Sony to Nintendo: Leave Our 3D Glasses Alone!

[AceMcBadass]

lol. The last time Sony and Nintendo partnered up Sony screwed Nintendo pretty bad, but now they're all butthurt because this time they cant steal the better technology? Serves them right.

Refresh my memory?

The original PlayStation was used with Nintendos Technology. In a way....Sony did NOT create it...Nintendo did.

yep. Nintendo was trying to develop a disc based addon for the Super NES called the Super Disc, to combat the same tech that Sega was developing called the Sega CD, an addon to the Genesis. (Unlike the Sega CD, the Super Disc was never released.) They partnered up with Sony to help with the development. as the project neared completion, Sony backed out, taking the R&D with them, and using it to produce the PlayStation. I may be showing my age, but i remember when the PlayStation first came out, many people dubbed it the Nintendo PlayStation because, besides the disc part of the system, the design was Nintendos.

 

[AceMcBadass]

besides, all of you people saying that nintendoes technology is better, yes, the nintendo can give a 3d image without need of glasses.
but, you need to be in the "sweet spot" otherwise the quality of the 3d effect and the image itself is compromised. when applying that stuff to a widescreen tv, and more than 1 person feels like playing/watching too.... how do i describe this?
ahhhh, remember when they had those old laptop screens that turned the display all blue or whatever when your head wasnt directly in front of the screen?
i imagine it would be more annoying than that.
and getting rid of the glasses won't nessasarily fix the whole headache problem, people assume its the glasses, but it's actually your brain trying to figure out why it can focus on things at different depths at the same time. perhaps you should do some research.
the reason it works for nintendo is because of the fact that its a handheld console, meant for ONE PERSON, I can imagine you all bumping yours heads together as you attempt to watch avatar on your new NO GLASSES tv.
perhaps do some research on the things your bagging

the Technology is new, kinda like that laptop was that yo talk about in your analogy. But guess what? Something has to be first. Nintendo took the first step. it my not be great now, but neither was the original Game Boy. Im using a laptop right now, and i can see the screen just fine from almost every angle, which means that, even though laptop screens used to be annoying and slightly impractical, the technology improved to what we have today, and im sure it will get even better. This 3D phenomenon was started too early, too expensive and too many draw backs to be practical. Nintendo is the first company to mass produce an alternative, slightly better version of the tech. No, its not perfect, but its a step forward. No 200 glasses, and the console is not outrageously expensive, unlike standard TV's VS. 3D TV's. Because of this step forward, soon there will be another, and then another, till the Glasses Less 3D tech can be seen at any angle, on any size screen, for a reasonable price. Thats how technology works. 15 years ago i remember my parents buying a PC with Windows 3.11, mb a gig hard drive 58kb ram. They paid $4500. 2 years ago, i bought my laptop, Windows Vista, 320 gig hard drive, 4 gigs of ram: $600. 3D is too early in the game to be good or affordable. come back to me in 5 years and you'll see. sorry for rambling.

 

[FallenTraveler]

you know, I can see complaints about sony saying to things at once. but really, has anyone played the 3ds, if so, yeah, it's awesome, but have you watched someone play it? yeah, its awful, headaches and all that stuff. Sony offers 3d that everyone can enjoy, more power to them! I wish nintendo would move on from the ds thing already, something new would be nice...

 

[sunburst]

yep. Nintendo was trying to develop a disc based addon for the Super NES called the Super Disc, to combat the same tech that Sega was developing called the Sega CD, an addon to the Genesis. (Unlike the Sega CD, the Super Disc was never released.) They partnered up with Sony to help with the development. as the project neared completion, Sony backed out, taking the R&D with them, and using it to produce the PlayStation. I may be showing my age, but i remember when the PlayStation first came out, many people dubbed it the Nintendo PlayStation because, besides the disc part of the system, the design was Nintendos.

Other way around. Sony was completely uninterested in the console gaming market, but agreed to work with Nintendo to make a disc-based version of the SNES. Nintendo broke off the deal when they had a disagreement over financial proposals and decided to partner with Philips instead, so Sony decided to complete their own system and compete against Nintendo out of spite. It has worked out well for them though.

 

[Prof. Monkeypox]

I think E3 has taught me one thing this year.

When it comes to gimmicky pointless bullshit, Nintendo is king.

Everyone copied their motion control gimmick, just in time for them to move on to 3D.
Nintendo relies too strongly on gimmicks, but you can't beat them at their own game.

