Sony Displays Gran Turismo 5 In 3D
See Full ImageSamsung has already released their 3D line of HDTVs and next up is Sony's Bravia series. To help push them, the electronics giant will certainly utilize the new 3D capability of the PlayStation 3 to get the message out.
According to 1Up, Sony decided to show off their fancy new 3D technology in Tokyo this weekend. And in addition to displaying "concerts and events featuring 3D footage being filmed live," they also provided attendees with a playable version of Gran Turismo 5 in 3D. Apparently, the game doesn't look any better (or worse) than when it wowed the crowds at TGS last year, but there was a bit of the standard 3D "pop-up" we've often seen in 3D presentations. Here's a portion of the analysis:
"Though 3D images can be hard to watch for a long period of time, GT5 was relatively easy to look at. This is thanks in large part to the game not using any strong depth of field effects. Often times the 3D image in a game or movie is broken when the viewer tries to examine an object that the camera is not focused on. The brain tries to process the object, but the eyes can't bring it into focus, creating an odd effect that causes headaches or nausea in some. All objects in GT5, regardless of location, are rendered without any post-processing blur, so no matter where we looked on the screen, we could focus easily."
This, plus the addition of the Recaro racing seat, should've provided them with one hell of a realistic driving experience. Furthermore, Sony was also showing off Wipeout HD, MotorStorm 2, and Killzone 2 in 3D; only the latter wasn't playable. We do know that games with 3D patches won't look as good as those designed specifically for the new dimension, though, so we'll be looking towards the future... Who plans to jump on board with this new technology in 2010?
Related Game(s): Gran Turismo 5
5/30/2010 9:17:26 PM John Shepard
Put this on your webpage or blog:
Email this to a friend
Follow PSX Extreme on Twitter
Comments (57 posts)
SmokeyPSD
Monday, May 31, 2010 @ 12:40:29 AM
3 up, 0 down
WorldEndsWithMe
Monday, May 31, 2010 @ 12:54:38 AM
1 up, 0 down
Qubex
Monday, May 31, 2010 @ 3:25:41 AM
I think to do it on the cheap is a dangerous precedence... I for one will not go into this for many years, and I won't let corporates push this down my throat - as if I were an unsuspecting and rather sad looking ostrich turkey - No, I will stick to my 2D gaming for now...
Q!
"no.3D.hero.please"
2 up, 1 down
laxpro2001
Monday, May 31, 2010 @ 7:03:15 AM
However I'm not ruling the technology out but I'm not going to get it until I have enough money and have gotten all the games that I have yet to pick up this generation
1 up, 0 down
Scarecrow
Sunday, May 30, 2010 @ 10:05:18 PM
Reply
Sony should have realized that we gamers care 'bout games
3D failed in the 80s, it fails now as well.
It's not something we want
The ONLY way I'd actually buy into the 3D BS is if there's no retarded glasses needed for it.
11 up, 5 down
Mavfan321
Sunday, May 30, 2010 @ 11:35:14 PM
2 up, 0 down
fluffer nutter
Sunday, May 30, 2010 @ 11:43:26 PM
4 up, 4 down
laxpro2001
Monday, May 31, 2010 @ 2:33:59 AM
@Scarecrow, I for one am excited about 3D. If done right I think it can greatly enhance how involved you become in a game and make you feel more immersed in the universe itself. Granted I'm definitely waiting for a little while to get a 3D enabled T.V. since I'm still in college and will have to start paying back loans soon.
Also we didn't want 3D in the 80's but thats 30 years ago. Look at how good Avatar did in theaters... I didn't see it but from what I heard the plot wasn't amazing, I think 3D really did have something to do with its acclaim (then again I would have to see it myself to develop my own verdict on the plot)
Last edited by laxpro2001 on 5/31/2010 2:38:30 AM
2 up, 0 down
Jawknee
Monday, May 31, 2010 @ 11:04:31 AM
3 up, 0 down
spiderboi
Monday, May 31, 2010 @ 11:09:18 AM
1 up, 0 down
fluffer nutter
Monday, May 31, 2010 @ 12:40:18 PM
1 up, 0 down
Mamills
Sunday, May 30, 2010 @ 10:05:51 PM
Reply
until then ill stick to HDTV. better framerates on HDTV from what i hear too and they also have to scale back the resolution of most titles so that they can run in 3D.
2 up, 1 down
Sithis
Sunday, May 30, 2010 @ 10:07:25 PM
Reply
5 up, 1 down
Reccaman18
Monday, May 31, 2010 @ 12:08:41 AM
1 up, 0 down
King James
Sunday, May 30, 2010 @ 10:21:17 PM
Reply
Plus, I wear eyeglasses sometimes so trying to put 3d glasses on top of your own glasses not only makes you look like an ass...it also ruins the 3d effect.
