3D Gaming*

Discussion in 'Console Technology' started by Arwin, Jul 30, 2009.

  1. grandmaster

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2007
    Messages:
    1,159
    Likes Received:
    0
  2. specwarGP2

    Regular

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2007
    Messages:
    810
    Likes Received:
    26
    It uses anaglyph type glasses right?
     
  3. Crossbar

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2006
    Messages:
    1,821
    Likes Received:
    12
    I´d say it all depends on the price of the OLED screen with the required amount of pixels. I think OLED is the only alternative for that type of hi-res screen on a handheld as it draws less power than LCD. I don´t know that market well enough to guess if it´s feasible or not.
    I also don´t know the cost of the vertical lense screen that has to be attached, it should probably be pretty cheap in large quantities.
    It would not require twice as much rendering capacity as a lot of pixels can be reused between the images, but it would still warrant a certain overhead.

    Maybe Sony is considering it for PSP2, one obvious advantage is that it would be a very obvious market differentiator compared to the current PSP.
     
  4. ergem

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2010
    Messages:
    33
    Likes Received:
    0
    http://www.alioscopy.com/Overview
    http://www.alioscopyusa.com/content/technology-overview

    I tried reading the overview of the technology thinking I would understand it one bit. LOL. Anyway, the technology is only applicable for large screens, I take it? Because it's only applicable for an HD resolution (2 million pixels)?
     
  5. ergem

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2010
    Messages:
    33
    Likes Received:
    0
  6. MfA

    MfA
    Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    7,381
    Likes Received:
    716
    I thought I linked this before ... but I guess I didn't ...

    http://masterimage3d.com/products/3d-lcd

    That's the technology that is based on. I don't think this makes a lot of sense with OLED, since the barrier is based on LCD which wastes a lot of the potential energy saving (because only half the light from the OLED display can be utilized, the light from a LCD display is however already inherently polarized so the barrier LCD uses that more efficiently). Without the energy saving angle all your left with is a more expensive screen.
     
    #426 MfA, Feb 6, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 6, 2010
  7. Crossbar

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2006
    Messages:
    1,821
    Likes Received:
    12
  8. grandmaster

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2007
    Messages:
    1,159
    Likes Received:
    0
    Nope, look at the link I gave to patsu.
     
  9. Squilliam

    Squilliam Beyond3d isn't defined yet
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2008
    Messages:
    3,495
    Likes Received:
    114
    Location:
    New Zealand
    Lets say someone has already got a decent 1080P HDTV. Whats the point in getting glasses AND upgrading the TV for 1080P 3D when, if you're already wearing glasses anyway you may as well just get a set of glasses which displays the video natively on the inside of the glasses instead?

    This is the one thing I don't get about 3D gaming/TV. If you've got the glasses, why do you need the TV?! Can someone please explain why we can't simply use OLED glasses?
     
  10. grandmaster

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2007
    Messages:
    1,159
    Likes Received:
    0
    Could you get 720p or 1080p resolution onto OLED glasses? Surely they would need to be tethered to the console? What about weight, power input, and durability?

    I agree it would be awesome if they did work: accelerometers built in for head-tracking plus complete FOV :)
     
  11. specwarGP2

    Regular

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2007
    Messages:
    810
    Likes Received:
    26
    I read the link, and I'm not sure I'm understanding this correctly. The article states that PS3 needs a firmware update in order to play 3D games. This update is also needed to support 3DTVs. I'm assuming that you can't just use active shutter glasses with any 120hz TV because the emitter needs to talk to the TV to sync.

    So how is it that you can play Avatar in 3D on PS3 if PS3 isnt 3D capable yet and you cant buy a 3D TV? Anaglyph doesnt require anything other than those special glasses. Polarized requires a special screen so that's out. If it's active shutter and Avatar works right now, in 3D (and looks good according to you) why do we need 3D TVs at all?
     
  12. grandmaster

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2007
    Messages:
    1,159
    Likes Received:
    0
    Avatar doesn't use anaglyph. It uses any one of five different 3D implementations based on half-resolution frames. The link contained screenshots showing all of them. In short it works on existing 3D screens, while the Sony firmware etc is based on the new screens based on the HDMI 1.4 standard. It may well be that these screens are backwardly compatible with one or more of the 3D schemes supported by Avatar.
     