 

[AceMcBadass]

yep. Nintendo was trying to develop a disc based addon for the Super NES called the Super Disc, to combat the same tech that Sega was developing called the Sega CD, an addon to the Genesis. (Unlike the Sega CD, the Super Disc was never released.) They partnered up with Sony to help with the development. as the project neared completion, Sony backed out, taking the R&D with them, and using it to produce the PlayStation. I may be showing my age, but i remember when the PlayStation first came out, many people dubbed it the Nintendo PlayStation because, besides the disc part of the system, the design was Nintendos.

Other way around. Sega was completely uninterested in the console gaming market, but agreed to work with Nintendo to make a disc-based version of the SNES. Nintendo broke off the deal when they had a disagreement over financial proposals and decided to partner with Philips instead, so Sony decided to complete their own system and compete against Nintendo out of spite. It has worked out well for them though.

im going to assume by sega you meant sony, and your right. i had forgotten exactly why sony and nintendo had split. thanks!

 

[sunburst]

im going to assume by sega you meant sony, and your right. i had forgotten exactly why sony and nintendo had split. thanks!

No worries. And thanks for the heads up. I hate it when I do that. *fixes*

 

[Anti-Robot Man]

Someone asked why I called 3d a fad that won't take off in the mainstream earlier (I was referring to 3D TV, you'd be a fool to bet against Nintendo in the handheld market - except for a Virtual Boy sucessor).
A few reasons in no particular order:
1) High price of early adoption.

2) High risk for early adoption owing to competing technologies.

3) Expensive for multiple viewers (the shutter glasses are expensive and will remain so until economics of scale kick in - that only happens if it becomes popular).

4) The need for a set of glasses for each view hinders the ability to show of the tv (which face it is how a lot of tech gets sold to middleage men with large disposable incomes).

5) High definition TVs have yet to pass 40% penetration in the US (as far as I know) let alone in other important markets like Europe.

6) Historical precedent. There have already been a number of waves of 3D films in the past (most notably in the 50s and 70s). They were gimmicky, and the fad dried up shortly thereafter, and where a largely forgotten (a high number of these films are considered lost).

7) Scarcity of releases. There are not enough films, certainly not enough good films, using this technology (to good effect) to justify the extra expenditure to upgrade so you can play them at home.

8) Videogame designers don't seem to be able to grasp how to effectively use the tech. High Def gaming help drive sales of HD TVs this doesn't seem like it will be such a factor (expense, reduced graphical performance, difficulty making it fit game mechanics and motion, etc.).

9. Artistry. Does 3D actually add anything meaningful to films or is it simply a flashy effect? Aside from films that are spectacle focussed, it is redundant to the vast majority of movies.

10. Owing to the relatively few major spectacle films being released each year, it would be cheaper to go see each one multiple times at the cinema than it would be to invest in this technology (if you don't want to be bothered by other people just wait until near the end of the run).

I say these things as a film-lover and frequent early adopter. Wait on this tech, it's one that's very likely to fail.

 

[Towowo2]

you know, I can see complaints about sony saying to things at once. but really, has anyone played the 3ds, if so, yeah, it's awesome, but have you watched someone play it? yeah, its awful, headaches and all that stuff. Sony offers 3d that everyone can enjoy, more power to them! I wish nintendo would move on from the ds thing already, something new would be nice...

Psst.. the 3DS isn't a hardware revision but next gen portable hardware.

 

[jords]

What's nintendo's next handheld? 4DS - Time manipulator included!

 

[FallenTraveler]

Psst.. the 3DS isn't a hardware revision but next gen portable hardware.

sure looks the same to me! it's a DS with an anolog nub and improved graphical ability, but it is still in the shell of the DS, I would like something different than a ds, I'm sick of buying new ones.

 

[Towowo2]

Why does the handheld shape matter so much? No one complained about how the Game Boy line stayed the same, and quite frankly you sound like you've bought each revision as it came out.

 

[Jumplion]

To make an analogy: The woman who went to a coffee shop, spilt the coffee on herself, and then sued the shop because the cup didn't say that the coffee was hot.

In short: COMMON SENSE

Okay, I know this is completely off topic, but I just want to straighten this out because I always see people citing this lawsuit;

The coffee was boiling hot, and that's literally, not figuratively. The old lady spilled the coffee on her legs, she had to get god damn skin grafts. Skin grafts! You only need those when you have 3rd degree burns, I.E when you're on fire!

McDonalds was purposefully making the coffee several degrees hotter than the recommended temperature for coffee, claiming that most of their customers would wait until they got home to drink (which was not true). To put that in perspective, McyDees basically served their coffee immediately out of the pot at the temperature of fire.