I hope Sony does this 3d thing right. The Move thing too. No shovelware. Just games that use these new tools effectively so I can have a more immersive experience.
And don't give me Killzone 2 with a 3d patch and call it Killzone 3. I love KZ2 too much to stomach a lackluster sequel.
0 up, 0 down
WorldEndsWithMe
Sunday, May 30, 2010 @ 10:31:25 PM
1 up, 0 down
King James
Sunday, May 30, 2010 @ 10:35:02 PM
But I just hope Guerilla doesn't do what Bungie did to Halo after Halo 2. All Halo 3 was, was Halo 2 wit a HD makeover. I'm hoping KZ3 isn't KZ2 wit a 3d makeover and more blood.
1 up, 0 down
Snaaaake
Sunday, May 30, 2010 @ 10:21:25 PM
Reply
3D doesn't affect any gameplay, only affect your experience.
Just like movies and what the heck, more and more movies are getting 3D nowadays.
1 up, 1 down
King James
Sunday, May 30, 2010 @ 10:31:36 PM
Reply
2 up, 1 down
Scarecrow
Sunday, May 30, 2010 @ 10:35:49 PM
I won't buy into that BS
0 up, 1 down
King James
Sunday, May 30, 2010 @ 11:05:03 PM
Me: Yea, I looking for a HDTV.
Random Retail Store Salesperson: What kinda picture quality u looking for?
Me: The Best. I have a 1080p Sony Bravia Projection TV now. So I'm looking for another one to replace it. Maybe a thinner, lighter one. I watch Blu-rays. Play PS3. And watch sports in HD. What you got?
Salesperson: I got this $3k 3DTV! U can buy these $200 special 3D glass to go with them and watch...
Me: Whoa! Besides 3D, does this $3k TV do anything else that these other $1500 2dTVs - thats the same quality but half the price - can't do?
Salesperson: <sighs> No.
Me: Give me the 2D one.
Salesperson: Okay, sir. I'll go get the ladder and bring one down.
Sorry, I did all that to prove a point. This 3D thing adds lil' value to my visual experience. Why in the hell would I pay double or in some cases triple the amount for a figure that isn't worth that cost.
Give me a TV that syncs wirelessly to labtop and works as a monitor without the HDMI cord. And learns what channel I wanna watch via my past view history. And if the TV cooks breakfast, then I'll be ready to spend 2-3 grand on a TV again. The jump from SD to HD was worth. This jump from 2d to 3d...not so much.
5 up, 2 down
Reccaman18
Monday, May 31, 2010 @ 12:11:57 AM
1 up, 0 down
DemonNeno
Sunday, May 30, 2010 @ 10:45:09 PM
Reply
2 up, 0 down
Metal Head
Sunday, May 30, 2010 @ 10:46:37 PM
Reply
1 up, 0 down
Alienange
Sunday, May 30, 2010 @ 11:03:51 PM
Reply
Now they want us to believe that the return of some failed techs is making a huge return and we're supposed to replace our TVs with the latest "next best thing?"
Never going to happen. A few guppies will run out and pretend they are trend setters, but we all know the truth. 3D is what they drag out every time technology stagnates. At best, it's interesting for all of 30-40 minutes. After that you're just dying to get back to the normalcy of HD gaming.
1 up, 0 down
DemonNeno
Sunday, May 30, 2010 @ 11:24:31 PM
3D technology isn't bad, a failure or pointless... Inside a theater. In our homes, it comes with many disadvantages. Now you need to wear glasses, those of us who already wear glasses need something more to pile on. Those of us who don't wear glasses have to deal with them being one for prolonged periods of time. Finally, those of us who run out of budget (and glasses) leave others participating out of the picture.. Literally. The prices for the equipment to treat 4-6 people has quite and repulsive pricetag.
Scaled down graphics for the meantime, unknown graphical quality for the future, extremely high prices for equipment that otherwise would be half the price (not to include all those who just recently bought into $1k+ units before 3D launched) and wearing glasses just to stare at your TV..
Where's the advantage in that for the CONSUMER?
Last edited by DemonNeno on 5/30/2010 11:26:06 PM
1 up, 0 down
phade2blaq
Sunday, May 30, 2010 @ 11:04:42 PM
Reply
0 up, 0 down
NeoHumpty
Sunday, May 30, 2010 @ 11:18:24 PM
Reply
What I'm really wondering is if the release of 3d tv's will lower the price of standard HD sets. I'm thinking that this year may be a great one for my tax money.
