Sony: It Feels Like [2006 Blu-ray] All Over Again With 3D Skepticism

When the PS3 launched back in 2006, many held strong skepticism on whether the console would survive. The unrest was echoed throughout the industry as journalists would write articles on ‘why PS3 will fail’, and ‘why blu-ray was a bad choice’.

Four years later, and that sound has been banned. No more do we see articles predicting the PS3’s death, or even that of Blu-ray. That’s because Blu-ray won the HD war over HD-DVD and the PS3 has seen substantial growth, with a redesigned console and cheaper price.

Now, Sony’s leading the innovation and adoption path once more with 3D, and according to Sony’s Worldwide Studios VP Scott Rohde, it feels like [Blu-ray] days all over again.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
dangert122829d ago (Edited 2829d ago )

3d will take over, eventually the difference with the blu-ray argument was that we have only had to upgraded from dvd once and it took a while but its near enough done,
but with tv's this gen brought us the hd tv's and some still cost alot today 3d tv's cost more,but sony said there willing to wait which is good on them because if they hold it up and keep pushing how they are now people will support it when its affordable because there is good content on offer there already or shell i say coming gt5 killzone 3d blu ray is on the way yes?

if you disagree please let me know why

Cloudberry2829d ago

It would take a while for 3D gaming and / or TVs in full adoption.

But even though on a different scale with Playstation, Nintendo 3DS it self would off for a great start, in my opinion.

Offering a glass-less 3D games on their handheld + 3D games on consoles & PCs, love it or hate it, 3D is here to stay.

Jamie Foxx2829d ago (Edited 2829d ago )

the price is mainstream (for both tv and glasses)

and 3D will receive an even higher adoption rate by the masses when 3D is glasses free

until then its an expensive gimmick

raztad2829d ago (Edited 2829d ago )


I agree about the price thing but 3D GIMMICK? Jimmy Fallon beg to differ:


I would say THAT reaction is not due to a gimmick.

BTW people are overblowing the glasses wearing stuff. It would be better not to have to use them but they look ok to me.


"The 3DS already manages glasses-free 3D and Sony's version will look outdated by comparison. "

That is reaching it. 3DS sports a flawed tech that barely can be used at a specific angle in order to perceive the 3D effect, and the screen needs to be even smaller than previuos DS models. This "solution" is totally not working for a home TV set.

thor2829d ago (Edited 2829d ago )

Yeah 3D really needs to be glasses free to gain mainstream adoption.

A surprising number of people need to wear glasses in order to see the TV clearly - these are all barred from watching in 3D without ludicrously expensive prescription 3D glasses.

The 3DS already manages glasses-free 3D and Sony's version will look outdated by comparison.

Also watching 3D for a long time with glasses can give some people headaches.

StanLee2829d ago

True. Blu rays success only came when the price of blu ray players were more consumer friendly and the price of PS3s were also reduced drastically. It seems they also forgot that part.

coolfool2829d ago

"A surprising number of people need to wear glasses in order to see the TV clearly - these are all barred from watching in 3D without ludicrously expensive prescription 3D glasses."

I completely disagree with that.

This is completely wrong, if it was true then you can guarantee that the manufacturers would be working on a way around it because otherwise it would be one huge missed demographic.

My colleague at work has just bought a 3d tv and he wears glasses. He said that it was perfectly fine to fit the 3d glasses over his normal ones. The only thing he did say was that it is a tiny bit less comfortable over a period of time.

snp2829d ago (Edited 2829d ago )

I wear prescription glasses and own a 3dtv. The 3d glasses fit fine over the prescription glasses - they are designed to actually.

Agree glasses-less 3dtv is a better idea, but since the 3d tech adds negligible cost to a tv's production cost and auto-stereoscopic tv is years away, the options are 1)hostilely scow at 3d glasses tv for a half decade (on principle?), or 2)enjoy it for what it is while it is (to the extent that you can or want to get in on it) and when and the time is right for a natural evolution/succession to auto-stereoscopic, get in on that should you wish.

In my case i needed a new tv anyway (have done for a while; couldn't hold off for another five years), and this one just happened to be a 3dtv (it was the one in my price range, and with the feature set and value added redemption bonuses i wanted regardless of the 3d). I'm expecting it'll probably buy me five years or so till i'll upgrade to an Oled, preferably auto-stereoscopic 3d, tv of some kind (or maybe some kind of hybrid tv/computer or whatever it'll be by then.)

