CES 2009: Sony shows off 3D display tech with PS3

by Ludwig Kietzmann { Jan 8th 2009 at 3:14PM }

Like this but COMING OUT OF YOUR SCREEN WATCH OUT

"But all my games are already in 3D!" you exclaim, quick to accuse Joystiq of being "bias" and desperate to downplay the PlayStation 3's magnificent graphical capabilities. Rest assured, dear reader, that this post concerns real three dee, the kind that leaps off the screen and subtly mocks you for donning a pair of silly, silly glasses.

Ars Technica had a brief glimpse at some new 3D technology on display at Sony's CES booth and came away impressed. Though a Sony representative remained mum on specifications and insisted that it was merely "a look at what 3D could look like if Sony decided to move in this direction," the effect on PlayStation 3 games proved most enticing. After peering through "a dorky set of black glasses" at Wipeout HD, post author Ben Kuchera noted, "I was ready to whip out my credit card right there."

Late last year, a stereoscopic 3D Certification and Advocacy group claimed that Sony was fully intending to support 3D stereoscope technology, in both movies and games, in 2009. In the interest of embracing as many dimensions as possible, we sincerely hope the CES showing manages to draw out a few more credit cards. (But not from tech journalists -- those are usually maxed out.)

Tags: 3D, CES-2009, Stereoscopic, Wipeout-HD

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)

Shagittarius @ Jan 8th 2009 3:24PM

I hope your LCD does 120hz or Sony is going to be asking you to upgrade your TV again.

Shagittarius @ Jan 8th 2009 3:26PM

Not to mention but you'd also need to have the game support 1080p or even on a 120hz LCD it wouldn't work.

Shagittarius @ Jan 8th 2009 3:27PM

Seems more like a "next gen" idea to me. PS4.

SoulBlade @ Jan 8th 2009 3:39PM

I think you're right. This is next gen tech, but I think it's still pretty cool (though I'd need to see it to affirm that). It might also be why they chose WipeoutHD as an example since it supports 1080p.

I still want it

Shagittarius @ Jan 8th 2009 3:42PM

Oh its very cool, I use to play Everquest with this tech back in the day and it was truely awesome. I would like nothing more than to see this catch on. However, LCDs are pretty popular and unless you have an LCD capable of 720p at 120hz your not going to be able to use this tech.

I originally said the games had to run at 1080p, but I realize that they could run at any progressive resolution and be ok.

How many people have 120hz LCDs though?

AwesomeTown @ Jan 8th 2009 3:53PM

Shag, I haven't seen one up close, but can the average person see a difference with a 120hz lcd? Basically, other than this 3D, is there really any incentive right now to justify the price difference for the 120hz panel?

Zertoss @ Jan 8th 2009 4:02PM

120Hz supposedly makes a huge difference when viewing SD content. I've got a 32" from Panasonic that has a 120Hz refresh rate, but I haven't tested it to see if there's a noticeable difference.

I've got it plugged into my homemade PVR, so it runs at 1080p constantly. I'm pretty sure it only does 120Hz at 480p.

SoulBlade @ Jan 8th 2009 4:03PM

I've got one! Yea for waiting to jump in!

Heh.. but I think you need a 120hz because you have to render two frames and overlap them as one for the 3D effect. Basically you have to double your framerate. I could be dead wrong, but that might be why the higher refresh rate is needed.

nips @ Jan 8th 2009 4:09PM

Cheer up. No one's asking you to upgrade anything. It's always your choice. Besides, that refresh rate is unnecessary as you can clearly see that they are polarised glasses. Meaning the screen emits 2 differently polarised images at the same time. Read:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stereoscopy#Linearly_polarized_glasses http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polarized_glasses

Free tip: Check details before you go on a rant lest you look silly.

Little Big PSN ID: johnnynumber5 @ Jan 8th 2009 4:12PM

I don't like the 120hz televisions. I considered purchasing one but the extra frames make what your watching look fake. You can see the enhancement going on right in front of you. Besides, wouldn't a regular plasma suffice since the only reason LCD's had to do 120hz was to compete with the picture quality of plasmas?

What about the tech Sony showed off using the Playstation eye to give the illusion it was 3-D at CES last year?

Shagittarius @ Jan 8th 2009 5:07PM

nips:

The term Stereoscopy doesn't indicate the method used to achieve the 3d effect. All methods of achieving a 3d effect are called Stereoscopy. The only way your polarized theory works is if everyone buys a new TV, you can't display polarized images through any standard in-home TV set made currently.

Most likely it would be the method I am referring to in which 2 images are show to 2 separate eyes. Hence why you need 120hz and a source that is progressive scan in nature.

Shagittarius @ Jan 8th 2009 5:16PM

2 separate images trading time on the same display device, and glasses that block out one eye during every other frame.

*Just to clarify.

AwesomeTown @ Jan 8th 2009 5:56PM

Ok, you guys have confirmed what other stuff I've heard, is that a lot of people notice it, but some just don't like it. I'll have to check it out myself at the store, but man, this 3d sounds pretty nice.

