Sony’s big-wig, Shuhei Yoshida, has insisted that wearing 3D glasses isn’t a major barrier to the technology and wants Nintendo to stop banging on about the fact they do not need them for their new 3DS.
Sony’s Worldwide Studios Shuhei Yoshida told US game website IGN: “If you really want a big theatre experience, of course you have to wear glasses.”
He went to say that he felt that the glasses are “light” and you’ll soon “forget” that you’re even wearing them after a while.
At this year’s E3 Sony went 3D crazy, even giving out the polarised glasses to attendees at its 3D press conference.
Nintendo also announced new 3D tech at E3, but not without taking a cheap shot at Sony’s tech by referring to their 3D glasses as “not cool,” and it would appear that this has hit a nerve with Sony.
“I have hope that they have a broader perspective with 3D,” Yoshida said.
“When you listen to what they are saying about the effect of 3D perspective to the games, they are saying the same message we are, but they don’t have to bash some small part of what the other company is doing.
“I think as an industry we should preach this new perspective, from a very large cinema screen to a small portable, because that helps advancing the games and the game industry,” he said. “We’d like to work together to promote 3D.”
So the 3D wars are set to begin. Do you think 3D will take-off or it is just another expensive fad? Have your say below…..
Via Eurogamer
6 thoughts on “Sony Defends 3D Glasses”
Because the 3D technology is so new, few people understand how it works, especially the “glassesless” 3DS screen. Well, let me burst your bubble.
The lenticular 3D used on the 3DS has its drawbacks, the 3 main ones being the screen can’t be much wider than the distance between your pupils, you have to be fairly close to get the required angle for the lens and the screen resolution is halved horizontally as it uses half the pixels for each eye.
So, the fact of the matter is this. Glassesless 3D is fine for small hand held gaming but if you want a big screen that you don’t have to sit right in front of and you want a decent resolution, you are going to have to have a system that uses 3D glasses.
I’m sure there will be a battle between the 2 types of 3D that require glasses, either the polarised glasses or the active shutter. Active shutter glasses could be made to work on a standard TV if it has a good enough refresh rate as it just flashes between the left and right images. An infra red box sends out a pulse that syncs with the glasses so each eye only sees one side.
However, polarised glasses are very cheap to make and there is no reason why you can’t make your own polarised glasses from a set of the standard big ugly ones you get in the cinema. You can cut the filters with a pair of scissors and as long as you keep the orientation of the film the same, it’ll work.
All very true Silent – I went to the Gadget Show a few months ago and tried the PS3 with the glasses on Motorstorm. I was left a bit underwhelmed as was the case with Avatar too. The clarity of vision through the glasses wasn’t the best and is quite often a bit to dark for me.
I totally agree about non-glasses tech it does require you keep the screen at certain angle and distance to make the 3D effect – so would be more than useless for TV’s or cinemas.
I just think its 80’s tech that hollywood is pinning the whole film industry future on. I can’t see it being a winner, give me better graphics every day of the week over 3D.
Yeah…Sony would not say their glasses looks stupid and that they are like jumping back in time 20 years, they are spending millions in all that stupid movement they are doing about 3d glasses, and they want to sell at all cost.
Nintendo in the other way is much smarter, they offer what they can…small screen?, ok…right now it is viable a smart screen without glasses so they did it. When its viable a bigger screen without glasses, then its the time to release to public, not the freak experiment of the 3d glasses which is condemned to die..
Bigger screen without glasses are possible also, there are a few prototypes out there, search for them…just dont spend your money on stupid glasses, and they will release the new technology sooner.
I read about a year ago that 3D will not need glasses within 5 years, so 4 years to go. I think I can wait. A family of 5, do you really expect to bung out a grand for glasses, you make me laugh. Yep I think I’ll wait especially since I’ve just bunged out for 60″ LG,
I cant understand why Sony and other manufacturers are trying to reinvent the wheel. Active shutter glasses are doomed to fail as they are clumsy, expensive and have possible safety issues.
Passive polarised glasses are cheap and easy to use and the quality is just as good. Keep your eyes out for the latest LG 3d tvs, they are made for passive polarised format.
I got some polarised glasses from i-3k.com and have used them in the cinema (real D) and at the pub for the world cup and they are fine, cant do that with a pair of £100 actives, no contest.
All this talk about glasses or no glasses doesn’t take into account that the glasses are perceived as a hassle. Given the choice, people will simply refuse’em.
That is all.