Don't mean to sound smarmy, but i get the feeling people aren't down on 3d so much because there's any rational reason to be (it's optional; what reason could there be?), but rather because it's puts them in an inward quandary - "is this something i'm not going to be in on. And if i get in now, i'll miss out on the next step when that..." etc etc..

Myself, i love visual stuff. The second flat screen starts to claw back to the quality (contrast and colour accuracy) of crt from yesteryear, i'm in. Will eat bread and drink water for a year, if i have to.

talltony2829d ago (Edited 2829d ago )

Here is the future and why I am not on the 3d bandwagon right now. The future is 3d without glasses.

the best part is that it will be out in less than 2 years.

snp2829d ago (Edited 2829d ago )

the best part is that it will be out in less than 2 years.

Nothing i've come across from even the most optimistic co's i've seen talk about it has mentioned anything like that sort of time frame. Long long way before the myriad of tech problems are worked out first off, let alone what sort of format the tech will take (OLED will be it's best chance, but that's still a year and a half/two years from it's, probably expensive, introductory screens), and then they've gotta try and work out how to make it feasible as an, even expensive, mass market product.

To be less than two years away the tech would have to be stable right now, basically, and all the various question marks regarding implementing it would need to be sorted out by the end of this year.

Hey, i'd love for you to be right, but honestly, i think you're a couple of years ahead of the truth (point of fact, there's been little progress on the screens in the nearly six months since CES - the couple of big trade shows since have been running identical models).

talltony2829d ago (Edited 2829d ago )

In fact 12 to 18 months time to launch in the consumer market. Listen to the interview.

Every time I post this I get disagrees and dnt know why.

rockleex2828d ago

"and the price of PS3s were also reduced drastically."

Yea, because we all know 3DTVs will never drop in price. -_-"

+ Show (7) more repliesLast reply 2828d ago
wiggles2829d ago

Look at our entertainment section as a whole...all we ever talk about is how we want to immerse ourselves in the situation and how we want to really "be there."

That is a key word in every good video game review...that we want to feel as if we are apart of do we do this?? By adding a third dimension..

3D is the obvious next step...yes it's expensive as hell, but this article nails it....It's going to stay...

And it's clearer then Blu-ray that it will stay...with Blu-ray only Sony endorsed it....

Now Sony and Nintendo are endorsing 3D, it may be expensive right now; but it's here to stay..

Kleptic2829d ago

not sure what you mean with BD and 'only Sony endorsed it'...rephrase that...they were the only console manufacturer to use it...but I assure you they had backing from a majority of the electronic and entertainment companies...

as always...this is simple...its only won't be popular until its affordable...Not many of us are that interested in buying another HDTV right now, or at least a top tier one with 3D this 3D stuff comes out, 'normal' HD televisions will plummet in if anything, the onslaught of 3D will simply increase HD and BD those things are now falling to price points where almost anyone can afford them...

Silver3602829d ago

we get really involved in a game when the game play and story grabs our imagination. technology helps but it all about how much interest a game has from you. 3d won't make games better avatar the game is still crap in 3d.

Pistolero2829d ago

to be accurate though even bluray hasn't overtaken dvd....i go into walmart or most other stores and the bluray section is a fraction of the size of the dvd section.

3d actually has potential in my opinion...i think it could be an exciting technology in a few years....but right now and for the immediate future only a small number of people will be able to use it.

jneul2829d ago

it took years for dvd to overtake vhs as well, blu-ray is getting adopted faster than what dvd did at first

MNicholas2829d ago

until hybrid OLED TVs that don't require glasses become available.

However it will do well with early adopters and that's who the manufacturers are aiming for.

When introducing a new technology you always start at the top.

synce2829d ago (Edited 2829d ago )

3D is not blu-ray. 3D is a fad (smell-o-vision, anyone?) I wouldn't watch movies in 3D even if the upgrade was free. If anything I feel sorry for the people wasting their money on the equipment.

EvilBlackCat2829d ago (Edited 2829d ago )

Sony: It Feels Like [2006 Blu-ray] All Over Again With 3D Skepticism

WELL ITS DIFFERENT because 3D is an option and NOT NECESSARY to watch movies or play video games.

