Sony's Solution To Split-Screen Multiplayer 157
We discussed Sony's E3 announcement of the pricing and details of the Vita portable console (hands-on report), but they also made a stronger push into the 3D space, revealing a 24" display specifically designed for 3D gaming. Most notable about this display is that two players wearing 3D glasses can use it to view separate images on screen. This means that when playing with a friend, you need not sacrifice 50% of screen real estate to accommodate the other player. The Guardian has a good run-down of Sony's other E3 announcements.
I gotta hand it to them. (Score:1)
This is actually pretty darn clever. Maybe I don't know of the prior art everyone and their brother knows, but colored me impressed by a company I no longer expected this from. Not just in realizing this could be done, but in the executives allowing it to reach market.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Poor patents are issued today because the system is overwhelmed by submissions from individuals and corporations paying tends of thousands per filing.
And you think things would get better by making them *free*!? If you think an idea is worth protecting, suck it up and pay the money. Tens of thousands of individuals do.
If you don't, all you need to do is publish something about it. When you had that idea in '06 (and its not anything new -- active LCD 3D wasn't uncommon even in the early 90's, and I saw this
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Next phase is of course 240Hz 3D tv that allows two player 3D gaming from the same screen.
With the current setup you always have image going to your eyes. For two-player 3D you would have to have 2 blank cycles (for the opponent's screen) for each frame (1 cycle left eye, 1 cycle right eye, 2 cycles no eyes). I think that would be very straining, even if it was L - 0 - R - 0, because the predominant signal from your eyes would be blank.
Not saying they couldn't do it, but I think it's a harder problem.
--
JimFive
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Look up "defensive publication." It's done all the danged time.
not Free (Score:2)
Look up "defensive publication." It's done all the danged time.
But his requirement be that it's free. Something like halfbakery.com is probably what he's looking for. The WP article on it lists some of its competitors: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halfbakery [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
There's nothing more free than the public domain, which is why a defensive publication is used. The halfbakery thing seems uneccesarily convoluted. I suppose that some definitions of "freedom" are GPL-like, in that maybe he wants to allow people to pseudo-freely use his ideas as long as they agree to certain conditions?
Re: (Score:1)
This is just more evidence that if you're already a global mega-corporation it's much easier to put these ideas into production (and, more importantly, lock everyone else out with IP laws).
The fact is that, at least in Europe, you have to implement your idea into a real device to patent it, so to show that:
* you can build it for real
* it is useful
It's a much worse situation when someone patent just an idea, just waiting for someone else to do the dirty job (i.e. implementing the idea into a real device) and profit.
Re: (Score:2)
Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't this mean that the PS3 has to create 4 images per frame for 3D for 2 players? At 1080p this is a LOT of pixels to push. I'd wondered whether this sort of thing was possible some time back, but assumed it would not be feasible as the frame rates would need to be lowered too much. If it works as advertised though, I'm definitely up for getting one! (and I'd written Sony off)
Re: (Score:3)
It would be in 2D, at least for now. I think if you were going to start splitting into 4 images instead of 2, the flickering would be far too annoying (I tried a 3D Sony TV in one of their stores, and noticed a slight flickering even with 60Hz in each eye). I much prefer polarised 3D to active shutters..
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
the ps3 can't even create one 1080p image at any decent rate. no game runs beyond 720p, most run on even lower resolution.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Lair = 800x1080 (2xAA) - AA buffers are merged to produce 1600x1080 for further scaling [beyond3d.com]
(sounds odd but might be accurate?)
Wipeout HD = dynamic-framerate-dependent 1080p framebuffer (1280x1080 to 1920x1080) [beyond3d.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
i dunno man, i don't think i ever saw ANY game run at 1080p.
on the other hand, my shitty laptop with shitty intel graphics can spit out mw 2 easily at 1080p. though all other games don't go above 720p.
Re: (Score:2)
"At 1080p this is a LOT of pixels to push"
Nope, because you're still only displaying a 1080p stream overall. Different Camera views is trivial.
Re: (Score:1)
As a friend told me that has worked at sony in the past, Sony exists out of multiple independed entities. So it is perfectly normal that one department is real cool and relaxed and another department is a real PITA.
