By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony - Sony: Nintendo Shouldn't Bash 3D Glasses

Killiana1a on 02 July 2010
gamelover2000 said:
Killiana1a said:

Sony working alongside Nintendo is a loser move. If you have the stronger position, stronger company, then collaboration with your competitors is a loser because they will profit off of your hard work.

Reading between the lines, Sony is in deep trouble if they feel the need to work alongside a company whose systems they thrashed in sales during the PS1 and PS2 era.

We may have no PS4 after all if and IF Sony keeps Kaz Hirai whose ideas for making the PS4 a cutting edge gaming console will push the PS4 to a $699 and $799 respectively, then they will have no one except a bunch of vain "My system costs more than yours" Scott Alexander wannabes purchasing it.

you sir, lose 1 internets..

The plain bullshit that that line holds I will not even discuss, the fact is that they are talking about promoting 3D Technology wich Sony wants to do with all other TV makers to.. I am not sure if your mind is clear or not but I hope you realise what you typed there..

I realize quite well what I wrote. Nintendo with the 3DS is creating a glassless 3D experience that all other television makers including Sony would love to get the knowledge to replicate.

Yes, Sony is a competitor for Nintendo at the game console level and Nintendo would love nothing more than to disrupt their 3D television business with the 3DS, which will raise questions such as why am I paying $3k for a 3D television requiring glasses when the technology is there on my son's Nintendo 3DS to have a glassless 3D experience?

My mind is crystal on the implications of the technology concerning the Nintendo 3DS.



Around the Network
hsrob on 02 July 2010
Killiana1a said:
joeorc said:
Killiana1a said:
joeorc said:

Sony's not trying to compete with the 3DS with their 3D

but Nintendo is trying to compete with Sony in the Home theatre market with the 3DS

makes you wonder.

Well, that is quite a logical leap and an astute one. Imagine this:

1. Nintendo 3DS drops in the US during the 2010 holiday season or March 2011 at the latest.

2. Meanwhile, Sony is spending quite a bit of R&D and marketing on their 3D television that require glasses.

3. Consumers buy the Nintendo 3DS in droves, become fascinated with the 3D without glasses, and wonder why Sony is pedaling 3D televisions upwards to $3k

4. The media reports on the Nintendo 3DS ushering in a new, glassless 3D experience.

5. Sony is proverbially screwed.

I see this happening and what this call for collaboration really then is, the worst form of corporate espionage masked under the form of collaboration.

Sony is done.

omg..

Sony is not the only one: the majority of Tv manuf. are all doing 3D TV's

the freakin D@MN 3DS is not built for the Home theatre..there is no way the 3DS is going to have that effect.on the Entire Home Theatre industry because the screen is too d@mn small. which is the same problem for every portable. they are not even in the same target Market.

the simple truth is:

a) the resolution of the Screen in the 3DS is made for portables, not home theatre

b) 3D movies are being made for Home Theatre, yes the 3DS can get portable version's, but the simple truth once again in order to have that 3D theatre experience at home you will still need 3D glasses to experience it.

c) I very much doubt that many if any is going to want to watch the 3DS as their main unit for 3D movies as a replacement for Home theatre.

d) the replacement for a glassless 3D for home theatre is quite a way's off because of several problem's but also, the very fact that its going to be real expensive for screen's 32" and above. any way mean while 3D enable LCD sceen's that use the 3D shutter technology work and they know it will be priced for mass consumer adoption well before any pratical solution of a glassless option that would be anywhere within that price range. Before The Current 3D is well established.

You are missing the forest by focusing on the trees.

It is not how big the screen size is. It is about the technology created to render 3D without the need for 3D glasses. Once this technology is created then it is a matter of refining it and replicating it onto a big screen.

This may take time to replicate on 60 inch televisions, but once Nintendo can show it, then it may have a godly patent on a technology that Sony and every other television maker would be drooling over.

Read up on the technology used in the 3DS screens.  Ask the people who make them (Sharp).  They will tell you that there is no way this technology in it's current form can be used on big screens, or as someone else already mentioned, on a big screen that more than one person can watch. 



