PS3 News: Ubisoft: 3D Is "Much More Important" Than People Believe - PS3 News

Members Login: Register | Why sign up? | Forgot Password?

Ubisoft: 3D Is "Much More Important" Than People Believe

3D gaming is in its infancy stages now, but that's primarily because developers are just starting to utilize the new technology and the fact that most people don't have 3D HDTVs just yet.

But all that is going to change, and according to Ubisoft, the change won't be long in coming. According to what the publisher's UK marketing boss Murray Pannel told Eurogamer, there will be a 3D-compatible TV "in every living room in just three years time." Obviously, he doesn't mean literally; he means it'll be about as common as HDTVs in the home now. And in the end, Ubisoft is a "big fan of 3D," reminding everyone they were the first to deliver a fully 3D title to market (last year's Avatar). Said Pannel:

"The truth is I think it is a technology that's coming. We can't ignore it. It'll start slowly this year. But like HDTV I wouldn't rule out the fact that this will be installed in everyone's living room in three year's time, and for us to be in a position to have content that could really look absolutely amazing in 3D."

Sony is definitely pushing 3D hard, and you will see plenty of big games and Blu-Ray movies become 3D-enabled within the next year. Significant titles include Killzone 3 and Gran Turismo 5, along with what will be an ever-increasing number of 3D movies. Of course, some remain skeptical in regards to the worldwide acceptance and ultimate embracing of 3D but Pannel and Ubisoft are confident.

"For the naysayers, if you like, I would say, 'Just watch this space,' because when you have global corporations like Sony pushing 3D as hard as they possibly can, Sky, equally, showcasing 3D content on TV, I believe it will become a much more important part of consumer electronics than a lot of people believe."

As usual, it may come down to price. A new HDTV isn't a cheap proposition and with one pair of 3D glasses currently costing in the realm of $200 (and multiple pairs required for multiple sets of eyes), prices will have to come down a bit. But perhaps the quality of the technology will sell itself; something like GT5 in 3D might be downright amazing. We'll have to wait and see...

Tags: 3d games, 3d hdtv, 3d glasses

7/9/2010 10:33:21 AM Ben Dutka

Put this on your webpage or blog:
Email this to a friend
Follow PSX Extreme on Twitter

Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Share on Google Share on MySpace Share on Delicious Share on Digg Share on Google Buzz Share via E-Mail Share via Tumblr Share via Posterous

Comments (83 posts)

MyWorstNightmar
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 10:56:54 AM
Reply

If it becomes the norm as he says, then I will probably get involved down the road as there becomes more content, but honestly, it has to get much better than it is at this stage. I was at Best Buy this week, and I watched 10 minutes of soccer. I was underwhelmed. I also watched a racing game, must have been Motorstorm, and kinda cool, but again, not a MUST HAVE.

I have a great setup now with HDTV on a 52" Sony, and it looks great, WITHOUT having to wear special glasses.

If technology and society move us towards 3d, I won't push back against it, but at the same time, I am not a 3d cheerleader either. I could take it or leave it. It just has not blown my mind.

If I still had a standard def TV, I am sure my mouth would have hit the floor when viewing soccer in 3d, but it just looked like a slightly better image than my HD image at home, and I don't have to wear 3d glasses at home. AND I don't have to sit right in front of the TV either to get the most out of the image.

The 3d movement will be slowed down because of HDTV. If we went from Standard Def straight to 3d, then it would catch on much faster IMO. But HD might eventually mean the death of 3d.

Last edited by MyWorstNightmar on 7/9/2010 11:00:34 AM

Agree with this comment 7 up, 4 down Disagree with this comment

Qubex
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 11:01:38 AM

I must say MyWorstNightmar... you comment is spot on... I think the PS4 generation of hardware will hit the mark... this generation is the "wannabe 3D" generation...

I am not entirely convinced yet...

Q!

"play.experience.enjoy"

Agree with this comment 7 up, 3 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 11:06:18 AM

By the end of this year the PS3 will be capable of HD games, HD video, and HD display of photos, it will also be capable of 3D games, 3D BluRay/video and 3D photos. There is no need to wait for the PS4, the PS3 is capable of all of this and more.

Agree with this comment 16 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Nlayer
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 12:36:15 PM

Sure, it's capable of the 3D features, which is awesome, but I won't be able to try them out because the TV is so expensive. And I'm sure they'll come out with a 'better' 3DTV down the road at a later time(It always seems to happen). I agree that the PS3 will be capable of 3D this gen, but the TVs may not be capable in delivering the greatness of the PS3 just yet.