For example Sony DVD players supports divx for a long time (I have a really old one) which their movie department isn't that happy about. 90% of the people using DIVX aren't playing legal content.
Sony Imageworks for e
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What I want to know is if the glasses will work with other 3DTVs and the feature will be supported on other TVs. I've got a 55" Bravia 3DTV and I would love to be able to use this feature. Really all it is is a different shutter pattern for the glasses, so there is no reasons they shouldn't make this available on any 3DTV that has compatible glasses.
Re: (Score:2)
The short story Double-Take by Winston K. Marks covers the concept, although in there it was in a theatre as an evolution of 3D movies, where one viewer could watch a movie from the male lead's perspective, and the other from the female lead's perspective.
The story was written in 1953. Is that prior art enough? You can check here [selfip.com] a bit over half-way down for the story.
Not unlimited in reality (Score:2)
It is not only about refresh rate and shutter speed. One key problem is brightness and ghosting. If you do basically a time multiplex and want to achieve the same brightness level you have to boost the amount of light coming out of the screen quite a bit. Additionally all shutter glasses are not 100% dark, so even now you often see ghost images.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And, while it wasn't active shutter, there have been luxury cars in the recent past using parallax barrier 3D tech to show navigation to the driver, and a movie to the passenger, on the same display.
Re: (Score:2)
Somehow, the "Cave Johnson" voice seemed to come out loud and clear in that last paragraph.. And it captured the apparent Sony approach nicely!
One thing they probably didn't think of... (Score:1)
What about people who aren't playing and want to watch?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I'm assuming without the glasses you'd see both screens superimposed on each other. While it could be annoying, you'd get to follow both players this way.
And if you want to go with one player only, you don't need the glasses. Just blink really really fast. :)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh they thought about it, don't worry. They'll just sell you as many $70 pairs of glasses as you want people watching.
Flicker (Score:2)
>"This means that when playing with a friend, you need not sacrifice 50% of screen real estate to accommodate the other player"
Right, it means you sacrifice 50% of the refresh rate instead. And with all the 3D TV's I have seen so far, that means FLICKER!!
Re: (Score:2)
To me, it seems like a solution looking for a problem, much like the Wii, but without the benefit of viral marketing.
3D glasses will soon join the Foreman grills, stack of T-Shirt transfer paper and Cuecats in the basement. This secondary use for them won't do anything to stop that. Anything that adds inconvenience will fail. Having to put on glasses and only run certain games is an inconvenience.
Re: (Score:2)
No you wont. Because 99% of all game players already are playing at 60hz.
Re: (Score:1)
My 60hz display isn't black 50% of the time.
A strobe light with a 0.5 duty cycle isn't exactly the same thing as a light source that's half as bright but doesn't flicker on and off.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, but not a great deal. Stick CRTs in front of people and everybody will say 50Hz flickers. Some won't have a problem with 60. I'd guess about half would be happy with 70, and most would be happy above 85. So at 60, yes you'll probably notice a bit of flicker, but probably not enough to bother you. Smaller screens bother you much less with flicker anyway, so I doubt people will be bothered by this.
It's not that long ago that people were happy with their 60Hz TV sets (or even 50Hz here in the UK). I
Re: (Score:2)
Of course, back then, a 60 Hz TV set was designed for actual 60 Hz operation, and the phosphors were still lit up pretty brightly by the time the beam came past again.
60 Hz shutter glasses, OTOH, intend to block light as soon as the frame ends. Therefore, you need a much faster refresh rate on shutter glasses than you would on a CRT that had relatively slow phosphors.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, but most weren't /that/ slow. Plenty of people used 60Hz CRT monitors and didn't think they were hideous (I'm not entirely sure why though), and the persistence of those phosphors was tiny (after about 5% of the vertical size they'd reverted to mostly black).
Re: (Score:2)
>"This means that when playing with a friend, you need not sacrifice 50% of screen real estate to accommodate the other player"
Right, it means you sacrifice 50% of the refresh rate instead. And with all the 3D TV's I have seen so far, that means FLICKER!!
