Ben-DutkaAlthough the focal points of Sony's E3 press conference were clearly PlayStation Move and 3D, this doesn't necessarily mean the two lifecycles are similar.
SCEE boss Andrew House told CVG that 3D "is a much longer proposition" than Move, saying the two new pieces of technology are expected to have different lifespans. He also believes what many industry analysts have been saying, that 3D will take longer to develop and become a mainstream feature, while Move will hit hard this fall. Besides, you don't need an expensive new TV to toy around with the Move; the latter may cost $100 if you need the PlayStation Eye as well, but that's a far cry from $1600 (the cheapest we've seen a 3D HDTV). Said House:
"I think Move is very much something that's going to explode within the next 12 months. I think 3D is a much longer proposition. We're obviously going to have to take time to see the requirement of having new TV sets.
It's more like the shift between SD and HD, where as I think Move is an opportunity potentially to explosively grow our business and the kinds of content that we have, just at the point of a lifecycle where we should be reaching out to a massmarket."
Certainly makes sense. Just about anything that requires a significant investment for the vast majority of consumers takes time and besides, with the immense popularity of the Wii's motion sensing, that established craze could easily carry over to Sony and Microsoft. We'll have to see how both new technologies are received this fall; Move and Kinect may appeal to a whole legion of Wii owners who may wish to try the motion upgrade… As for 3D, we've got to actually see it before we go nuts for it, right?
i know i've said i'll wait to get a 3d tv but i can't resist it. i have to see how awsome KZ3 and GT5 look. i might have to drop the 1600 bucks to get one
i hope sony doesn't allow all that craptastic shovelware on the move.
Makes sense. What I like is that Sony has created an infrastructure centered on the PS3 with 3D, HD, BluRay, Digital downloads, online services, games, Internet, Motion capture/control and last but not least the hardcore and casual games. All of this centered on the PS3, the PSP comes along for the ride acting as a sort of satellite device offering some of this content on the move. They have executed a very intricate strategy all centered around the home game console. And yet with the exception of their own network services none of it is proprietary or exclusive to Sony. 3rd parties make compatible HD and 3D TVs, BluRay players, online services, and games. It's a very integrated product and strategy.
This year with 3D, PlayStation Plus and Move, Sony put those final pieces into place and it's clear that the PS3 has a long life ahead. And I would expect that the PS4 – whenever it arrives – is capable of sliding right into the same role that the PS3 has in all of this, as an upgrade instead of a replacement.
What this guy said ^
Course they are, 3D is here to stay, motion controls may be out of fashion in 10 years time. All these people winging about 3D should just pipe down, were they the same people saying no winging about going from standard definition to HD?
Anyway I have been pondering getting a 3D Projector for use with GT5 when it is released, as I just bought a new HDTV last month, as always the technology will get cheaper and cheaper so no one will be left out.
I think that the motion controls thing will last for as long as there is no other way to capture player motion. As we move more into 3D, 3D motion capture to control in-game actions becomes even more important.
Oh, btw for all the FF fans out there, FFIX (9) is on PSN in NA *now*.
yeah I saw that, I have never played it so I'm getting it as soon I get paid.
picked it up as soon as it showed up on tuesday. Such a great game. Next one I hope for is Xenogears. A friend borrowed my original copy but that was like.. 10 years ago.
i've always been curious as to why so many people want the older FF's on the psn?
they're fairly cheap to import (except ff7)
but 8 and 9 have always been dirt cheap
i've also wondered, does the psn version include all of the 'extra stuff' that was included in the international editions?
also …kinda bothers me when i'm playing a ps1 game, i'm still logged into the psn…and people can see me online and send me messages…but i can't access the cross media bar to reply
Evil, they want them because they are cheaper to just get over PSN and have on the hard drive. And they are better than the new ones (XIII)
I really hope the Dreamcast favorites on PSN will include Skies of Arcadia. Whoever missed that needs to play it.
Last edited by WorldEndsWithMe on 6/17/2010 3:32:52 PM
Well, it's less expensive than buying them on Ebay, they are on the HDD, so no disck swapping, and I can play them on my PSP on the move.
Hmmm… sounds like some pretty decent reasons there.
@ world
I've never played it, only recently heard of it and I'd love to give it a try, but I only buy new online and that's too expensive. So I hope right along with you, bring it to psn.
I really want a 3DHDV, and the reason behinds why are quite obvious. The onslaught of new technology all created to accompany 3D and enhance the experience of general media, gaming, television, & film. However, saving up the extra cash will be no simple task :'(
Ben will buy you one 🙂
3D is here to stay for as long as the consumers go out and buy it. Move will likely last no more than ten years. The difference is in interest and the past has proven that the interest of gamers in any new product wanes much faster than the general electronics market. (I'm talking in the different control methods, even though Sony's DS standard has lasted for almost twenty years.) So, yeah, that's the way I see it
I understand Sony's push for 3D – trying to lead the way as it did with DVDs for the PS2 and BluRays in the PS3 – but man, it just seems waaaay to early to emphasize that aspect as much as they are doing now. Sure, it's nice for marketing and all that, but when most gamers don't even own HDTVs, how much longer would it take for 3D TVs to become mainstream? 5 years? 10?