I tried the 3DTV out at Best Buy as well and I was impressed. The one I tried out did it's job without making my dizzy(But I only used it for a few minutes) or requiring me to be in a exact location. I can honestly say that it was way better than what I've seen in the theaters. Although, the price tag made my eyes hurt. And I didn't think I needed another TV since I already got a Plasma.

Just like 'Nightmar' said, I would have jumped if I hadn't already jumped with the Plasma. =/

Agree with this comment 4 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

laksh
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 2:05:25 PM

must say, i kinda agree with TheHighlander in that i believe there's absolutely no reason to wait for a ps4 if you don't have a ps3.

@MyWorstNightmar, i believe that the majority of people will agree with you that unless it becomes the norm to have 3D people aren't gonna bother with it. I have a great setup to albeit a 50" bravia and not 52" but i tend not to use it much for football or "soccer". I mean it looks great but i couldn't care for watching it at home, i normally go to my local pub/bar cos its all about the atmosphere.

I did watch some football in 3d and was impressed but not overly excited about it cos i dont think i'll be watching it much in 3d, at least not till the pub gets 3d tv's and everyone starts bringing their glasses. But what really won me over for 3D was wipeout. you ppl may think i'm sad but I was really impressed by the wipeout trailer in 3d and that's what really got me excited about 3D gaming.

Last edited by laksh on 7/9/2010 2:06:08 PM

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

manofchao5
Saturday, July 10, 2010 @ 2:22:19 PM

the only thing that stinks about 3d is the cheapest price is the monitors or a big family contributes to get a 42" 3dtv

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 11:00:05 AM
Reply

I do think they are right - up to a point. 3DTV costs are dropping far more rapidly than HDTV did. I think it's because 3D TV builds on the HDTVs already in manufacture. When HDTV came along, manufacturers had to completely re-tool to make them. For 3D, it's an upgrade to existing technology.

Now, until we have 3DTVs with either no glasses, or easy to wear and inexpensive polarized lenses, I'm not sure it will fly for everyone. I went to see a 3D movie last week (first one) and those damned 3D glasses just would not sit comfortably in front of the glasses I wear to see. As a consequence I was distracted and the 3D illusion was not as impressive as one would hope.

But because stereoscopic 3D can be done relatively easily with 240Hz LCDs, I expect that the capability will drop in price rapidly, especially when the glasses needed are passive technology instead of an active one. It's just cheaper to stamp out polarized lenses than make the electronics for active shutters.

I just wish that I had had a better 3D experience because it's left me feeling a little underwhelmed. I read comments and articles all the time claiming it's the greatest thing since 1080p or sliced bread. But with the current 3D glasses, it's just not gonna work well for me.

Agree with this comment 8 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Qubex
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 11:05:55 AM

Fortunately, I don't have to wear glasses at the moment... so for me an actual 3D movie is an "ok" experience... Admittedly "Avatar" was really spectacular though, the problem is, that is what I want to be playing, not watching...

Without a PS4 to give us an "order of magnitude" increase in hardware performance and resolution I stand unconvinced presently... with GFX hardware such as FERMI out now... we need a new platform sooner or later to make it a convincing experience, otherwise only the PC people with 4K rigs will experience 3D in true HD the way it should be experience...

Watching a 3D blu-ray movie is one thing, but playing a 1080p full HD game in stereoscopic 3D is another, without corner cutting - such as resolution reduction and/or simplification of 3D models and textures...

Q!

"play.experience.enjoy"

Last edited by Qubex on 7/9/2010 11:09:03 AM

Agree with this comment 3 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 11:10:19 AM

I think that 3D in anything above 480p resolution will look pretty well done because you will be more concerned with the illusion of 3D than the apparent resolution of the image.

Sure higher resolution will look better, but since TVs are *NOT* going above 1080p resolution any time soon, the PS3 only has to hit the 3D target as it stands.

LCD panels with 2160p or higher resolution may come along, but until home video or broadcast TV standards go beyond 1080p, it's simply pointless and irrelevant. The investments to get to 1080p for broadcasters and video makers has been high, I don't see them scrapping HDTV at 1080p when we are only now beginning to see it hit the mainstream. So for at least 10 more years 1080p is (IMHO) going to be it. 3D works within this envelope.

Agree with this comment 6 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Qubex
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 11:16:00 AM

Maybe when immersed in the game itself, those short comings are not noticed... but I don't know yet if i want to spend 5K in total to find that out to be honest... I can wait 2-3 years... can you?

Q!

