LG's new 3D TV has true gaming split-screen, reminds us of another display

@Faenix
8 pairs of glasses, and two of them can't be gaming glasses, why?

@Js2Kings
To make more money.
That's why.

@Faenix The split screen glasses should be fairly inexpensive. I'm sure the reason why none are included is because most people purchasing this set will be doing so for 3D movies and not games.

Joystiq doesn't mention it, but these LG sets will use passive 3D glasses instead of the more expensive active shutter ones. LG's passive 3D technology is called "Cinema 3D" because it's very similar to what the movie theatres use right down to the inexpensive glasses.

@Faenix

THAT'S how they get you? What about the freakin' price of the tv's? That's insane, considering 3d tv prices have dropped to under $1000 for an ok one about 40-50". /end rant

Well, it is cool technology, but until the price comes down, I won't even consider it. Hell, I am not even considering regular 3d yet, so who knows.

@darksied TVs under $1000 are relatively small like under 40" and just okay to use, and some of them are crappy (like the ones from Vizio) I mean that model LW980T is top of the line TV which has not even released on the market yet. If you want affordable one, LG also has lower model, lw5600. I read it is the best on its price range.

@TRONdll
I think (not sure) that the benefit from the glasses would also be a larger viewing angle. With a parallax barrier you'd have to sit in the sweet spot.

They also make GPSes with said display. The driver sees the GPS and the passenger sees a movie or w/e. Kind of neat also.

@Mmmmz

With the glasses, the viewing angle doesn't matter. It's a shutter system, meaning that the TV rapidly alternates between the left and right eye images in synchronization with the glasses alternating between covering up your right and left eyes, respectively. That way, only your left eye sees the left eye image when its on-screen, and your right eye only sees the right eye image when its on screen. The left eye never sees the right eye image because it's covered up whenever the right eye image is on-screen (and vice-versa).

The Sega Master System had a similar 3D system without the need for a special TV. The only reason a special TV is needed today is because the glasses synchronize with the television itself through a wireless (I think) connection. The glasses cost so much because instead of moving shutters like the Master System glasses, each lens is a one pixel LCD display that turns on and off to simulate the shutters covering your eyes.

I'm guessing for the split-screen gaming mode, the television splits the two screens into differently filtered images so that each pair of glasses can only see their respective screens, much like how IMAX 3D works in movie theaters, but without the 3D.

@Veteran Gear

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ou-FeOoKDq4

@killerjuice
well played.

@killerjuice

No love for the maid... so sad.

@kmcroc
Yes its much better than the Sony one that is at a rip-off price in Europe.

@Kibbles XIII
I like what Capcom does with their split screen in RE5 and Lost Planet 2 'cause it preserves the original ratio and keeps your inventory/HUD next to your screen to reduce clutter in the actual picture; but it makes playing on anything less than a 37" a real chore..

@Kibbles XIII
I may be wrong. But they may be using that technology
That let's both users see completely different images
On the entire screen but from different angles.

@Janitor

No. Stop that.

@Rob Liv but but.....but....

@Pure Black World Tendency

THIS IS THE BEST COMMENT I'VE EVER SEEN

@Halgrimur

It's because the US Dollar has no relevance in the UK. When electronic goods come here, they are transported over European land and waters, so the manufacturers have to pay their shipping and customs expenses in Euros not US Dollars. This is why the UK price is therefore a direct conversion of the Euro.

No company who manufactures goods in China/Japan/Taiwan etc would transport their products through the US and then over the Atlantic to the UK and the rest of Europe as it's not cost effective and it's a much longer indirect route.

@Rain
Double the sony one and you get 48" for $1000 with better tech, I think this is more of a rip off....

@pluupy Yes, all you have to do is take two of the right side lenses and two of the left side lenses and match them together and you would have the ability to make them split screen compatible. So if you didn't wanna buy the glasses separately, just take two of the 8, jimmie rig them so they are displaying both lenses of one side and wallah!

@(Unverified)
True gaming split screen means split screen without splitting the screen the conventional way. So it's full screen local multiplayer for each user, but not in 3D (I don't think, not even sure if it's technically possible under current tech)

Unless you meant conventional split screen in 3D.

@nerdydesi1
I bought a HDTV for my consoles and I still don't have/need a HD subscription (SD TV still looks great in PAL regions and resolutions).

So effectively I might as well add that cost onto the price of my "console gaming experience". Along with subscription fees to just play games online, more expensive games.

@nerdydesi1
Such a nonsensical statement. I truly don't understand where you're coming from. If it's about neat full screen LOCAL multiplayer the PC is at the same disadvantage...

Both PC and consoles need a display. Both can display 3D and both don't require it by a long shot.

I play my PC games on my HDTV if I'm using a controller and I still have a 23" monitor for normal tasks and mouse gaming. So, I didn't save money in that respect. I spent more. I just got more bang for my buck in regards to my HDTV.

The true cost savings comes from games being generally at least $10 cheaper at launch (but we get more bugs and sometimes no DLC because our money isn't good enough) Then there's Steam and other DD platforms.

It has nothing to do with a TV that both platforms can use. (Not sure about 3D, though. Never cared to check it out for PC, or console for that matter)

But yeah, what are you trying to say?

@nerdydesi1

Sorry dude but I think your logic is super flawed. A big expensive TV isn't required like a big expensive monitor isn't required to play on the PC. Most people use their TVs & monitors for more than just gaming. The price of the display has nothing to do with the cost of entry of a gaming system. That's like saying a 42 inch monitor is a pre-requisite for playing computer games and we know it's not.

@nerdydesi1 Oooh, sorry to get everyone's panties in a bunch. Just saying for the ignorant console gamers that think you need a $500 GPU to play PC games, there are also ways to make console gaming expensive.

RELAX.

@nerdydesi1 Lesson: You can't favorably compare PC gaming to console gaming to the general public without getting shit all over, even if your points are legitimate. Folks HATE reason.

@Accessgranted

oh boy,... exactly my situation and feelings.

@Accessgranted

except I am Al Bundy and not a college student ;)