Last edited by NeoHumpty on 5/30/2010 11:19:15 PM
1 up, 0 down
NeoHumpty
Sunday, May 30, 2010 @ 11:35:35 PM
0 up, 0 down
fluffer nutter
Sunday, May 30, 2010 @ 11:44:35 PM
1 up, 0 down
Metal Head
Sunday, May 30, 2010 @ 11:32:06 PM
Reply
Alienange I agree with you. I bought my 1080p tv just to play Metal Gear 4. It was very expensive and I'm not buying a new one just because it can play 3d.
I finally finish God Of War 3.
0 up, 0 down
whiskeytango74
Sunday, May 30, 2010 @ 11:56:02 PM
Reply
2 up, 0 down
fluffer nutter
Monday, May 31, 2010 @ 1:19:50 AM
4 up, 0 down
CharlesD
Monday, May 31, 2010 @ 1:46:17 AM
Reply
Last edited by CharlesD on 5/31/2010 1:46:50 AM
0 up, 0 down
laxpro2001
Monday, May 31, 2010 @ 2:35:50 AM
Still I too long for that day. Flower would be the first game I would like to play like that :D
That would probably look better than real life flowers...
Last edited by laxpro2001 on 5/31/2010 2:40:16 AM
0 up, 0 down
Robochic
Monday, May 31, 2010 @ 2:06:55 AM
Reply
I just got a new tv a few months ago why in gods name would I buy another one that will be 3x the price I just paid for my 42inch sony bravia.
I think they are pushing the techology to quickly it's going to back fire, we are just getting out of a recession can't they wait till the economy gets back on their feet.
0 up, 0 down
Alienange
Monday, May 31, 2010 @ 1:03:08 PM
0 up, 0 down
laxpro2001
Monday, May 31, 2010 @ 2:39:33 AM
Reply
I can wait however another year or two.
0 up, 0 down
___________
Monday, May 31, 2010 @ 3:15:30 AM
Reply
i saw a demo model when i went to Queensland last week, they were demonstrating new tech called neon its suppose to improve the fidelity and depth of colors and i have to say i was blown away.
ive seen a 8K pioneer kuro which ATM is the worlds best looking TV the colors that thing produces is incredible! but this Panasonic looks even better!!!!!
just the colors they looked so vibrant most TVs over saturate colors making them look fake but the Panasonic just made them look perfect!
best part is there incorporating that tech into their 3D TVs when they release later this june.
if they look half as good as the demo model i saw im definitely getting one.
they may be expensive 3K for a 46 inch but i dont care it just looks so impressive i was sold on the spot!
i think i know why it looks so good too.
apparently the guys who worked on the kuro were bought out by panasonic recently and the tech they created, thats why there are no more kuros on the market the tech is now being put into high end panasonic plasmas.
it will be interesting to see how sony and co react to this, this will wipe that smug smirk of samsungs face.
yeah yous were first in, but so what when your product looks like crap in comparison to the comp.
wonder if sony will start using this, or stick to the old LCD tech like stubborn mules.
i really can not understand sonys logic.
samsung, toshiba, LG, sharp, panasonic, all TV manufactures have stopped using LCD back light screens and started using LED ones but sony.
why?
they like using inferior old school tech?
thats one thing i hate about sony, they charge you a arm and a leg for their product, i would not mind if its better but its not.
my sony Z series is 1200 bucks more than my cuzs samsung 8 series and guess which one looks better?
yup the 1200 buck cheaper sammy.
0 up, 0 down
Highlander
Monday, May 31, 2010 @ 3:15:41 AM
Reply
That depth of field thing that is talked about in the article is a real problem. If you stop and think about it for a moment the way that human vision works you can't use a lot of artificially created depth of field without confusing the human brain. Our eyes are barely 4 inches apart, so the stereoscopic benefit of our vision is limited as the range increases. But you see effects in 3D movies where the depth of field is artificially enhanced far beyond what is normal for human vision. It's also depressingly easy to see which scenes are designed for 3D viewing - when you're watching in 2D, which to me at least, detracts from the regular viewing experience.
3D has a ways to go before it matures and is done right. Sounds like GT5 does it right by leaving everything at any distance in sharp focus. It's all very technical, but it comes down to the optical capabilities of our vision system and how we perceive objects that we focus on. For example even when two objects are at the same distance from us, and even right nest to each other, when we look at one object the other fades from focus because we are not looking at it. Optically it does not blur, but our perception of it is that it does blur.
The optical depth of field that we can perceive is limited too. So when we are looking at close objects it's possible that an object slightly closer or further away will appear blurred both because we are not focusing out attention on it and because it is optically not in focus.