  13. Iron Tiger

    Regular

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2004
    Messages:
    848
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    SoCal
    It was a gaming machine that one the HD movie war, not Blu-ray players. That's not early adoption, it's a trojan horse effect. The majority of people that own 3D-ready TVs right now weren't buying them because they're 3D-ready. They just wanted a relatively inexpensive bigscreen and Mitsubishi's DLP's just so happened to have 3D support. Most stores I've been to don't even advertise that those TVs are 3D-ready.
    Millions of gamers aren't buying Cryostasis. I agree with your point about its potential to enhance a game, but so far, no really popular game is incorporating it in a way that's integral to the gameplay or immersion.
     
  14. Squilliam

    Squilliam Beyond3d isn't defined yet
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2008
    Messages:
    3,495
    Likes Received:
    114
    Location:
    New Zealand
    Now that could totally work for a console. If you have a wireless controller you could plug in both together and leech the battery/wireless interface off the controller itself. Why limit yourself to a TV? You could play games almost anywhere, I would buy one if it was good and less than $200.

    Edit: Imagine playing local multiplayer with your own screen! :)
     
  15. Arwin

    Arwin Now Officially a Top 10 Poster
    Moderator Legend

    Joined:
    May 17, 2006
    Messages:
    18,515
    Likes Received:
    2,257
    Location:
    Maastricht, The Netherlands
    But that technology is similar to something that's existed since quite a while, though of course it'll be much better quality now and smaller and more energy efficient.

    Now I'm sure it should be very efficient for recreating a large 2D panel in front of your eyes, but will it work for proper 3D? The distance from your eyes could become a big handicap there?
     
  16. MfA

    MfA
    Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    7,381
    Likes Received:
    716
    Why? It's still at a large focal length regardless of the physical distance.

    Here's a site for HD OLED, the alternative is LCOS and FLCOS.
     
  17. patsu

    Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2005
    Messages:
    27,709
    Likes Received:
    145
    Yes, this is the part I'm trying to find out:

    So the side-by-side encoding technique half the res (bandwidth) ? ...since 1.2 has about half the bandwidth compared to 1.3 and 1.4 (if I remember correctly). I am a little sleep deprived these few days. So don't trust my memory.
     
  18. V3

    V3
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    3,304
    Likes Received:
    5
    I was looking at these HMD solutions to see how they're progressing. The problem with them is that their field of view are still very small. Note they mentioned 32" screen size, even some models will mentioned 65" screen but from 12 feet away. Their fov are still low. About the same as the Sony unit I tried around a decade ago.

    For the hassle that these HMD solutions put on you, they should provide wider fov like 165 degrees or above. You know giving the IMAX 3D like experience. So far I am not aware of consumer friendly solution for something like that. I only know of sensics that is offering that kind of solution, but the unit cost like half a million dollar and look cumbersome. It offers 4k x 2k res by stitching several screens together. So you can see the seams when your eyes isn't looking straight.

    Anyway here hoping with OLED keep on improving, I hope HMD can make great progress. If they can offer IMAX 3D experience in a HMD for less than $5k, I'll probably buy it.
     
  19. Crossbar

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2006
    Messages:
    1,821
    Likes Received:
    12
    Creepy stuf!

    [​IMG][​IMG]
     
  20. Squilliam

    Squilliam Beyond3d isn't defined yet
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2008
    Messages:
    3,495
    Likes Received:
    114
    Location:
    New Zealand
    There are some unfortunate draw backs with the current technology, but getting it right would be a big bonus to any console which can gain access to the technology exclusively. Probably need to get the percieved screen size up to at least equal or greater than a typical home theatre setup and they're good to go.

    So how much would a decent unit cost in a year or so if someone commited to making millions of units as opposed to say, thousands at a time?
     
Loading...

Share This Page

  • About Us

    Beyond3D has been around for over a decade and prides itself on being the best place on the web for in-depth, technically-driven discussion and analysis of 3D graphics hardware. If you love pixels and transistors, you've come to the right place!

    Beyond3D is proudly published by GPU Tools Ltd.
Loading...