That's why when the likes of Killzone 3 comes out next year, built from the ground up for 3D, I'm pretty sure that only a *tiny* fraction of gamers will be able to experience the game to its full potential. It's cool that the option is there for those who have the extra income and TV to support it, but like you said Ben, the cost of entry at this point is ridiculous and will be a niche market at best for the next couple of years.
Last edited by DragonSphere on 6/17/2010 3:19:37 PM
I sincerely doubt "most gamers" don't have HDTVs. Last I heard, market penetration is in the neighborhood of 50% and gamers are FAR more likely than the gen pop to have advanced tech.
Let's just hope 3D is always only an option or we will see a breakout of seizures and migraines the likes of which as never been seen even in Japan.
reminds me of that simpsons episode when they went to japan…. one of the best episodes i think. They couldn't help but watch the anime robot show that always caused a seizure….
glimpse of the future?
I do think 3D has the potential like HD after SD, I have tried mlb 2010 just this morning from sonystyle store and all I can say is it is really impressive. Like most of the guys here that are not really looking forward to upgrade to 3D TV, my firsthand experience with 3D made me change my mind of upgrading to a 3D set instead of upgrading from my 32" hdtv to a bigger screen, I will save up more to go for 3D TV. And if the starting price as of now is $1600, it is not bad if you consider if its a new technology.
Somebody should enlighten that House fellow. The shift to 3D is nothing like the shift from SD to HD.
Going from SD to HD meant getting a friggin cool flat panel LCD or Plasma and letting a Blu Ray melt your eyes out.
The shift to 3D, in it's current state, is putting on uncool 3D glasses so that developers can transmit a migraine to the back of your brain.
It's not the SAME House. It's not the same.
Last edited by Alienange on 6/17/2010 6:25:51 PM
Alienage:
Yeah, because I play games to look cool, so 3D ain't for me…
If the glasses make the experience significantly more immersive and realistic than I could care less how they look. I haven't read any reports of the tech causing headaches but I guess we'll see.
It can't hurt to wait a year or so so to upgrade, by then, the prices will have dropped slightly and they'll be more than a handful of 3D games to choose from.
I really hope the move doesnt end up having a short "life cycle"…….
I know I will be picking up Move real soon but it might be a while maybe even couple of years before I get a 3d tv even thou i want to have it for KZ3 and GT5 realy bad I just can't afford it. 🙁
Hey Highlander,
Got a couple of tech questions for you about this 3D.
If your game's IS in 3D, but you only have a regular HDTV(I know you won't see any 3D effects), but will the overall picture be affected and/or degraded on how it will look on the lesser TV?
And for this question's for myself,
I only have a 32" Sharp brand SDTV, so will a 3D game look poorly on my crappy older SD set, and if so, by what percentage of graphic downgrade would you think?
Games that render in 3D should display perfectly well on a standard screen. Either the game will switch render modes to non stereoscopic, or it will simply be the case that you see the frames from one of the points of view. Either way it should display. If a game doesn't have a non-stereoscopic render mode you may find that it is not rendering as high a resolution as you would expect on a normal game, but on an SDTV you should have no problems, I don't think any 3D game will have to render below about 540p.
Gran Turismo 5 has two distinct game engines, one optimized for stereoscopic 3D and the other for conventional HDTV (I can't believe I just called HDTV conventional!). I think that a lot of games will do this kind of thing, only unlike GT5 which had 3D added after it was pretty much done, games designed from the ground up will simply switch modes depending on what the display configuration is.
One thing at the sony conference they kept hitting on was that thanks to blu ray they could put the regular version of games and the 3d version on the same disk, including kz3.
So it may be as simple as picking HD or 3D.
Ok, thanks a million thumbs up, Highlander.
You just soothed my ailing wallet!!!
BTW, I have no clue, so is 540p what a SDTv normally renders everything at, or is that just for games, or just certain games?
And if not, what's it normally render everything at, meaning TV shows, VHS movies, DVDs, etc?
The HDTV here keeps telling us that analogue channels are in 480p, while the DVD player says 510i, so either way, I'd say it's higher definition than SD. Take heart.
Peace.
wow, really?
in other breaking news the sky is blue, water is wet and cars are heavy!
all jokes aside theres one thing separating these 2.
motion controls will catch on quite quickly because it does what all innovations should.
it adds positives with no negatives.
allot of people hate 3D because either they have to wear those stupid glasses, or they get motion sickness.
motion controls really have no drawbacks.
worst part of motion controllers i can think of is you have to get of the couch.
but is that such a bad thing?
I've been staunchly against motion controls and 3D. However when I watched the Sony press conference I was sold. The immersion of 3D with motion controls sounds pretty awesome. I think it was Sorcery that sold me on Move, it seemed to utilize it quite well in a game that I would in fact play which is something I can't say for Wii where on that system for the most part I'd play a lot of their games but would be against the use of motion controls.