The PS4 Will Be "True" 3D; Unlike The PS3

Joseph DiGrado Writes: "With Sony introducing 3D to the PS3 this generation for their BluRay movies and games, they still had some slightly big setbacks as far as being perfect. The PS3 uses HDMI 1.3 which limited the...

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
greenpowerz1955d ago ShowReplies(11)
richierich1955d ago

Didnt Sony say that the PS4 will only use 4K TVs for movies not games

PoSTedUP1955d ago (Edited 1955d ago )

no you can even play games on the PS3 on a 4k TV but it dosent support it so it will be upscaled. the PS4 will most likely be upscaled games too bc i dont think any game will be 4k native resolution from what i understand.

reynod1954d ago

The more important question is how many games will the PS4 support in 3D?

PS3 had 3D support as a marketing check mark. It hardly supported more than 30 3D games.

Meanwhile PC on the other hand supports more than 600 3D games.

Once again console makers promise more and deliver less. Ill wait and see how many games the PS4 supports in 3D, until then this is all hype.

ICECREAM1954d ago


Read the article first, it's not about how many games, it's about technological comparison between ps3 and ps4.
Where ever pc fanboys read ps3 or ps4 they just disagree.

Ritsujun1954d ago

Why did PoSTedUP waste his time saying obvious stuff?

Pandamobile1955d ago

The PS4 will not support 4K game rendering output. Only movies.

Hitman07691954d ago (Edited 1954d ago )

hey homie, link? p.s. the article never says ps4 has 4k games lol , its an article about 3d.

Reverent1954d ago

@Hitman, at the risk of sounding like a teenager... Pwned.

honkayjeezus1954d ago

That has to do with off the bat at launch. The 360 couldn't support 1080p at launch.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1954d ago
user76939581954d ago

They have not confirm anything but most likely only PSN and PS3 remakes will be 4K native.

but is still a possible.. something is for sure, the 4K tvs do a great job at upscaling native 2k..

chaos-lockheart1954d ago


They did confirm it "The official answer is that the PS4 supports 4K output but for personal contents, like photos or videos. Not games," Yoshida said. "PS4 games do not work on 4K."

SlapHappyJesus1954d ago

The system will not support 4k gaming. Period. Nothing game related. The power is just not there.

Derekvinyard131954d ago

4k needs to be cheaper! It's 25K at my sony store

Krew_921954d ago (Edited 1954d ago )

Well of course. It's Sony, you can find cheaper 4K TV's, but not by much. They're still overpirced, and will be for a while.

Just like 1080p HDMI TV's were so grossly expensive upon release.

Even Sony overpirces current 1080p TV's, and the competition prices them better.

I find this hilarious:

You save $1.99 with Prime!!! don't miss a deal of a life time...

chaos-lockheart1954d ago


The reason why Sony have more expansive items then the competition is because the quality materials they use are high quality and quality labor. But now they are making things from china.

gtr_loh1954d ago

@chaos-lockheart. Sony always made their products in China. The only time I remember it being made in Japan was the early radio that was invented.

jmc88881954d ago

Though you can get 1600p for about $400. It's 26 or so inches and not the massive size those $25k are.

But just remember people the price (aside from potential hyperinflation) will drop.

HDTV's were going for similar prices in 1999-2000 but by 2004 they dropped in price enough so you could by a 30" 1080i HDTV for $499. I know, because I bought one, and it still works.

Thus it shouldn't be too long before we similar 4ktv's get much lower, but probably not for a few years. Probably within five you'll see them start going for sub $999. (unless hyperinflation hits, which is a real possibility before then).

jivah1954d ago

$5.5k 32" sharp igzo 4k monitor display

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1954d ago
+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1954d ago
saphiron1954d ago

I Just want them to add support for checkerboard 3D so we can play [email protected] in 3D

bumnut1954d ago

Dont forget you need active 3D for 1080p, passive only supports 720p @60hz. Passive is capable of 1080p but only at 24hz which is no good for gaming.

GreenRanger1954d ago

I would probably get a 3DTV if they were cheaper and you didn't have to wear those glasses.

PoSTedUP1954d ago

i wouldn't mind wearing the glasses just as long as they dont mess with your eyes. i heard your best bet for games are the non-sutter frame glasses, the tv's are cheaper and for the PS3 it's more convenient because the PS3 only does 720p 3D anyways. the shurrt frame tv's are 1080p, unless you watch movies as well, im just in it for the games mostly.

Oh_Yeah1954d ago (Edited 1954d ago )

LG's passive 3d is easier on the eyes, no crosstalk or flickering, picture is brighter, glasses are light and cheap, you can see 3d from all angles even laying down...much better overall quality when I compared to active 3d where it's dim and flickery and you can't see off angles. Other companies are starting to adopt passive 3d and incorporate it into their sets...I've heard some people say active is better but I can't help but to think they just say that because that's what they spent their money on.. Idk maybe it depends on the person though.

kneon1954d ago

The problem with passive 3D is that it's only half the vertical or horizontal resolution depending on the manufacturer. But with a 4k Tv you can do passive 3D and still have 1080 lines of resolution since you've got 2160 to start with.

C-Thunder1954d ago


1 eye seeing 1/2 image + 1 eye seeing 1/2 image
1 eye seeing full image 1/2 the time + 1 eye seeing full image 1/2 the time

In the end, your brain still receives the full 1080p image.

wsoutlaw871954d ago

I have a vizio passive 3d tv and 3d movies look great (the ones made for 3d at least) and the glasses are light so you forget you are wearing them.

kneon1953d ago


Sorry but your math makes no sense, time != space. The only way your statement works is if higher fps is the same as higher resolution, and that's just not true.

Passive 3D uses every other line all the time so it really is half the resolution. Active 3D uses all the resolution but at a high enough frequency that you don't notice.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1953d ago
Software_Lover1954d ago (Edited 1954d ago )

I got a 42inch Vizio LED last year for 599. It works pretty good for 3d. It has built in Netflix which was a plus also. I have not noticed any issues. I do want a bigger screen though. My next Television will probably the Vizio 21:9 58inch led.

black9111954d ago

I have a SamsunG PN51E8000 cant wait!!!

Oschino19071954d ago (Edited 1954d ago )

Nice Tv

I got a Sony XBR55HX929 and a KDL46HX800 (previous Tv) for friends to play on. 3d is nice now for most games that have it and even simulated 3d can be nice for some games but if we get 1080p 3d at 60fps I will be glued to my TV till my head hurts.

Don't know how Samsungs 3d glasses are as I have never tried them but Sony has nice lightweight titanium framed active shutter glasses that actually look decent and work great. (Just looked them up called TDGBR750)

Don't see why people are hatin on 3d unless they don't have a 3d tv that is. I didn't use it much at first but the more content out there the more often I mess around with it. My friends always love playing games in 3d when they are over.

plmkoh1954d ago

Nice TV, the Sony HX925 has awesome 12bit colour when you plug in the PS3. Simply insane colour pop.

Show all comments (85)
The story is too old to be commented.