And this wasn't the only case, there were several hundred cases with similar results, and a few of them sued to.

Sorry for getting off topic, but I just want to straighten that out, it's annoying seeing people cite that lawsuit over and over when there really was a good reason.

BUT, to be on topic, nobody has yet to answer my question; Has anyone actually played a 3D capable game? It makes a god damn difference, 3D has much more potential in video games than it does in films, I don't know why people are citing films to compare to video games, they work in two separate technologies anyway.

 

[Insanum]

Sony is basically saying "So we made the wrong choice, Stop rubbing our noses in it"

...Suck it up sony, Ninty got you this time.

 

[Miumaru]

They sound like Fox news now. Didnt they say before how they were proud of Nintendo's 3DS?
Nintendo is doing what Sony should do if it wants to sell 3D. MAKING IT BETTER! 3D glasses are the shackles of failure that keeps 3D a gimmick. Once we can make 3D glassessless for everything will 3D be worth it.

I don't see you making any practical large screen 3D tv's.

You dont see me BUYING any either. And as the consumer, thats a big deal.

 

[Double A]

You can't look directly down with the glasses, Sony. And they're easily broken or lost.

Nintendo wins.

 

[RadiusXd]

besides, all of you people saying that nintendoes technology is better, yes, the nintendo can give a 3d image without need of glasses.
but, you need to be in the "sweet spot" otherwise the quality of the 3d effect and the image itself is compromised. when applying that stuff to a widescreen tv, and more than 1 person feels like playing/watching too.... how do i describe this?
ahhhh, remember when they had those old laptop screens that turned the display all blue or whatever when your head wasnt directly in front of the screen?
i imagine it would be more annoying than that.
and getting rid of the glasses won't nessasarily fix the whole headache problem, people assume its the glasses, but it's actually your brain trying to figure out why it can focus on things at different depths at the same time. perhaps you should do some research.
the reason it works for nintendo is because of the fact that its a handheld console, meant for ONE PERSON, I can imagine you all bumping yours heads together as you attempt to watch avatar on your new NO GLASSES tv.
perhaps do some research on the things your bagging

the Technology is new, kinda like that laptop was that yo talk about in your analogy. But guess what? Something has to be first. Nintendo took the first step. it my not be great now, but neither was the original Game Boy. Im using a laptop right now, and i can see the screen just fine from almost every angle, which means that, even though laptop screens used to be annoying and slightly impractical, the technology improved to what we have today, and im sure it will get even better. This 3D phenomenon was started too early, too expensive and too many draw backs to be practical. Nintendo is the first company to mass produce an alternative, slightly better version of the tech. No, its not perfect, but its a step forward. No 200 glasses, and the console is not outrageously expensive, unlike standard TV's VS. 3D TV's. Because of this step forward, soon there will be another, and then another, till the Glasses Less 3D tech can be seen at any angle, on any size screen, for a reasonable price. Thats how technology works. 15 years ago i remember my parents buying a PC with Windows 3.11, mb a gig hard drive 58kb ram. They paid $4500. 2 years ago, i bought my laptop, Windows Vista, 320 gig hard drive, 4 gigs of ram: $600. 3D is too early in the game to be good or affordable. come back to me in 5 years and you'll see. sorry for rambling.

you misunderstand how glassesless screens work on the fundamental level.
it would take a massive shift to make it work like that, if its even possible i.e larger than the diff between plasma and lcd.
im not saying its a not a good idea for handhelds, as only one person at at time uses the things, and the small screen size means it doesn't cost an arm and a leg.

you will have to reaserch the parralax barrier and lenticular lenses technologys yourself if you want to understand why it doesn't work for more than 1 person without some sort of paradigm shift.
you miss the point sir, good day.

 

[RadiusXd]

They sound like Fox news now. Didnt they say before how they were proud of Nintendo's 3DS?
Nintendo is doing what Sony should do if it wants to sell 3D. MAKING IT BETTER! 3D glasses are the shackles of failure that keeps 3D a gimmick. Once we can make 3D glassessless for everything will 3D be worth it.

I don't see you making any practical large screen 3D tv's.

You dont see me BUYING any either. And as the consumer, thats a big deal.

then be my guest, buy a 3ds, and bring all of your friends around to watch movies on it in GLORIOUS NO-GLASSES 3D.

 

[RadiusXd]

since i wear actual glasses the 3D glasses don't fit me can i get 3D goggles?

i would actually like 3d goggles.

Then you shall have them!
I will craft them from unicorn horns!