Killiana1a on 02 July 2010
hsrob said:
Killiana1a said:
joeorc said:
Killiana1a said:
joeorc said:

Sony's not trying to compete with the 3DS with their 3D

but Nintendo is trying to compete with Sony in the Home theatre market with the 3DS

makes you wonder.

Well, that is quite a logical leap and an astute one. Imagine this:

1. Nintendo 3DS drops in the US during the 2010 holiday season or March 2011 at the latest.

2. Meanwhile, Sony is spending quite a bit of R&D and marketing on their 3D television that require glasses.

3. Consumers buy the Nintendo 3DS in droves, become fascinated with the 3D without glasses, and wonder why Sony is pedaling 3D televisions upwards to $3k

4. The media reports on the Nintendo 3DS ushering in a new, glassless 3D experience.

5. Sony is proverbially screwed.

I see this happening and what this call for collaboration really then is, the worst form of corporate espionage masked under the form of collaboration.

Sony is done.

omg..

Sony is not the only one: the majority of Tv manuf. are all doing 3D TV's

the freakin D@MN 3DS is not built for the Home theatre..there is no way the 3DS is going to have that effect.on the Entire Home Theatre industry because the screen is too d@mn small. which is the same problem for every portable. they are not even in the same target Market.

the simple truth is:

a) the resolution of the Screen in the 3DS is made for portables, not home theatre

b) 3D movies are being made for Home Theatre, yes the 3DS can get portable version's, but the simple truth once again in order to have that 3D theatre experience at home you will still need 3D glasses to experience it.

c) I very much doubt that many if any is going to want to watch the 3DS as their main unit for 3D movies as a replacement for Home theatre.

d) the replacement for a glassless 3D for home theatre is quite a way's off because of several problem's but also, the very fact that its going to be real expensive for screen's 32" and above. any way mean while 3D enable LCD sceen's that use the 3D shutter technology work and they know it will be priced for mass consumer adoption well before any pratical solution of a glassless option that would be anywhere within that price range. Before The Current 3D is well established.

You are missing the forest by focusing on the trees.

It is not how big the screen size is. It is about the technology created to render 3D without the need for 3D glasses. Once this technology is created then it is a matter of refining it and replicating it onto a big screen.

This may take time to replicate on 60 inch televisions, but once Nintendo can show it, then it may have a godly patent on a technology that Sony and every other television maker would be drooling over.

Read up on the technology used in the 3DS screens.  Ask the people who make them (Sharp).  They will tell you that there is no way this technology in it's current form can be used on big screens, or as someone else already mentioned, on a big screen that more than one person can watch. 

Once the Nintendo 3DS hits the shelves and sparks a media frenzy, it is only a matter of 2 to 5 years before glassless 3D televisions become reality.

The Nintendo 3DS will place the ball squarely into the hands of the televisionmakers with the question, If Nintendo can create a 3D technology without glasses then why are you creating 3D televisions requiring glasses costing thousands of dollars?

Sony will have a hard time answering this one.



TomasPL on 02 July 2010
hsrob said:
Killiana1a said:
joeorc said:
Killiana1a said:
joeorc said:

Sony's not trying to compete with the 3DS with their 3D

but Nintendo is trying to compete with Sony in the Home theatre market with the 3DS

makes you wonder.

Well, that is quite a logical leap and an astute one. Imagine this:

1. Nintendo 3DS drops in the US during the 2010 holiday season or March 2011 at the latest.

2. Meanwhile, Sony is spending quite a bit of R&D and marketing on their 3D television that require glasses.

3. Consumers buy the Nintendo 3DS in droves, become fascinated with the 3D without glasses, and wonder why Sony is pedaling 3D televisions upwards to $3k

4. The media reports on the Nintendo 3DS ushering in a new, glassless 3D experience.

5. Sony is proverbially screwed.

I see this happening and what this call for collaboration really then is, the worst form of corporate espionage masked under the form of collaboration.

Sony is done.

omg..