"play.experience.enjoy"

Agree with this comment 2 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

Nynja
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 11:24:40 AM

I believe Highlander nailed it as for time line of events. I suspect with the push for 3D, Ultra HD TVs (as one company has called it, Samsung or Toshiba I think) sporting a resolution of 2160p won't be the focus. Too many options just confuse the consumer into not buying anything, kind of like the format wars (beta vs VHS, HD-DVD vs BD).

I believe the push for 3D is premature. Once Ultra HD TVs are introduced with 3D capability without the need of glasses, consumers may be more inclined to make the jump. We've spent the last 70+ years of our lives watching TV in 480p. We just started viewing movies and broadcast programming in 1080p just a few short years ago. Now major corporations want to push 3D tech that reduces the quality of the image on those HDTVs we all spent so much money on.

If 3D catches on with the current tech and prices, know that I will not be one of those contributing.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Karosso
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 11:27:02 AM

I get what you're saying, my girlfriend wears glasses and has a hard time as well.
I had a retinal detachment on my right eye about a year ago, and thought I could never enjoy 3D the way it was meant to be but, somehow even with my right eye pretty much useless for seeing anything, I still get the full 3D experience... not sure how that is possible(Maybe you can explain it as always, no sarcasm intended), but I'm not complaining :)
I agree that glassless TV would be much better and I'm holding out for that tech for the time being.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

AcHiLLiA
Saturday, July 10, 2010 @ 3:34:19 PM

@Highlander
Do u need both eyes to experience 3D?, cause u know there is people in this world that have one bad eye and one good eye.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Monday, July 12, 2010 @ 1:58:25 PM

Yes Alex, you need two eyes for stereoscopic 3D.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Nynja
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 11:12:45 AM
Reply

3D Is "Much More Expensive" Than Companies Believe.

I recently demoed a 3D TV at BestBuy and I must say the image was AWFUL. The quality of the 3D I've seen is well overpriced.

I have no intension of dumping thousands of dollars on 3D tech that will vastly improve over the next 5 years.

Too soon, even for me.

Agree with this comment 7 up, 3 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 11:18:30 AM

Did you turn the glasses on?

The demo i tried at BestBuy looks great.

Last edited by Jawknee on 7/9/2010 11:21:35 AM

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Nynja
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 11:25:19 AM

Turn on? I don't know, someone assisted me with the viewing. So, I suppose they did.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 11:38:11 AM

ah i see. The only reason i ask is because another PSXer complained about the BestBuy demo and he forgot to turn the glasses on. LOL!

If the store guy assisted you I'm sure he turned them on for you. If not then hes a dope.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Nynja
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 11:55:02 AM

Well, I wouldn't rule out the assistant being a dope... :)

Now knowing that, I'll give it another go around next time I'm there.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

GuernicaReborn
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 11:17:42 AM
Reply

I'm not that interested in 3D. I do know, however, that one 3D game will change my whole outlook on it... I'm just waiting on Dead Space 3D before I make a purchase.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

WolfCrimson
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 11:21:25 AM

For a second there I thought you were going to say GT5.

Agree with this comment 5 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

GuernicaReborn
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 12:22:00 PM

Nah, not a big fan of driving sims. I'm a truck person, and I'd rather play Motorstorm than GT5.

I'd play Dead Space 3 in 3D though. Just to see limbs of necromorphs float past me in Zero-G.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Nynja
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 11:30:38 AM
Reply

On a hypocritical side note; I can't wait to see the Nintendo 3DS. A portable 3D device, with more processing power than the Wii, a widescreen, and analog nub, all without the need of glasses? Yes, please!

I can't wait to demo one of those! Especially with MGS3: Snake Eater on the way!

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Akuma07
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 11:36:33 AM

What did you say?

MGS3 on the 3DS

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 11:41:22 AM

I don't think the 3DS has more processing power then the Wii.

Have you seen Skyward Sword? I don't believe that can be done be done on a 3DS.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Nynja
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 11:53:09 AM

Some developer claims the 3DS has comparable power to the PS3 and 360. I'm claiming bogus on that. So I went with "more powerful than the Wii" which I do believe Nintendo is claiming too, yes?

Nintendo's E3 Press Conference, which was very boring by the way, had demos for the 3DS to show attendies and had a non-playable demo of MGS3: Snake Eater. Kojima even made comments about the device and how he's interested in bring MGS to the handheld.

I find it amusing that Kojima hasn't made a new Metal Gear Solid game on anything other than PlayStation since the start of MGS1 on PS1. Sure other systems have Metal Gear, but they are typically just ports of the Playstation version(s). I don't count MGS:Rising since he was more involved in MGS:PW.

