Better batteries do that. That's if the mags that said this are right.
If you agree with someone's comment then you're saying it too..
Last edited by a moderator:
Nintendo 3DS Announced
- Thread starter patsu
- Start date
Better batteries do that. That's if the mags that said this are right.
If you agree with someone's comment then you're saying it too..
It'd need a huge battery then
I do agree with it. But you still misquoted it. Twice.
You don't know how much power a Tegra or GC based handheld would use though.
Then you're claiming that a dual stick controller substitutes for a mouse/keyboard but a Wiimote doesn't?.. A Wiimote is far closer to a substitute for a mouse/keyboard then any dual stick controller.
Last edited by a moderator:
Last edited by a moderator:
EvilOne666
Newcomer
This is what i found when i searched the European patents
Batteries
http://oami.europa.eu/bulletin/rcd/2010/2010_052/001197511_0001/images/001197511_0001_1_source.jpg
<.<
>.>
Batteries
http://oami.europa.eu/bulletin/rcd/2010/2010_052/001197511_0001/images/001197511_0001_1_source.jpg
<.<
>.>
Another link about the new Sharp LCD. It's all in Japanese but with plenty of pictures.
http://av.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/20100402_358729.html
http://av.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/20100402_358729.html
a look into the 3d parallex technology
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8byrOlU58x8
obviously you can't see the 3d demo they give, but the video does give you an idea of what it'll look from the side angle
480x745 and 1000:1 contrast
I would imagine the resolution would probably be lower for the 3ds.
I've been thinking what new gameplay mechanics could stereoscopic 3d provide, and I can't really think of anything. But I could imagine a straight top down view RTS or tank game - and you would be able to see the bombardment make the elliptical travel towards you and away. I think a lot of games that went from 2d to 3d because of the gain in extra information to the end user could go back to being 2d.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8byrOlU58x8
obviously you can't see the 3d demo they give, but the video does give you an idea of what it'll look from the side angle
480x745 and 1000:1 contrast
I would imagine the resolution would probably be lower for the 3ds.
I've been thinking what new gameplay mechanics could stereoscopic 3d provide, and I can't really think of anything. But I could imagine a straight top down view RTS or tank game - and you would be able to see the bombardment make the elliptical travel towards you and away. I think a lot of games that went from 2d to 3d because of the gain in extra information to the end user could go back to being 2d.
Last edited by a moderator:
3D in both portrait and landscape modes!
Everybody seems to be focused on the new Sharp Parallax Barrier displays, especially the new 3.4 inch 854x480 model, but I don't think that particular display (or maybe even that kind of display) is what Nintendo will end up using, for a couple reasons.
1. That display is not well suited for the intended application. It's smaller in display area than the current DSi's screens, its resolution is much higher than necessary, and that specific resolution would either require legacy DS games to be absolutely tiny on screen if scaled x2 in each dimension, or scaled x2.5, which would add blurriness.
2. After researching online, I've learned about a 3D film technology from 3M that looks very impressive. It displays the left and right eye images sequentially at 120hz instead of simultaneously in half resolution at 60hz, so there's no loss of resolution in 3D mode, and the displays don't have to use excessively high resolution only to throw away half of it for 3d. It also doesn't require a special LCD layer like Parallax Barrier tech, just a modified backlight system and special reflective film behind the screen. I've read that it uses fewer specialized parts and should be less expensive than PB tech as well. Also, it was demonstrated last year and is already in production, so it's totally a viable alternative. The only drawback that I know of is that the 3D effect won't work in portrait orientation, but due to the narrow viewing angles of glasses-free 3D screens, and the fact that the DS's displays are angled in book mode, I think that 3D book-mode games may not be the best idea anyway.
Here are some articles on the tech, if anyone's interested:
http://techon.nikkeibp.co.jp/english/NEWS_EN/20091102/177201/
http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/article6897316.ece
http://www.businesswire.com/portal/site/3m/index.jsp?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20091005005255&newsLang=en
1. That display is not well suited for the intended application. It's smaller in display area than the current DSi's screens, its resolution is much higher than necessary, and that specific resolution would either require legacy DS games to be absolutely tiny on screen if scaled x2 in each dimension, or scaled x2.5, which would add blurriness.