Sony is not the only one: the majority of Tv manuf. are all doing 3D TV's

the freakin D@MN 3DS is not built for the Home theatre..there is no way the 3DS is going to have that effect.on the Entire Home Theatre industry because the screen is too d@mn small. which is the same problem for every portable. they are not even in the same target Market.

the simple truth is:

a) the resolution of the Screen in the 3DS is made for portables, not home theatre

b) 3D movies are being made for Home Theatre, yes the 3DS can get portable version's, but the simple truth once again in order to have that 3D theatre experience at home you will still need 3D glasses to experience it.

c) I very much doubt that many if any is going to want to watch the 3DS as their main unit for 3D movies as a replacement for Home theatre.

d) the replacement for a glassless 3D for home theatre is quite a way's off because of several problem's but also, the very fact that its going to be real expensive for screen's 32" and above. any way mean while 3D enable LCD sceen's that use the 3D shutter technology work and they know it will be priced for mass consumer adoption well before any pratical solution of a glassless option that would be anywhere within that price range. Before The Current 3D is well established.

You are missing the forest by focusing on the trees.

It is not how big the screen size is. It is about the technology created to render 3D without the need for 3D glasses. Once this technology is created then it is a matter of refining it and replicating it onto a big screen.

This may take time to replicate on 60 inch televisions, but once Nintendo can show it, then it may have a godly patent on a technology that Sony and every other television maker would be drooling over.

Read up on the technology used in the 3DS screens.  Ask the people who make them (Sharp).  They will tell you that there is no way this technology in it's current form can be used on big screens, or as someone else already mentioned, on a big screen that more than one person can watch. 


dude, Sharp already STARTED PRODUCING 3D glass-free screens for bigger mobile devices, TVs, laptops and PC monitors that will hit the marnet next year so STOP TALKING BS!



snfr on 02 July 2010
z101 said:
Rawnchie14 said:
snfr said:

Yep, I agree with that. Nintendo are the ones to push new technology into the mainstream, Sony is simply not able to do that right now.

Anyway, it will be nice to see what the people will think when there are the first 3D TVs which don't require glasses.


There's where I agree with you.  No glasses - not even to hold us over until tech gets more advanced.  Just skip useless technology like that.


There are already TVs that can do that ... but only for one person and you must sitting exactly at the right angle in front of the TV and you dont allowed to move your head. Its not for the masses, for lonely Freaks maybe.

It is a fact: With the TV technology there is no comfortable 3D possible. They must use something like holography to bring 3D at home, but we are many years away from that.

Of course it is, why should it not be possible? It just takes time!



2012 - Top 3 [so far]

                                                                             #1                                       #2                                      #3

      

Around the Network
twesterm on 02 July 2010
SpartenOmega117 said:

Okay guys the main reason people dont like wearing 3d galsses is because it makes you look goofy right? Well we all have to admit playing the wii or any motion device makes you look goofy as well. Im just saying if people are willing to use an imaginary steering wheel then they can wear 3d glasses too without a problem.

I think I've seen you say that in other threads and I've probably told you before that's not why people don't like the glasses, guess you didn't listen so much there.  This isn't some giant mystery, people don't like the glasses because they just aren't comfortable.  Even if you don't normally wear glasses they're just incredible uncomfortable.

3D is suppose to provide great immersion into films and games but you're aware of the glasses the entire time which actually takes you out of the movie.

As for the OP, I think I've already seen plenty of people nail it in the first page alone: Sony can't take what they dish out.

We've seen them mock and downplay the competition countless times but anytime something that's an actual threat appears, well, that happens.

-edit-

Also, does anyone else hate that in the new VGCharts I can't press Quote or Reply and open it in a new window?  I usually like to read long threads like this and open mulitple windows. 

Now I have to reply to each post individually and constantly have to find the place where I left of again.  It sucks.



 

twesterm on 02 July 2010
joeorc said:
Killiana1a said:
joeorc said:

Sony's not trying to compete with the 3DS with their 3D

but Nintendo is trying to compete with Sony in the Home theatre market with the 3DS

makes you wonder.

Well, that is quite a logical leap and an astute one. Imagine this:

1. Nintendo 3DS drops in the US during the 2010 holiday season or March 2011 at the latest.

2. Meanwhile, Sony is spending quite a bit of R&D and marketing on their 3D television that require glasses.

3. Consumers buy the Nintendo 3DS in droves, become fascinated with the 3D without glasses, and wonder why Sony is pedaling 3D televisions upwards to $3k

4. The media reports on the Nintendo 3DS ushering in a new, glassless 3D experience.

5. Sony is proverbially screwed.

I see this happening and what this call for collaboration really then is, the worst form of corporate espionage masked under the form of collaboration.