Last edited by Nynja on 7/9/2010 11:53:49 AM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 12:01:33 PM

Hmm..i wasn't aware Nintendo was claiming this. MGS Snake Eater did look purty on the 3DS though.

I happened to liked Nintendos conference by the way. lol!

Skyward Sword, Kirby Epic Yarn and a few other titles made the show for me.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 12:14:51 PM

Whatever developer claimed that the 3DS hardware is as powerful as a PS3 or 360 needs to be fired for incompetence. Saying it's faster than the Wii is kinda pushing the limits of truth as well.

Agree with this comment 4 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Nynja
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 3:38:21 PM

I read it in an article where an unnamed developer made this claim. Could be from a company that has never made a game on the 360 or PS3.

Found this info on the 3DS (as someone claims). Obviously the specs are far less than PS3 and 360 performance, but this is a handheld:

http://www.gamespot.com/pages/forums/show_msgs.php?topic_id=27353349

Based on the specs, it sounds like it may be close to the graphical power of the Wii which for a handheld may be good enough.

Here's a link to one article that explain's some developers' claims.

http://www.ozcarguide.com/technology/gaming/3273-nintendo-3ds-ps3-xbox-360

***The line from my original post "with more processing power than the Wii" probably should read "with more graphical power than the Wii".

Last edited by Nynja on 7/9/2010 3:39:53 PM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Shams
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 5:30:13 PM

From still images, and granted, w/o having experienced the 3d effect, it seems more psp'ish, not even ps2'ish, let alone ps3/360, or even wii.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 6:32:54 PM

The Snake Eater demo on the 3DS looked much better on the PS2 version.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 8:10:11 PM

*looked better THEN the PS2 version. >.<

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

maxpontiac
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 11:33:16 AM
Reply

Couldn't agree more. Our house is already gearing towards the 3D revolution, and even my parents (wife's too) are impressed after watching a few movies in 3D at the theater.

Like Blu Ray, Sony is leading the next great technological evolution.

Agree with this comment 4 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Akuma07
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 11:35:52 AM
Reply

NO SIR! it will NOT be in everyones living rooms in 3 years.

Not when a LARGE population of the earth doesn't even have a HD TV in their living rooms yet!!

IGNORANCE!!

Agree with this comment 4 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 11:38:52 AM

You never know. The price of LED 3DTV's is falling much faster then LCD TV's as stated. I plan on buying one as soon as i move into my new house.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Nynja
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 11:57:36 AM

Yeah, that 3 years thing...

HDTVs were around a lot longer than 3 years. Sure, the major push started about 3 years ago, but his statement is inaccurate.

That said, I agree. 3 years from now, you and I may be the 2 people keeping him from being right.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Nynja
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 11:47:31 AM
Reply

Well, I wouldn't rule out the assistant being a dope... :)

Now knowing that, I'll give it another go around next time I'm there.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Nynja
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 11:54:54 AM

This was suppose to be a reply.... dammit.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

TEG3SH
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 12:04:03 PM
Reply

DON'T cares for 3-d. it's bad, it's annoying and it's stupid, if it becomes the norm , i'll buy a black and white tv. or start watching stuff on my computer......

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 12:16:32 PM

Just because you don't like doesn't make it stupid.

Why protest progress? This is an advancement in technology.

Besides, when it becomes the norm, its still likely to only be a option on the TV. No one is going to sell 3D only TVs.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

TEG3SH
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 12:27:31 PM

I know it's my own opinion, the reason i believe it's stupid is that a large percentage of ppl who watches 3-D movies get a severe headache afterwards. for me that is really dumb, why would I wanna put my self into severe pain just to enjoy a couple of hours, no thanks i'll stick to crack for that ;)

Last edited by TEG3SH on 7/9/2010 12:28:12 PM

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 12:31:36 PM

Thats sucks for you. I can understand why you wouldn't want to mess with 3D if you makes you feel crappy but i don't believe that's the majority of people.

And like i said, if and when this becomes the norm, TV's are not going to be 3D only. It will just be an option much like the Auto Motion Plus on Samsung TV's used to smooth out frame rates. Its something you simply turn off and on in the TV's settings menu. So you can still enjoy your games on a nice LED TV with out worrying about 3D being forced on you. :)

Last edited by Jawknee on 7/9/2010 12:32:31 PM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 12:33:03 PM

@Jawknee

3D on the PS3 with a modern HDTV is virtually a free upgrade. At the moment it's the cost of the shutter glasses and some additional processing inside the TV. But the point I am making is that the PS3 as it exists now (and many BluRay players) have 3D capability right out of the box. Many of the newer LCD panels that will be sub-$1000 next year have the capability (implemented or not) to do 3D. So unlike the switch to 720p/1080p HDTV, there is no new wave of hardware that is required to take advantage. For the most part, people can continue buying relatively standard HD equipment and get 3D along for the ride. Obviously there is a premium on 3D right now, but that will disappear quickly.