2. After researching online, I've learned about a 3D film technology from 3M that looks very impressive. It displays the left and right eye images sequentially at 120hz instead of simultaneously in half resolution at 60hz, so there's no loss of resolution in 3D mode, and the displays don't have to use excessively high resolution only to throw away half of it for 3d. It also doesn't require a special LCD layer like Parallax Barrier tech, just a modified backlight system and special reflective film behind the screen. I've read that it uses fewer specialized parts and should be less expensive than PB tech as well. Also, it was demonstrated last year and is already in production, so it's totally a viable alternative. The only drawback that I know of is that the 3D effect won't work in portrait orientation, but due to the narrow viewing angles of glasses-free 3D screens, and the fact that the DS's displays are angled in book mode, I think that 3D book-mode games may not be the best idea anyway.
Here are some articles on the tech, if anyone's interested:
http://techon.nikkeibp.co.jp/english/NEWS_EN/20091102/177201/
http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/article6897316.ece
http://www.businesswire.com/portal/site/3m/index.jsp?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20091005005255&newsLang=en
While i agree the 3.4inch is not ideal , they may still use sharp's screens just a bigger size.
Although 3.4 may still work. The original DS had 3inch screens the DSI has the larger screen at 3.25 inchs.
So 3.4 will be bigger than both although notas big as the 4.2 in the xl dsi. However that system is very big. I'm sure nintendo will want to go with portability.
As for the resolution its 854x480 but they may need that to do the 3d properly
The screens may not have high res , but they don't work portrait. Alot of programs use that for the orignal ds.
The times article says it was already shipping on a device and that was oct 2009. What device was it ?
Not only that but what will be harder the higher res or having to create 120 frames a second ?
In diagonal measurement, yeah. I was referring to screen area, and in that regard the 3.25 inch DSi screens are larger than the 3.4 inch Sharp ones because of their aspect ratio.
They could still do portrait-style games fine, just not in 3D mode. My question is whether or not displays with a narrow 3D viewing angle would be well suited to a mode that entails viewing one or both slightly off-center.
I have no idea. 3M didn't release that information publicly, so I don't know how you would find out.
I think that would totally depend on what resolution the displays have. Considering, for the sake of argument, a 1.5:1 aspect ratio, Nintendo could get away with a resolution of 432x288 (assuming legacy DS games are scaled 1.5x, which would blur the image somewhat, but so would scaling them 2.5x with the Sharp display). To run DS games scaled 2x, they'd need 576x384. In the first case, you're dealing with approximately 30% the resolution of the Sharp display, so even if you run twice as many FPS, you're still processing 40% fewer pixels per second. In the second case, you'd have 54% as much resolution, so at 120hz you'd be pushing 8% more per second. In that case, though, you'd still have better image quality for legacy games, and better image quality in 3D. The 3M tech wouldn't require higher framerates in 2D mode, so the pixel-pushing requirements for that would be 30% and 54% respectively. Maybe things are a bit more complicated by running 120hz than my simple math here, but I think it's pretty good for some ballpark figures anyway.
I don't immediately see how you could do this with a single passive LCD barrier ... you could use two but how much would that impact transmittance? You could use TFT, but that's expensive.
The way they split up the lightpath for left/right eye illumination is fucking brilliant ... I'm not sure it's steerable though (ie. I think it has a single sweetspot).
Really? That's the first I've heard of that. I've just started looking into this stuff, so I'm no expert or anything, but the stuff I've read on Parallax Barrier tech hasn't mentioned that at all. On the contrary, it's very much pointed to fixed-angle. Do you have any links with information on steerable- view-angle PB displays? Also, for fine adjustments of viewing angle, wouldn't that require some crazy high resolution on the barrier, possibly much higher than the color LCD itself?
http://www.evl.uic.edu/core.php?mod=4&type=3&indi=335
Resolution is relatively cheap for the linear barrier, since you can just drive it from the edge ... no TFT needed.
Resolution is relatively cheap for the linear barrier, since you can just drive it from the edge ... no TFT needed.
You are almost certain getting eyestrain from active shutters in the glasses. 3DS is not using them. If you hold the 3ds in its sweetspot half the lines from the screen will send the light to one eye and other half to the remaining eye. And that's how you see 3D effect.