Will you really miss 50% of 120Hz?
120Hz total, 60Hz per eye.
So it will be at 30Hz. It will be like the current shitty 3D movies in the cinema.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Sony steals ideas... (Score:2)
The second 3d tv's came on the market almost ALL gaming forums were full of the "Screw 3d, how about full screen for 2 player co-op?"
Sony steals that idea and patents it as their own.... Nice.
Thanks sony!
Re:Sony steals ideas... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
So, for once, Sony actually listens to what people want... and you're STILL complaining?
You think listening to someone else's idea & patenting that idea are the same thing?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So, did Sony actually patent this thing? And is there actually prior art in the gaming forums? Some links would be nice.
"sony solution"? (Score:2)
Is it just me, or anything putting "sony" and "solution" in the same phrase just don't make sense anymore?
Re: (Score:2)
Sure it makes sense:
-In a dread inspiring voice: The Sony Solution-
Dislike someone? Hack them to death!
Give me a break (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
But this is the whole point. Nowadays the only way their multiplayer is safe is when it is not over a network. So it is obvious they would try to give you better 2-player support on the same display.
So next time PSN is down, they will say "Stop complaining. We gave you the best multiplayer that doesn't require a network, so, go out, buy a 3D TV and find a friend!"
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Smearing (Score:2, Interesting)
I assume other large TVs also suffer from smearing.
With this new 'solution' I imagine seeing a ghost image of the other player's screen, or am I way off the mark?
Re: (Score:1)
I'm no expert, but I've read the "200Hz" means the TV tries to calculate in-between frames. This doesn't work well for fast panning action, which might be causing the smearing. Try to see if you can get rid of the smearing by turning this "smart" feature off.
Why when I heard SONY and SOLUTION (Score:3)
Why when I heard SONY and SOLUTION I immediately thought "They came up with a way to have people who want to play split-screen to pay for two copies of the game instead of one. Some licensing/payment/authentication scheme that enables split-screen only if both players purchased the license."
I know, I know. Don't give them ideas. I hope they don't read Slashdot.
Dust 514 (Score:2)
On a sadder note, DUST 514 is going to be ps3 exclusive?!?!?!? WTF!!!!!!!!!!!!!1!!!1!
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Step 1: (Score:2)
Make sure that Russian hackers have all your personal information and credit card numbers.
SQL injections ... (Score:2)
Three little words (Score:2)
"wearing 3D glasses"
Never mind. Still nothing to see here.
Looks great (Score:2)
It looks like a great 3D TV, until they gain enough popularity and Sony decides to remove the multiplayer feature.
So, instead of 50% screen real estate (Score:2)
You lose 50% of the refresh rate (e.g. 120Hz appears as 60Hz for each player). After all, I'm assuming that they're using the glass's active shutter system to display half the frames to one player and the other half to the other player. Or did they do something different?
Great for two players, what about the viewers? (Score:1)
The downside to this is you can't have people watch you play. They're either going to see your screen or their screen, they won't be able to see both. I imagine games that use this technology will have a "traditional"
Re: (Score:1)
One of the things I dislike about multiplayer on the same console is the amount of screen you lose.
In Bomberman or Street Fighter IV, how much screen does each player lose?
Security Purposes? (Score:2)
Would it be possible to use this concept to allow only one person to see what's on a screen? This could be a potentially powerful tool for security and secrecy.
You loose half of the screen anyway (Score:1)
you need not sacrifice 50% of screen real estate to accommodate the other player
Yes you do, the 3D display process is already halving your resolution - which is exactly the same thing: you lose 50% of screen.
One of the most efficient adverts ever (Score:2)
But I read on anyway and it still sounds bizarrely bizarre. Like, you're going to have friends round to play a multi-player game, and they're not going to bring their own laptop? Weird concept. How are you going to swap porn and jack off together. Yeuch - the very idea of jacking off onto someone else's keyboard is ... strangely appealing.
Re:Split screen multiplayer (Score:5, Interesting)
Definite case of "YMMV" there, bud.
Re:Split screen multiplayer (Score:5, Interesting)
Check this out, you can do it yourself:
"Full screen-split screen with any game."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CVJcVPvjUJo [youtube.com]
They're using cheap glasses from going to movies with one person having two left lenses and the other two right lenses.
