for sure better than anything in the past.

3D (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32520664)

We aren't cut out for 3D, we only have 2 x 2D. Hype :P

Knowing Sony (3, Funny)

$RANDOMLUSER (804576) | more than 4 years ago | (#32520672)

It'll be a 3D side scroller. With a rootkit.

Re:Knowing Sony (1)

Psaakyrn (838406) | more than 4 years ago | (#32520770)

Actually, all the demos of gameplay I've seen using the 3D technology (not counting FMV and trailer) has always been car racing.

Re:Knowing Sony (1)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 4 years ago | (#32522690)

And Japan will get it about a year before everyone else.

Fulltime wearer of Glasses (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32520676)

Until they develop 3D that doesn't require wearing special glasses, I for one have absolutely no interest in this technology.

Re:Fulltime wearer of Glasses (2)

LingNoi (1066278) | more than 4 years ago | (#32520822)

I'm with you. It's the same as 3D movies which I also hate as does my girlfriend. It adds nothing to the experience, is annoying and just costs more.

Re:Fulltime wearer of Glasses (1)

NoZart (961808) | more than 4 years ago | (#32521144)

Yeah, but for gaming it can add a new - uhm - dimension.

Not just visually, it can change the way we play a little. People have already commented that playing Racing Games in stereo changes the way how you approach turns. I myself tried stereoscopic Q3 a few years back and found that it was a bit easier to calculate trajectories of grenades.

Re:Fulltime wearer of Glasses (1, Troll)

Merls the Sneaky (1031058) | more than 4 years ago | (#32521618)

So if you're one eyes Sony just put you at a disadvantage in racing games. Another reason to hate sony I guess.

Re:Fulltime wearer of Glasses (-1, Flamebait)

gblackwo (1087063) | more than 4 years ago | (#32521732)

You guys are pissing me off today. If you have only one eye, turn the damn 3d off. It is an option, not a requirement. And you can't blame sony for putting you at a disadvantage. Gonna blame the DMV or someone else for putting you at a disadvantage with drivers with two eyes? Blame whomever is responsible for your lack of eyesight in one eye.

Re:Fulltime wearer of Glasses (1)

Trogre (513942) | more than 4 years ago | (#32521482)

Yes, just like colour film and stereo sound.

Re:Fulltime wearer of Glasses (3, Insightful)

LingNoi (1066278) | more than 4 years ago | (#32521954)

Wearing things on your face for 2 hours is a completely different matter to colour or stereo sound. It's also extra annoying if you already have to wear glasses anyway.

The only reason they're making everything 3D is so people can't cam it anyway, stop making it sound like it's some kind of breakthrough in technology when it only exists to charge you extra.

Re:Fulltime wearer of Glasses (1)

Firethorn (177587) | more than 4 years ago | (#32522284)

The only reason they're making everything 3D is so people can't cam it anyway,

What do you mean can't cam it? All you need is the appropriate polarized lens. Well, two cams and the polarized lenses if you want to get the 3D effect. Probably takea a lot of post processing at that point, but you could do it.

Personally, I figure they're making things 3D as a gimmick to get people to go to the theater.

Between bigger widescreen TVs and blue-ray, they were losing a lot of their business to people willing to wait to watch it on their 'home theater'. $3k for a 3D capable LCD TV is still quite a price leap for most people.

Re:Fulltime wearer of Glasses (1)

protektor (63514) | more than 4 years ago | (#32522624)

All you need is a 120+hz/120+fps video camera to make sure it actually catches ever frame that is put up on the screen and your fine. The cycle your glasses at the correct 60hz or whatever, and you will see the exact same thing as what everyone else in the theater saw. So no it isn't hard in theory to still cam a 3D film. The problem is, if you can find a camera that records enough fps to do it. I have no idea how many fps most camcorders do these days.