I'll not comment on whether 3D is all that worth it, but I do have to say that 3D will quickly become just another check box on the list of features.

One thing I also notice is that amidst all of this, a standard for 3D home video based on BluRay has been accepted by the industry, HDMI 1.4 is the standard for 3D video signals, and stereo-scopic 3D on TV using these signalling standards has become the accepted norm in the manufacture of 3D enabled TVs. So in other words, the standard for 3D has been set, and Sony pretty much did it on their own. Even if TVs that do 3D without glasses come along in 5 years, the standards for transmitting and storing 3D in HD have been set and will not change. All those BluRay players and 3D video files/photographs and PS3s and games will continue to work without change.

Really, Sony's execution on setting a 3D standard and creating a market for 3D has been flawless so far.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

TEG3SH
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 12:35:11 PM

You and me both know that in 5 years time, normal TV's will be obsolete, so that's why i'm ranting now.

If ppl love it and it doesn't annoy them, then good for them, but if developers start shoving it up my throat, i'll be pissed

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

anjpikapp3
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 12:35:35 PM
Reply

I don't think 3D will be in everyones home in 3 years but at least half... See, every person that "waited" to make their recent HDTV (most likely bought a LED) purchase will disagree with this. Why? because they just purchased a $3,000 TV and plan on keeping that TV for 5-10 years. Thing is, everyone that bought HDTVs when they first arrived (1080p projectors, 720p LCD/plasma, etc) are ready for an upgrade and looking for something better....and 3D TV's are what is being pushed as better. This is very true as the 3D TV's are a 240hz must; which we all know is smoother than the 120hz.

As for me, I'm going to have to consider the 3D TV as its time to upgrade my 1080p projector (family room TV).

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Steel
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 12:44:11 PM
Reply

I think I fit somewhere in between. I also wear glasses, and watching 3D movies has been kinda a pain so far. I have a really narrow face so i nearly had to hold the glasses on my face the whole time.

That being said, I am excited for the tech evolution without a doubt. I do plan on picking up a 3D TV, but I will probably wait for a year or two to let the tech grow a bit more. For now, my samsung 52" HD works just fine :)

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

DeejayDeez
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 12:50:14 PM
Reply

I'll get one when no glasses are required!! you know kinda like what Nintendo is doing with the 3ds...just on a bigger scale for the TV. Have a button or slide bar to turn the 3d on and off. Seems pretty simple, but as we all know these companies will make every penny at every stage of this 3d revolution that they can.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

JackC8
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 12:57:36 PM
Reply

Only around half of American homes have an HDTV in them right now, and this guy thinks we'll all have 3-D HDTV's in 3 years? That doesn't even rate a sarcastic comment.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 1:20:54 PM

Oh, I don't know. The prices of 30-odd inch LCD HDTVs has tumbled in recent months, they are approaching commodity pricing. 3D is a premium now, but the manufacture of 3D TVs is not that much more complex than making regular HDTVs, and does not require entirely new production facilities. So the timeline from early adopter to mass market/commodity will be greatly compressed compared to the original HDTVs.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 2:33:32 PM

Bear in mind that last holiday season, 93% of all TVs sold were HDTVs. HD is certainly here to stay.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Nynja
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 2:49:51 PM

Aparently HDTVs have been in continued development over the past 80 years (started in 1930s). HDTVs made their first appearance to American consumers in the 1990s. It's now 2010 and people still have not adopted HDTVs.

This guy is talking out of his ass, if you take his comment word for word. No way will 3D be in every household in 3 years time, or even 10 years time in America. Maybe in France it's a different story.

I do believe that 3D will be a viable format, just not with the technology still in it's infancy where glasses are still required.

As of now there are 4 different methods of achieving 3D without the use of lenses.
- Lenticular Viewing
- Cylinder Method
- Motion Parallax
- Camera 3D
- Panel System
I, for one, believe the Panel System may be the first solution available to the consumer and the 3D camera to follow shortly after.

Fun stuff; 3D images you can view on the Internet now using the Motion Parallax tech... still young, but still pretty cool.

http://tasteoftomorrow.com/amazing-3d-pictures-without-glasses/

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 4:38:37 PM

When i think about it, i haven't seen an SDTV anywhere in the last few years.