Re: (Score:2)
But with that you still have the problem of having a restricted view. With ACTUAL full-screen split-screen, you can see an entire screen's-worth of the playing field. With that workaround, you still only see half a view stretched over the entire screen. It does seem like a neat way to stop screen lookers though.
Re: (Score:2)
Pretty sure that video shows an ACTUAL full-screen image for two different players at the same time.
Re: (Score:2)
No, it shows a half-screen image stretched to the full height of the screen. You're still missing half your FOV and everything looks all wonky.
Re: (Score:2)
Some sat-navs do this but without the glasses by having a holographic screen. From the driver's seat you see the navigation display and from the passenger seat you see a DVD.
Re: (Score:2)
I loathe split screen multiplayer, and wish they would come up with a solution giving 2 players the whole screen to work with.
They did, and it's called "network play", where each player sits in front of his very own monitor, yet people play against (or with) each other! I know, amazing concept, that! What will they think of next?
Ever since I saw Marble Madness and Populous split screen played with two mice on an Amiga, I have wondered why people want to crowd in front of a single monitor when they don't even look at the same thing. Do they like each other's body odour or something?
Re: (Score:1)
Can you honestly not imagine, oh, I don't know, some crazy and ludicrous hypothetical situation where two people own one console (a young engaged/married couple living together, siblings, you get the idea) and would want to play multiplayer together on it with each other but don't want to deal with the split screen? How about having friends over! That's a case where one person owns
Re: (Score:3)
How about having friends over!
This tech will be useless for that. All your friends would need glasses too, and would only be able to see ONE of the two screens. So it's actually anti-social, excluding your friends compared to a normal game.
As for multiple TVs, I believe the average number of TVs in a household is now above 2. And a games console is going to be cheaper than the glasses needed for this. So what's the problem, again?
Re: (Score:2)
The single worst thing about traditional split-screen play, though, is that you can see the other player. This solves that, so that you can for once actually use tactics and sneak up on them as opposed to being restricted to bashing at each other because you both know where you are at all times.
You can do this with two machines networked together, but that's cumbersome. If you use a 1080P TV, it's essentially a 1000X1000 square that you'll be seeing - plenty of resolution to play a good game. (I'm figu
Re: (Score:2)
True, if you're a pedant. The words "Split Screen Multiplayer" do not define a problem.
However the problem of how to sensibly divide a screen for two players is quite nicely addressed with this tech. Not that I'll be buying it, because I already have a TV and this is a Sony.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
You're gonna have to be blinking might fast, lad.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Ahhhh, thank you. I misunderstood the "not in this mode" bit, apparently :-)
That does make a lot more sense.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
http://www.youtube.com/v/Uef17zOCDb8?fs=1&hl=en_US&rel=0&hd=1 [youtube.com]
Fast enough for you?
Re: (Score:2)
Umm... that's nothing to do with Vita, Vita is the new handheld.
And 3d is failing for a lot of reasons. Glasses are part of it, sure. Complete lack of content for home users is another big one though. I bought a 3dtv but I'm damned if I can find anything I want to use it for.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Computer displays are double buffered. That is, you have an image being displayed and an image being drawn to. Finish drawing and you flip them. This is all well and good, but a 1080p 32 bit display takes 8 Megs. We need another 8 for the back buffer, possibly another 8 for a depth buffer and the same again for player 2. That's 48 Megs allocated just to drawing the graphics. You might be able to do something simpler with triple buffering but that doesn't
Re: (Score:2)
If you can make the scene a lot simpler, then you can actually gain in both of these. If you are absolutely certain that a display will be drawn in less than a sixtieth of a second, then you can just draw that while the other image is visible.
So we'll have 3D versions of Battlezone [wikipedia.org], and it'll be called state of the art!
Re: (Score:2)
Since the article is about their upcoming hand-held device, how is that relevant?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
please people, pay attention!!
why do so many of you think that ps3 runs its games in 1080p? i've seen a lot of ps3 games and none of them goes above 720p, most are even lower.