You can buy a 3d capable tv and enjoy it without using glasses but NO, sony wants you to buy their tv's and glasses. A 3dtv that dont need 3d glasses is less risky than those sony is hyping.

Im not selling my recent 3 Samsung HDTV's screen for just getting a 3dtv because sony says is cool.

How much for a 26+ inches 3d capable tv?

Blu-Ray is media storage

3dTV is a damn tv that looks cool but 3d is not necessary or mandatory to enjoy a game or watch a movie.


saint_john_paul_ii2829d ago

just to let you know, Sony isnt the only company on board on making 3D mainstream. Samsung,Panasonic,LG,RCA,etc. are all on board. all companies will eventually integrate HDTVs with 3d capabilities.

i now have a computer with 3d capabilities right now, and its crazy.

Inside_out2829d ago (Edited 2829d ago )

I think 3D with glasses is already on the way out. The people have spoken and the market will adjust. Nobody wants to pay $150 for glasses, let alone $2500-3000 for a little 3D TV. You can find 52" 2D variety at a cost of $1000.

This company ( TCL ) has the right idea...check out the video. This vid is 5 months old. Watch how they ( big TV manufacturers ) try and buy this tech and bury it. Remember how Sony, LG, Sharp, samsung...all of them pleaded guilty to fixing the price of LCD's. 3D is no different. They should be investigated again. This time fine each company one billion dollars. That MIGHT wake them crooks up.

BTW...Blu-ray has bee ALLOWED to succeed. DVD's cost 15-17 cents each. A DVD movie should cost a fraction of the price of blu-ray. Sony's stock is down 8% this year, must be because they are doing so well and have a great plan for the future...NOT

snp2829d ago (Edited 2829d ago )

I doubt people will pay $150 for glasses for much longer, but i also doubt they'll need to. Multiple sets already come with all major brands, and within a year they'll probably cost next to nothing.

Comparing different tv ranges is a bit silly. Like for like - same gen/specs/brand model 3d versus non-3d - for the most part the difference is fairly small. The reason being that the tech is very cheap and easy to implement (frankly there's more effort and cost in implementing internet tv and various other features).

The largest expense in the non Plasma 3dtv's is in the production of the LED technology (particularly in local dimming models). Most of the markup versus last gen is pretty much identical to 2008-2009 price differences at time of introduction (there is a mark up, and 'early adaptor' gouging, but there is some of that every year with new models of every product, 3d or non-3d).

I've seen that tech. I've also read about it. It has appalling viewing angles. Needs - atm - specially designed demos/footage to not expose an array of visual flaws, and requires viewers also to stand/sit in a 'sweet spot' in terms of distance to the screen - and to work properly will require layers of screen tech.

Auto-stereoscopic is definitely the future. But it's not going to be buried for years because of some wicked conspiracy. It's simply, plain vanilla, not going to be ready for years on large screen tv's (in much the same way that OLED has been demoed for years but was $ infeasible, and also had problems with life expectancy that have literally taken a half decade to iron out - it's looking like finally showing in 2012 on a decent dimension tv's/monitors (and it was far far more advanced and looking ready for prime time years ago than auto-stereoscopic is now).

Biggest2829d ago

You can walk into any major retailer and get a 3DTV for half of what you think they cost, cez (you crazy troll, you!). It's too bad that TCL can't find a way to make their technology matter. You seem to be the only person actively pushing it. If it is worthwhile, Sony will probably find a way to join them. Thank you for allowing BluRay to succeed. It rocks. You are smarter than Sony. I heard you were the 2nd richest man in the world. Congratulations. Your genius is astounding.

MNicholas2828d ago

It's a lenticular overlay on a regular TV.

This has the problem of limited viewing angle.

The other problem with TCL's 3D is that it cuts the horizontal resolution in half. So a 1080P (1920x1080) image becomes 960x1080.

I'm not a fan of glasses 3D either. Too many compromises.

However, a better glasses free 3D technology is coming. You only have to look at the patents out there.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 2828d ago
NYC_Gamer2829d ago

the movie industry will be one of the main reasons why 3Dtv is successful

Omega42829d ago (Edited 2829d ago )

There's a huge difference between bluray and 3D. Either bluray or hddvd would have become standard it was necessary for HD content. So bluray was like saying "would HD ever takeover" and obviously it would.