Do TV manufacturers even make SD Tube TV's anymore?

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 9:14:57 PM

Nynja

I appreciate that you are playing Devil's advocate here, but HDTV did not truly enter mainstream development until there was a) a home video standard for it (BluRay/HD-DVD), b) broadcast standard (when did the first digital broadcast TV service in the US start anything above 480p service?) and c) relatively inexpensive TVs (30-40 inch panels fell below $1000 and now $500, this drop has happened within the last 3 years).

When it was all Plasma, or projectors or back projection TVs, prices were high, not to mention that there really was no content out there beyond 480p or 576p (Europe).

So to say that HDTV has been in development for 80 years is rather like saying that the automobile has been in development since before 1885 when Benz created his Motorwagen. HDTV has only really been a factor in any discussion for less than a decade.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

JackC8
Saturday, July 10, 2010 @ 8:15:41 AM

The math seems kind of simple - HTDV's have been around for a bit over 10 years, and in that time 50% of people have bought one. The prices are tremendously lower now, and over the next three years, the 50% number will rise - perhaps dramatically. But to suggest that in 3 years time, not only will ALL people who currently don't own an HDTV buy a 3-D HDTV, but additionally everyone who currently owns an HDTV will also buy a 3-D TV, that's just silly.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

thj_1980
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 1:36:07 PM
Reply

Nah ubisoft is kidding themselves. There will not be anything like that within 3 years but rather 10 years for some 3d tvs to hit homes. It somethign that really is nice but theres no innovation in the idea that will make a normal consumer purchase that rather than a cheaper normal tv. 3d is nice I have experienced it but it's the price of the tv and the glasses alone that set people back. So I really don't think that people will have 3d tvs within 3 years as it took a while before many people started buying lcds. Most stuck with what they already had, standard sd tvs for awhile before getting into HDMI.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

InBlackestNight
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 2:13:30 PM
Reply

What about those people who only can see out of one eye? Those people can enjoy regular tv but not glasses based 3d. I think once the glasses are not required then maybe it will be bigger but all the people I've talked to balk at the fact they have to wear the glasses.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

SuMtOnE
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 2:32:54 PM
Reply

3D tv already? I still don't have a HDTV and money isn't a issue. it's just that my 20" Sony CRT is still in mint condition... =)

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

The Stig
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 6:29:33 PM

Dude, go get yourself an HDTV. The PS3 is a completely different beast in HD.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

CharlesD
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 2:35:55 PM
Reply

I don't doubt it will catch on more than people are thinking but three years might be a bit of an optimistic number. I would say it will certainly happen within five-six years maybe even four, but three? Well, I'm not executive but I still think they are setting their hopes a bit high.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Temjin001
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 2:51:46 PM
Reply

Hopefully, Ubisoft speeds it along by sending me one for free =p

I look forward to the 3Dtv's that don't require glasses to experience.
Imagine how much more effective and captivating a glasses-free 3DTV would be on the showroom floors of Best Buy's and Targets etc.

It'll happen some day I-tell-yahs!

Instead, I see a blurry looking image on a HDTV with smudged oily fingerprinted glasses sitting on the stand in front of it.... sort of reminds me of those Virtual Boy kiosks I saw so many years ago......
sort of. so easy on the down thumbs guys

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Lawless SXE
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 4:01:00 PM
Reply

Sure, it may be important, but I doubt that "everyone" will have a 3-D TV in 3 years. I mean, what percentage of the market has upgraded from SD? I assume that most of those that have not will skip to 3D, but for most that have only recently upgraded to HD, it would seem an exercise in pointlessness to upgrade, unless you've got the money to throw away.

In three years, 3D will be being pushed much harder than it is now, and I would say that most all forms of video entertainment will have it as standard, so that may well be when the surge starts. Either way, I'll be getting one when I move out of my parent's house. Oh god, let that be soon.

On a slightly related note, I asked this question in another thread and it never got answered, so I'll ask again: How is it that at E3 Aaron Greenberg was touting that at the current point in time, the Xbox 360 is completely 3Dready? I mean, is that true, because from my standpoint, it is a blatant lie, or perhaps it is a false 3D. Help me out anyone, 'cos it's doing my head in.
Peace.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

LightShow
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 4:17:48 PM

if it was 3d ready, theyd retrofit something to showcase it. even the PSN has a couple titles (super stardust HD and something else...) that run in 3d, just to throw a bone to early adopters.

even if his statement is true, its irrelevant because they havent produced anything to prove it.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 8:11:31 PM

He uses Avatar as the example. From my understanding its not the same 3D as the tech Sony is pushing.