Little Big PSN ID: johnnynumber5 @ Jan 8th 2009 6:57PM

Awesome Town,

Yes I didn't like 120 HZ televisions. They use an algorithm to add in the extra frames so if it isn't native then it looks fake and twitchy. The one I saw actually added another extra frame in between the additional to give it better transition. It just didn't look natural to me at all and the guy at Best Buy said most people prefer either a Plasma or a 60 HZ LCD HDTV. The whole reason that LCD TV's had to do 120 HZ was to eliminate the motion blur more prevalent in traditional 60 HZ LCd TV's which is not in Plasmas. It's hard to explain without looking at the actual screen. Also, the pricing structure is not on par with 60 HZ televisions. I have found that the newer 60 HZ LCD HDTV's do fine during motion and you can get A much larger TV than a comparable priced 120 HZ. For example, take a look at these links ...

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=8835479&st=LG+52LG60+Scarlet+LCD+TV&lp=1&type=product&cp=1&id=1209772377723

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=9034323&st=Sharp+Aquos&lp=7&type=product&cp=1&id=1218010851328

I ended up getting that 52 inch Sharp Aquos at my best buy for $1,400 instead of $1,900. It's an incredible TV and a great value. The stores are more willing to deal with a 60 HZ model than a new 120 HZ model.

AwesomeTown @ Jan 8th 2009 9:24PM

Thanks Little Big johnnynumber5.
I haven't be bothered at all with my current LCD, so I don't think I'd want to spend the current price premium. But I won't be in the market for a larger TV until later this year, so I'll reevaluate it then.

nips @ Jan 9th 2009 10:06PM

@Shag: I know I gave a link to the applicable part of the article, and it's not my "theory" it works I have seen it with my own eyes. I also never said anything about having to buy it... ah what's the point... go have fun.

klitorisaurus @ Jan 8th 2009 3:25PM

Wow....

... you're a douchebag.

Duke @ Jan 8th 2009 3:24PM

All I know is that they have to take advantage of this to make Jaws 3-D: The Game.

Oh that would be sweet! OK, maybe not.

Dirty @ Jan 8th 2009 3:44PM

You just made me think of Back to the Future 2.

Duke @ Jan 8th 2009 4:03PM

Yeah, but the Jaws 3-D movie was so classic. Just too funny to watch.

Duke @ Jan 8th 2009 3:24PM

Dude, what?

Haggard @ Jan 8th 2009 3:26PM

Rendering games like this has an impact on performance, because the image has to be rendered twice at two slightly different angles (and then they are overlaid on each other).

I'd rather see head tracking, since all that technically does is move the camera in the game world but has a powerful effect.

Dirty @ Jan 8th 2009 3:44PM

How about both.... THE FUTURE IS NOW!

Brett from Atlanta @ Jan 8th 2009 3:49PM

No doubt head tracking is badass, but I think I'd rather have 3d. Head tracking requires me to move instead of just sloth into a chair and prepare for the inevitable seizure that wipeout hd will give me.

Haggard @ Jan 8th 2009 4:02PM

If I remember correctly, the console versions of CoD don't have the lean function (to keep the controls simple), along with a lot of other console shooters.

Now imagine if instead of how the PC does it, which is with a fixed distance lean to the left a right mapped to two keys, you were able to move your head in 360 degrees and any distance you wanted to have a completely free lean ability and without having to worry about buttons, instead doing something fairly instinctive.

Plus you get the eye-poppingly eerie effect that 1:1 tracking gives to the objects on screen.

HippoHero @ Jan 8th 2009 3:26PM

You shouldn't have to tell someone their dead.

HippoHero @ Jan 8th 2009 3:27PM

Oopsie *they're*

Zertoss @ Jan 8th 2009 3:30PM

Tried this on my PC years ago when I got a pair of glasses with a Geforce 3. Mechwarrior 4 looked pretty damn cool.

J @ Jan 8th 2009 6:05PM

can you link us to the device that you used. Did you use something like this?

http://www.edimensional.com/product_info.php?cPath=21&products_id=28

I thought of buying one. Why'd you stop using yours?

DemiurgicSoul @ Jan 8th 2009 6:37PM

I tried this with Rad Racer back in '87 on the NES. It was awesome? I can't remember. All I remember is headache.

Zertoss @ Jan 9th 2009 9:26AM

Yeah, I had a pair of glasses like those, J. I stopped using them because the flicker at 60Hz-75Hz, which is all my CRT supported, gave me a headache in some games. Also anything that wasn't rendered in D3D/OGL (things like the HUD in a lot of games) wouldn't double correctly, so you'd see all of the 3D stuff popping out at you with all of the 2D stuff flickering on both sides of the screen.

Also, the glasses weren't DVI compatible. ;)

ANTCEP @ Jan 8th 2009 3:31PM

Give up Alien Lord, you're already dead, just accept it.

Chris @ Jan 8th 2009 3:33PM

Cool!

Tall @ Jan 8th 2009 3:33PM

While this sounds really cool, it also sounds like something that would need to be patched into games one at a time. Something that third parties wouldn't waste their time on without any incentive, like a bullet point on the box. Like say, trophies, they're comparative to achievements, but without any standardization or regulation outside of "Platinum is for getting all of the rest". So some games might patch in 3d, and it will be part of the hud popping out instead of anything meaningful, neat but kinda useless.

Zertoss @ Jan 8th 2009 3:42PM

On the PC, it can be done with Nvidia's Stereoscopic drivers (not sure if ATI has an equivalent), so the games don't actually need to be programmed to support it. You do have to make some tweaks to some games, though.

I imagine the same could be done on consoles. I don't know how well it would run at 1080p though.