Well they have. (1)

alexandre_ganso (1227152) | more than 4 years ago | (#32520858)

It is exactly what we were gaming for years. The gimmick of adding perspective and focus to an image is as far as we can get to 3d in a flat screen. As long as both eyes receive the same image, of course.

The only new thing here is that they are trying to sell these so-called 3d screens. And you know what is their innovation? It's called interleaving. They show one image for each eye, with the old pal flicker.

Try attaching a 3d blu-ray to a 2d tv set. You will see both images, one after the other. Both with half the original resolution.

No, thanks. My current tv is good enough. I don't need to split its image and get a headache just for sony to release a new 3d hd screen in five years, with less flickering.

Re:Well they have. (1)

NoZart (961808) | more than 4 years ago | (#32521074)

huh?
Whats interleaving got to do with it?

The 3DTVs sold around here (=Austria) rely on shutterglasses.
You run your TV in 200 Hz, and show one frame for the left and then one for the right eye and shutter accordingly. Wouldn't interleaving defy the whole concept?

Also 100Hz per eye is not exactly PAL flicker anymore.

Re:Well they have. (1)

iainl (136759) | more than 4 years ago | (#32521254)

They do, but the discs are delivering 960x1080 frames, rather than doubling the bandwidth requirements.

Didn't notice the maintenance (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32520684)

Haven't been on PSN since they made me choose between PSN and Other OS.

the first 3D games (4, Informative)

mogness (1697042) | more than 4 years ago | (#32520730)

From a different source [playstation.com] , the first 3d games will be

* WipEout HD (full game): Experience the adrenalin rush of navigating the twists and turns of futuristic racetracks at breathtaking speeds like never before.
* Super Stardust HD (full game): Experience asteroids fly past you as you navigate the deadly battleground — only a battle on a cosmic level will save the indigenous life below from destruction.
* PAIN: The stereoscopic 3D content will include the Downtown area and tutorial along with three modes, including two new modes created specifically with stereoscopic 3D in mind, Alien Toss and Ice Breaker.
* MotorStorm Pacific Rift (demo): MotorStorm Pacific Rift in stereoscopic 3D puts you in the driver’s seat of a buggy for a one track, single player race around the deadly Kanaloa Bay for a dangerously real battle against ruthless opponents.

I haven't been a fan of the whole 3D TV thing, but I could really get into 3D video games. For that, I'd wear the silly glasses.

Re:the first 3D games (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32522006)

3D-TVs are far too small for watching movies (or do I just think that because I'm used to 3D only from theaters? Do I have to sit closer to the TV? What at first appears like a huge TV, seems far too small as soon as you put the 3D glasses on. It's like looking through a tiny window and feels not so much as immersion, but still just as watching), but for games this could be more interesting. Wipeout in 3D just has to be awesome...

Re:the first 3D games (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32522112)

I'm not sure stereoscopic vision will add much, but damn, now I want to play Wipeout in a CAVE.

Re:the first 3D games (1)

RivenAleem (1590553) | more than 4 years ago | (#32522676)

Wip3out in a piranha played at highest speed setting from inside the cockpit was already pretty shit-yer-pants scary at times. I remember when I was playing it comfortably on tracks I knew very well you could see my brother sitting beside me flinching left to right as I turned corners.

In 3-D it is going to be pretty extreme. I'll have to put in another order for adult diapers.

Re:the first 3D games (1)

protektor (63514) | more than 4 years ago | (#32522716)

I never got the point of 3D anything, games or movies using shutter glasses/colored glasses. The effect isn't of things flying out of the TV/screen it has always been more of a depth of the TV/Screen appearing to be deeper, rather than flat. Like you could stick your hand in to the TV, rather than something leaping out of it.

The ONLY time I ever really got the point of 3D was when I used to go to a local arcade that had those Virtuality 1000/2000/3000 systems that Edison Brothers had for the US. We had one of the test arcades here that had all the Virtuality gaming systems here. So I got to play all the stuff and even a few games that it seems were never officially released to the general public (other arcades).