Isn't that that 1950's 3D with the blue and red glasses?

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Temjin001
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 8:26:23 PM

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-stereo-3d-article

Look no further than the Digital Foundry for all of your game-tech needs.

Stereoscopic 3D is alive and well on 360, too

Though, I believe, without the PS3's SPU's helping things along for Sony the 360 won't always keep pace in this territory.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Lawless SXE
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 10:39:55 PM

Thanks for the link Temjin.
Peace.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

LightShow
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 4:16:11 PM
Reply

if in 3 years a 3d hdtv that doesnt need glasses costs as much as their size equivalents do today, then his statement will be plausible. remove any of those qualifiers, and he hasnt got a chance.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

The CEO
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 4:49:03 PM
Reply

So says the company that showed off Laser Tag at E3. I think they just see dollar signs. I also think they have poor eyesight LOL.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

WorldEndsWithMe
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 5:24:19 PM
Reply

No. Well... not for many years.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Snaaaake
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 6:28:07 PM
Reply

So if we play 3D game in 2D is it gonna look blurry?

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

The Stig
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 6:39:27 PM
Reply

I was skeptical at first about 3DTVs but after seeing one in action it quickly changed my mind. The 3D Blu-ray that was demoed (G-Force I think) was really impressive, awesome 3D effects and outstanding picture quality.

My current TV is starting to show its age and I think I will definitely be upgrading within the next 18 months when the prices have come down.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

BikerSaint
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 7:08:29 PM
Reply

Sony is not 'betting' on 3D, it merely tries to stay itself.

http://www.ubergizmo.com/15/archives/2010/07/sony_is_not_betting_on_3d_it_merely_tries_to_stay_itself.html

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Cheroqui
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 7:13:45 PM
Reply

Why couldn't they just kick this whole 3D thing off both gaming and TV/movies with the Passive Grey Shade Polarized glasses?
Is it absolutely necessary to try to force their new tech on us for $3,000?
All that d* flickering probably isn't good for people anyway. I wonder how many epileptic seizures they're going to cause with this crap.

Hey remember those glasses years ago that were supposed to flash colors to change your mind state and brainwaves; help you relax and make it easier "to learn"? Maybe they want to alter our mental states or something. Make us more susceptible to whatever new propaganda and propositioning they market in the future :-o ;-)

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

BikerSaint
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 7:16:08 PM
Reply

Found an interesting site that might help in answering our 3D questions.....

3D TV FAQ's

http://news.cnet.com/3d-tv-faq/?tag=mncol;txt

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 9:19:49 PM

As I said above (combining two comments);

By the end of this year the PS3 will be capable of HD games, HD video, and HD display of photos, it will also be capable of 3D games, 3D BluRay/video and 3D photos. Aamidst all of this, a standard for 3D home video based on BluRay has been accepted by the industry, HDMI 1.4 is the standard for 3D video signals, and stereo-scopic 3D on TV using these standards has become the accepted norm in the manufacture of 3D enabled TVs. So in other words, the standard for 3D has been set, and Sony pretty much did it on their own. Even if TVs that do 3D without glasses come along in 5 years, the standards for transmitting and storing 3D in HD have been set and will not change. All those BluRay players and 3D video files/photographs and games will continue to work without change. And *all* of that 3D media will work on the PS3 (as the ad says, it only does everything).

Really, Sony's execution on setting a 3D standard and creating a market for 3D has been flawless so far.

One more thought for those expressing skepticism. When HDTV started to become 'big' People spent two to three years arguing that the difference between BluRay and DVD was minimal. Companies not involved with BluRay tried to minimize it as if it was worthless and unimportant. Commentators decried the expense of those HDTVs and questioned whether anyone could see the difference between 720p and 1080p, and so on, and so forth. I even remember people trying to argue that a good VHS player was all that was needed.

How things change in just a few short years since the launch of BluRay and the PS3. Between them they have driven the wave of HD adoption. So before you say people aren't interested, or won't pay. Why not? They did before, and the cost of going 3D will be comparatively lower than going to HD was.


Last edited by Highlander on 7/9/2010 9:23:40 PM

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

kraygen
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 8:00:34 PM
Reply

I'm going to have to disagree with him for one simple reason. I know a lot of people who are not interested in tv tech at all. I have a huge family and I am the only one in my family with a flat screen tv.

I know most of my family and many other people I know won't replace their tv's until their tv quits working.