In a movie theater the movie presentation is for everyone, so there is no way that you can project the 3D image except as a generic 3D stereoscopic image, so the only depth of field effects that are available are optical. And with digital technology the film maker can play with the depth of field to bring certain effects, actors or props to visual clarity in an unrealistic, but very 3D manner.
The brain tries to make sense of all this and naturally has a hard time with it.
There is an article here
http://www.seereal.com/en/holography/papers/2010%20SPIE%202010%20SPIE%20Defense%20Security%20Sensing%20-%20DSS10-7690A-10%20-%20for%20web.pdf
That goes into a lot of depth on the topic - if you're interested. However it is definitely a good article.
1 up, 0 down
FM23
Monday, May 31, 2010 @ 4:23:20 AM
Reply
2 up, 1 down
JackC8
Monday, May 31, 2010 @ 7:32:11 AM
Reply
0 up, 1 down
Zorigo
Monday, May 31, 2010 @ 8:32:00 AM
Reply
0 up, 0 down
Richy
Monday, May 31, 2010 @ 9:08:31 AM
Reply
i'll jump ;) ...
3D is cool if well used, i don't have headache unless if i stay more than 3 hours.
i guess it's a like it or hate it & i'm sure that there are enough loving it out there for it to be a big success, or maybe a big surprise LOL.
a lot are mad because they just made the HD jump, so it leaves more choice to the others & please, sorry don't speak about the price! it may look expensive but for me it is same price at HDTV's debut & i'm sure will soon be same price, for the actual difference is quite low.
you still have the option in buying a cheaper 120Hz PC monitor with DVI or HDMI in.
I want to MOVE in 3D ;) ... & can't wait for this to happen
cheers!
Last edited by Richy on 5/31/2010 9:12:15 AM
1 up, 0 down
Notes36
Monday, May 31, 2010 @ 9:54:00 AM
Reply
0 up, 0 down
Notes36
Monday, May 31, 2010 @ 10:21:41 AM
Do we really want to stick wit the same 2D images, that only get upgraded wit more detail every year instead of moving on to trying something new?????
People get mad that they have to wear the 3D glasses, but that is just one step toward 3D TVs without glasses!!!
Let them try 3D, sure it cause a lot of money just like everything that is new. But once the world get use to it and it gets more advance, it will get cheaper & cheaper!!!
I mean it is just like cars, when they first came out people thought it was only for the rich. But look how much it help the world advance!!
2 up, 1 down
spiderboi
Monday, May 31, 2010 @ 11:16:53 AM
Reply
1 up, 0 down
dveisalive
Monday, May 31, 2010 @ 12:21:54 PM
Reply
0 up, 0 down
CharlesD
Monday, May 31, 2010 @ 1:08:56 PM
@Notes36:
Not sure comparing 3DTV and the model T is the best rout. It might advance television or gaming a bit but many people would agree that it is a bit overstated. Even if it was a completely awesome experience, how would this change the world to that extent?
0 up, 0 down
Highlander
Monday, May 31, 2010 @ 1:47:05 PM
The resolution of stereoscopic 3D is the same on the current wave of 3D TVs as it will be when the models that allow 3D viewing without glasses arrive. The difference is in the number of visual cues that trick the human vision system into seeing the illusion of 3D.
0 up, 0 down
MartyRules
Monday, May 31, 2010 @ 2:00:26 PM
Reply
2 up, 0 down
CharlesD
Monday, May 31, 2010 @ 3:49:04 PM
Reply
Good to know, in that case I would certainly choose stereoscopic, but then again if your going to throw down the cash for a 3DTV then you mine as well go the distance and get the glasses, even if they do look funky. That is if you get more visuals out of the glasses
0 up, 0 down
THEVERDIN
Monday, May 31, 2010 @ 7:05:02 PM
Reply
0 up, 0 down
camaro300zx
Monday, May 31, 2010 @ 9:07:09 PM
Reply
0 up, 0 down
BikerSaint
Tuesday, June 01, 2010 @ 1:49:55 PM
Reply
That way any unforeseen bugs or glitches should already been addressed & corrected, the prices should have dropped to a more feasible price=point by then, and......
....hopefully, there will be some new models out that do all their 3D in TV, & thereby doing away with the need for outer-space looking peepers altogether
0 up, 0 down
WorldEndsWithMe
Reply
Sunday, May 30, 2010 @ 10:04:15 PM
I wonder if this was a 4D patch since they already told us in no uncertain terms that the copious and long delays in releasing GT5 was NOT due to making it 3D.