Those were the only games I ever got the use of real 3D, because they were using 2 displays that were several inches from your eye, and covered most of your field of vision, and blacked out everything else so you didn't really notice that it wasn't 100% of your FOV. Or at least I never really noticed in the middle of game that it wasn't 100% of my FOV.

Tired of false advertisting (2, Insightful)

xororand (860319) | more than 4 years ago | (#32520776)

Stereoscopic imaging is not real 3D. It doesn't allow you to change the focal point. That's why stereoscopy is fatiguing. Also, you can't change your point of view. Yes, there are some kludgy workarounds like head-tracking or displays that work like lenticular images. Still, it's not the same as real 3D [engadget.com] .

Fighting this word abuse is an uphill battle that probably can't be won. Hacking isn't cracking either. Gotta go, have to shoo some kids off my lawn.

Re:Tired of false advertisting (2, Insightful)

Psaakyrn (838406) | more than 4 years ago | (#32520844)

However, holograms aren't the solution either, since they've a limited distance before images would get cut off by real-world objects. The only real solution would still be stereoscopic imaging (or equivalent) coupled with both head and eyeball tracking. We've 2 parts of the solution publicly available and mass-producible.

Re:Tired of false advertisting (2, Funny)

NoZart (961808) | more than 4 years ago | (#32521082)

Maybe because "Fake depth perception gaming" is just such a mouthful ;-)

Re:Tired of false advertisting (1)

TheVelvetFlamebait (986083) | more than 4 years ago | (#32521084)

Tired of false advertising

So, I suppose, every time you hear of a 3D movie/television/game, there's some confusion. You hold out hope that they are referring to real 3D, but every time, you are crushed and disappointed. False advertising only occurs when there is some kind of fraud being perpetrated, that is, when the advertisement exploits some confusion about what is being sold. If everyone knows what they're talking about (and, for practical purposes, everyone does), then it's not a fraudulent advertisement; it's a marketing term.

Besides, if you have a look at the link [playstation.com] provided by the guy posting above you, you'll see that Sony refers everywhere to "Stereoscopic 3D", rather than "Real 3D", so I think you'll find that the advertising is far from fraudulent, even by your standards.

Re:Tired of false advertisting (1)

ashvin213 (1602795) | more than 4 years ago | (#32521828)

The only solution to real 3D gaming is direct Retinal Projection. One step Better, wire your brain like in Matrix.

Re:Tired of false advertisting (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32521378)

combine with Head Tracking ?

N ...

Re:Tired of false advertisting (2, Insightful)

L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) | more than 4 years ago | (#32522074)

Further, piracy is not stealing.

Good luck getting either of these changed. Public view is already skewed, and it's only a matter of time before common use dictates a change in definition in the dictionary.

This makes no sense (3, Insightful)

Zouden (232738) | more than 4 years ago | (#32520870)

"If you were wondering why Sony is shutting down half the PSN today for maintenance, then wonder no more. We reckon the company's simply gearing up for the launch of the PlayStation 3's first stereoscopic 3D games."

I don't see how graphics-rendering technology requires an overhaul of the network. The third dimension doesn't require more bandwidth.

Re:This makes no sense (2, Funny)

bky1701 (979071) | more than 4 years ago | (#32521024)

Don't be silly. It requires the bandwidth used now, times the square root of it.

Just wait until comcast hears about this!

Re:This makes no sense (2, Interesting)

DrXym (126579) | more than 4 years ago | (#32521958)

More likely server maintenance is for something coming up in E3. Perhaps the PSN+ service or whatever. Or maybe they just choose to do major maintenance at this time of year because it's quieter so it's less disruptive.

Re:This makes no sense (1)

L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) | more than 4 years ago | (#32522708)

Nerds exhibit sunlight-evading behaviour. You'd think that winter would be the time to do maintenance, as the opportunity to avoid sunlight while outside is much more long lived.