I know most of us here at psx are all tech junkies and we like new stuff, but there are a lot of ppl out there who could care less if there nite time tv shows are in hd let alone 3d.

Personally I don't like the idea of having to sit directly in front of my tv with glasses on or else the picture is distorted or the cost of said viewing. Am I against 3d, not at all, I just would rather buy it later when it's more affordable and better quality.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

BikerSaint
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 11:02:10 PM
Reply

Just an FYI,

Game Companies Asking Consumers for Opinion on 3D

http://www.industrygamers.com/news/game-companies-asking-consumers-for-opinion-on-3d/

They're also doing a random prize give-a-way from the people who take the survey....
Here's a chance to win yourself a Panasonic 50" 3d HDTV, & other assorted gaming goodies, such as 2 sets of quality headphones, a 21.5" FullHD 3D monitor, 40 3D games from EA, Ubisoft, & blitz, & more. It only takes about 15 minutes to complete).

(BTW, if one of you should happen to win that Panasonic 50" 3D HDTV, then giving me a free PS3 game of my choosing will serve as a nice lil' "thank you" note, LOL)

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

kraygen
Saturday, July 10, 2010 @ 4:31:03 AM

Maybe I'm tired or something, but I went to the link and tried to take the survey, said I must be a member, thought no problem.

Ummm except when I tried to sign up, couldn't find anywhere to do so. Went to members and it said log in, no sign up.

It's 4:30 and I've only had 3 hours sleep in the past 70 hours, so sleep deprivation is definitely kicking in, or maybe there site has issues, I'm not entirely sure.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Alienange
Friday, July 09, 2010 @ 11:25:05 PM
Reply

All the "global corporations" in the world can push 3D but if the global population doesn't buy it, you'll see them singing a new song rather quickly.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

BikerSaint
Sunday, July 11, 2010 @ 10:19:23 PM

kraygen,
OOPS, sorry about that...
I forgot about adding that part, cause I also had a hard time trying to figure out how to register there too, at first.

What you have to do is just click on the survey itself. Then follow all of the survey's prompt's.

That will automatically put you into the "register" page, & when done, you'll get a comformation email that you'll have to click on to activate your membership there.

And once you're back at the site again,just go back to the survey & complete it.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

___________
Saturday, July 10, 2010 @ 2:02:38 AM
Reply

so your paying for them ubisoft?
dident think so!
sure its a new tech, and one to stay i think, BUT its going to take a sh*t load longer than 3 years to be in everyones homes.
3D is not helping itself either because unlike HD TVs there is different styles.
when HD TVs came out, they were the standard you did not have to worry about changing tech.
with 3D its a different story, now we need 3D glasses but in 2 years time or so new TVs will be out that do not require glasses.
the way the images are processed will change too, weather it be polarized or using stereoscopic techniques.

theres just too many inconsistencies now, too many variables and that will put people off, people will want to wait till things stabilize and one way or the other becomes the standard.

not to mention were in a recession now and allot of people, well are not exactly swimming in cash!
not to mention allot of people just spent a good 2/3K on a HD TV within the past 12 months.
i just spend 3K on the Z55 TV at the beginning of the year, i wont be buying a new TV for at least another 4 years.
and thats if they some how release smaller 3D TVs, if the smallest 3D TV stays at 46 inch like it is now i wont be ever buying one!

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

RebelExtrm02
Saturday, July 10, 2010 @ 4:22:21 PM
Reply

I just don't see it. Myself and everyone I know have already lost interest in 3D. It was cool at first, with Avatar 3D and all, but it quickly lost its flair. Anymore I find myself going to the regular digital non 3D movies and no longer looking at 3D hardware. Maybe we're just different. *shrugs shoulders*

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

xnonsuchx
Saturday, July 10, 2010 @ 7:12:34 PM
Reply

Need to wait for 42"+ 3D HDTVs to get under $500, the glasses to get down to $25-40/pair, and the PS4 that can do 120fps (60fps stereoscopically) on high-end games w/o lowering texture quality and resolution. ;-)

While I'm not that interested, at least 3D is something the PS3 can do that the Wii/360 cannot (unless they secretly upped the HDMI spec on the 360 S).

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

PaiNT_kinG
Sunday, July 11, 2010 @ 1:08:05 AM
Reply

STILL NOT CONVINCED ;D

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Leave a Comment

Please login or register to leave a comment.

Our Poll

Are you getting Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor?
Yup, I'm nabbing this one now.
Yes, but I'm waiting for a while.
Maybe...not sure yet.
No, not interested.

Previous Poll Results