Sony is done.

omg..

Sony is not the only one: the majority of Tv manuf. are all doing 3D TV's

the freakin D@MN 3DS is not built for the Home theatre..there is no way the 3DS is going to have that effect.on the Entire Home Theatre industry because the screen is too d@mn small. which is the same problem for every portable. they are not even in the same target Market.

the simple truth is:

a) the resolution of the Screen in the 3DS is made for portables, not home theatre

b) 3D movies are being made for Home Theatre, yes the 3DS can get portable version's, but the simple truth once again in order to have that 3D theatre experience at home you will still need 3D glasses to experience it.

c) I very much doubt that many if any is going to want to watch the 3DS as their main unit for 3D movies as a replacement for Home theatre.

d) the replacement for a glassless 3D for home theatre is quite a way's off because of several problem's but also, the very fact that its going to be real expensive for screen's 32" and above. any way mean while 3D enable LCD sceen's that use the 3D shutter technology work and they know it will be priced for mass consumer adoption well before any pratical solution of a glassless option that would be anywhere within that price range. Before The Current 3D is well established.

1. Just type damn.

2. Killiana does have a good point.  If someone pays roughly $300 for a 3D experience without glasses and then are asked to pay $3000 for a 3D experience with glasses, they're going to feel confused.

I agree that watching Avatar or whatever on the 3DS is silly, but it's just as silly as putting up with the glasses.

-edit-

Also, the idea that if 3D with glasses fails then it will be the end of Sony is stupid.  Sony is pushing 3D for the same reason they push BluRay.  It's a buzz word that the competitors can't say (well, now at least one of them can and can say it better).



 

snfr on 02 July 2010

I wasn't online for many hours, but now I read through all the comments.

As I said at the beginning I'm interested in both, the 3DS and 3D TVs. Of course 3D TVs have one big problem right now, and that is the need for glasses. But the 3DS has also a problem and that is that it has a tiny little screen. And this problem can't be solved on a handheld. 3D TVs without the need for glasses are already developed, the technology is just no good enough right now to bring the 3D effect to everyone in front of the screen (you have to sit directly in the right angle...).

Seriously... many people just complain about the glasses while hyping the 3DS which doesn't require ones. But they don't realise that there is a huge difference in screen size right now. So when there are the first 3D TVs available that don't require glasses I will be there to buy one (when they get cheaper). And if this takes to long... well... than I will buy a 3D TV with glasses because they will be cheap very soon (just look at how expensive HDTVs were 4 years ago, and how cheap they are now).



2012 - Top 3 [so far]

                                                                             #1                                       #2                                      #3

      

twesterm on 02 July 2010
kowenicki said:

can everyone list their top 10 3d movies.... ?


Freddy's Dead!

Er, beyond that...I saw a porn in 3D in a theater once (it was the bad 70's 3D/porn too)...kind of awesome but I don't know if I could legitamately put that on a top 10 list.



 

themanwithnoname on 02 July 2010
Carl2291 said:
c0rd said:
Carl2291 said:
KungKras said:
Carl2291 said:

I was calling Nintendo's bashing of glasses arrogant.

Oh, I see.

But why would it be arrogant? Agressive maybe, but arrogant?

Because people like wearing glasses.

They don't have the right to bash it, just because they think there version is better. They are being arrogant.

People like wearing the glasses for 3D?

Come on. You can do better than that.

Firstly. Explain how Avatar is the highest grossing movie ever.

Secondly. Glasses 3D is currently the only way (as far as i know) that people can watch 3D stuff at the pictures or at home. If nobody liked wearing the glasses, we wouldn't be having a big 3D craze right now. Would we?

I'm a bit disappointed that Squilliam missed the best reason for this: Inflation.

All too easy. *waves hand and lowers carl into the carbonite pit*



themanwithnoname's law: As an America's sales or NPD thread grows longer, the probabilty of the comment "America = World" [sarcasticly] being made approaches 1.