Oh effing great! (1, Interesting)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 4 years ago | (#32521248)

Do we now get the same kind of games that we have in movies? I.e. completely content-free, riding entirely on the "IN 3D!!!" ticket?

Are we going to get games that HAVE to use that 3D feature whether it makes sense or not, as it's been done far too many times with whatever gimmicky new technology was the fad of the day, from the advent of easy three dimensional rendering (in all seriousness, did we really want to have that "free 3D movement" in SimCity-ish strategy games?), to the Wii controller that made sense in maybe 10% of the games that tried to use it as the input device?

I hope and pray that they manage to keep the feature sensible and it doesn't get abused as the latest fad gimmick to replace content.

Re:Oh effing great! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32522276)

the Wii controller that made sense in maybe 10% of the games that tried to use it as the input device?

Did the Wii ship with a more appropriate controller? No? Then all games for the Wii must use that controller appropriate or not. Even I see that and I don't own a Wii nor want one.

Whats the main difference (1)

Z80a (971949) | more than 4 years ago | (#32521278)

Between this new 3D glasses tech, and the Sega Master System 3D glasses?

Besides the fact it runs on twice the frame rate and the lack of wire of course.

Avatar... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32521400)

...the game is in Stereo 3D. Had it for months, looks amazing on the 46" JVC 3D TV we have in the office...

how much will this cost? (1)

richman555 (675100) | more than 4 years ago | (#32521598)

Well as long as I don't have to buy another flatscreen TV for this.... has anyone noticed 3D TVs cost upwards of $3,000? Add a 3D blue ray player for another $350.... I think 3D in gaming can be cool.... the price is just outrageous.

Re:how much will this cost? (1)

gblackwo (1087063) | more than 4 years ago | (#32521874)

just get a ps3, 299.

Re:how much will this cost? (1)

DrXym (126579) | more than 4 years ago | (#32521998)

The price will drop. In a few years every midrange TV & blu ray player will boast 3D support and chances are the technology will be more stable and full featured by then too.

10 years later... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32521670)

yawn. I was playing quake 2 and 3 on pc with nvidia lcd shutter glasses 10 years ago.

Screwing the elderly (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32521842)

Well, you see, Sony has done it again, and proved they just don't get it.
Nintendo has managed to build a system which appeals to everyone from aged 2 to 102 with the Wii.

Why? Because its accessible.

Guess what? If people start developing games that NEED 3d, then they are going to lose a significant portion of the population that can't see 3d images, a lot of those folks over 70 who don't have full vision in both eyes... anyone who might have any sort of vision problems that prevents them from seeing in 3D will not be able to play games that are specifically designed for 3D.

Re:Screwing the elderly (1)

Z80a (971949) | more than 4 years ago | (#32522726)

Nintendo 3DS?

so.... (1)

Charliemopps (1157495) | more than 4 years ago | (#32521902)

Has Sony forgotten that stereoscopic glasses dim the image by 50%, cut the frame rate in half, and give most users a massive headache? Then there's the point that anyone without glasses can't look anywhere in the direction of the TV without getting vertigo. This has fail written all over it.

Virtual Boy (4, Funny)

British (51765) | more than 4 years ago | (#32522298)

Now PSN can release the Virtual Boy back catalog! Everyone's been clamoring for that!

Big deal... (1)

RemoWilliams84 (1348761) | more than 4 years ago | (#32522556)

So they upped the bust size of the Dead Or Alive chicks from double D to triple D? I mean thats great and everything, but do you really need to shut down the psn and get your network ready for triple D's?

Re:Big deal... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32522832)

Dead Or Alive is not available for PS3.
Not that it's missed, it's mediocre at best

wtf (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32522600)

Pirate original quake 3 game data.
Install ioquake.
Open console and write /r_anaglyphmode 1
Equip super awesome 3d glasses from beer four pack.
???
Profit!

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?