3D on the other won't effect everything like HD so it won't become as mainstream, does anyone really see people searching for their 3D glasses when the news is on or they are about to watch some soap or talkshow? I doubt it. 3D without glasses is the only way it will EVER become big, because just remember 3D with glasses has been around for years.

Im not referring to games at all I'm talking about 3D in general, no one will buy a 3DTV is they can get a HDTV for cheaper especially if the only benefit will be playing games and movies in 3D instead of regular TV as well

Strange_Evil2829d ago (Edited 2829d ago )

Why does it matter to you? It's a FREE feature and it's an OPTIONAL feature. Those 2 words itself bring any criticism to an end. And besides hence onwards EVERY new TV which comes out will support 3D so it's a welcome addition for anyone who buys a new TV now..

And stop with the '3D is expensive, wearing glasses is clumsy'. Firstly people should leave out the misconception that 3D is expensive cause it's frankly not. You get decent 42" 3DTV from Samsung for 1000£ which is like 1500$. I remember buying my Plasma 4 years back for 2500$. So a 1500-2000$ introduction price for a new technology is phenomenal especially since HDTVs retailed for 5000$ when they were introduced.

Also don't give me the crap about wearing glasses. I have seen people wearing glasses all the time and they don't whine and bitch about it. And besides, my family never sits besides me while I play a shooter or any other game, so why the hell would they do that if I play games in 3D. And wait a few months, those glasses price will come crashing down.

The only reason I can think of people whining is cause 'the other' console can't do it. If this was embraced by MS and Sony alike, no one would be bitching about it right now. I for 1 am looking forward to buying a 3DTV soon to replace my 4 year old Plasma and KZ3 pushed me off the edge as well to buy it.

Stop hatin, it's not mandatory, you can always game in 2D if you like. The new 3DTVs are equally capable as HDTVs.

EDIT @OMEGA: Thats the point, you don't see the future which Sony or Samsung or Panasonic or any other 3D supporting company see's. I bet my PS3 that in a years time, EVERY TV sold in the market will support 3D out of the box. It's like the SDTV to HDTV phase. People cared less at the time of adoption that they got a HDTV since they were still viewing SD pic on it, but as time went on, you could only buy HDTVs... It's called EVOLUTION. It's a feature you will get even if you like it or not. It's always great to have more stuff even though you don't use it.

Cloudberry2829d ago

I never ever think that Jimmy / whoever gonna put the 3D glasses is clumsy.


The 3D glasses design is cool, in my opinion.

wiggles2829d ago

It's true that 3D with glasses turns off many consumers...but do you honesty think that we will need glasses forever??

Of course not! Look at the 3Ds they have already figured it out for a small's only a matter of time before the technology becomes available to project a 3D image on a bigger screen.

Even think of the color TV comparison...I doubt when the black & white TV was created people were like oh it won't go mainstream because you can't see color..

You can't judge the future of a product just because it has limitations in the current time, as it's clear that improvements will be made....

Especially being Sony, Nintendo, and Panasonic clearly are endorsing 3D... Sony was able to make Blu-ray the standard by itself...there is no doubt these three giants can make 3D standard


2015 is the general feeling for glassless free 3d tvs and is a FACT that at the moment active shutter provides the best xperience over polarized and the current glassless tech.

+ to people saying about the 3ds making sony look outdated nintendo themselves said the tech wouldnt work on a bigger screen

o and if you wear glasses you can still watch 3D as the shutter glasses have adjustable bridges for that reason, bloody stealth fanboys (not u wiggles) are out in force against 3D

R_aVe_N2829d ago

Yes, because the MILLIONS of people that go and watch 3D movies every week go hand and hand with a fanboy on N4G. It is called entertainment for a reason. After all that is what gaming and movies are in the end. Do people really think there are only 1 kind of glasses out there for 3D. All you have to do is find the one you like. It is that simple! I am guessing you can't afford a 3D setup by the way you talk.

Hacker2829d ago

Can't wait to play Crysis 2 3D on ps3 lol.

cobraagent2829d ago

I believe it is safe to say that 3D is here to stay.