Sony restricts stereoscopic PS3 games to 720p 3D
By Sean Hollister 
posted July 19th 2010 3:32AM
posted July 19th 2010 3:32AM
posted July 19th 2010 3:32AM
A look back on popular stories from today in a specific year.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
I see the PS3's hardware is starting to show its age.
@Firewave But No News On A PS4 yet....
@Fr3sh2De4th
Consoles have that problem. People want them to last for 1000 years without having to upgrade. I believe that limits game's potential alot.
@Firewave
*bites on the troll lure*
Meanwhile, the 360 still has no native 3-D hardware support... Yeah.
The fact that the PS3, which is 4 years old, can even be updated to do 3-D games, is something else entirely.
@r34p3r
Also, this is old news. Why Engadget is posting it like it's something the gaming media *just* discovered is beyond me.
@r34p3r
If you were going to bite the "troll lure" you should have gone after the PC, not the 360. The Xbox 360 has been showing its age for quite a while now. The only "console" that doesnt suffer from this 5-10 year stagnation is the PC, which is upgraded an a lightning fast pace.
@Firewave
From what I could tell, most of the games I'm playing are 720P anyway. Granted the PS3 has a bit more power than the 360, but its a real shame that manufacturers are pawning such archaic hardware on us with no true upgrade available until 2012 per the rumors. =(
We don't have to wait that long to get upgraded models in our computers, cellphones, or even cars.
@r34p3r It's not special that a device can do 3D. You can take any 120 Hz or higher TV and make it do 3D. The Xbox 360 could do it, it's available on PC, even the handheld 3DS can do 3D and you don't need glasses.
The reason no one else is running into 3D this year is that it just doesn't have the market penetration. If 3D takes off and becomes profitable, Microsoft will add it to the 360.
@Firewave
Since when is bringing PC's into a console discussion relevant, when everyone knows that PC's can be updated on a whim.
The fact that consoles have a static hardware setup and yet can be brought even partly up to speed with the latest PC tech is noteworthy. Besides, I'd like a gaming PC that does everything my PS3 can do for only 300 dollars...
@Ducman69
" but its a real shame that manufacturers are pawning such archaic hardware on us with no true upgrade available until 2012 per the rumors. =("
Thats the point I was trying to make Ducman69. This type of thing is holding back our games. I know most games run at 720p. Most games are also crap. Most people play the good games the most, which I would expect to run at 1080p if they are on a PS3.
@r34p3r
The fact is my post wasnt meant to be troll bait, and it wasnt meant to bring PCs into anything. I was merely commenting on how the PS3s hardware limits were starting to show.
I said you should have gone after the PC since attacking the 360 which is even older than the PS3 was pointless. Since its hardware limitations are obviously greater.(Never mind the Wii... that was outdated at launch)
@r34p3r
Not for $300, but considering how much more a PC will do, and the fact that you end up buying one anyways, you can get a very decent computer for $600-$800. Less if you can take an hour to put it together yourself. I wonder why people don't realize this.
If you're buying a computer anyway why not just get a nicer one to begin with? It'll last you much longer, and will preform better at everything, not just games.
@Ducman69 Yeah ! I'm really eager to dump non recyclable hardware into young third world kids pawns so that I can replace my perfectly working game console and buy a new one that can display native 1080p images I can't actually differentiate from 720p because I'm sitting at 10 ft from a display smaller than 50" (do your math : at 10 ft, 720p requires a 50" display to match your eye resolution. And a 32" TV could display SD, you won't notice ! At 8 ft, 42" is the ideal for 720p).
Except in projection and for insanely big screens (50" and above), 1080p is a used-car-salesman argument.
@Dafrety
I already have a capable PC that I built myself for 1000 dollars 2.5 years ago, that still is able to keep up and do more than my PS3 can do (except for play Blu-Ray movies). But, when it comes down to it, I still use my PS3 more for media center stuff, movie playback and other activities (the most-noteworthy of which, of course, is playing games).
I just enjoy what both mediums have to offer....
@Dafrety
I think its hard for people to see the money work out in their favor over a long period of time.
@AWx Sounds like somebody is just jealous of people with nice TVs.
I like my 1080P, thanks. =p
@r34p3r I'm a PS3 owner (and don't (or will) own a xbox360), but the xbox360 is just as capable for 3D as the PS3 is, there are already some examples (just check engadget itself).. But microsoft is just waiting to jump on the bandwagon before committing any resources to something which only a very few people will use at this time (so they are using Sony to pave the way)).. Just like Sony can do a firmware update, so can Microsoft.. And just like Sony isn't capable of running 3D games in 1080p natively, so isn't the 360..
@Firewave Why... do you people always show the glasses even if you know people seeing the picture cant see it in 3D....?
@Billy
To piss you off.
@Dafrety
Truth is, PC games are coded for a wide range of machines and cannot be streamlined for specific hardware. For example the graphics chip used in the PS3 is the same as an nvidia 7800 graphics processor for pc. The visuals on the games such as killzone on the PS3 destroy what a pc with similar specifications would do. This is where PC gaming looses its appeal to gamers who want to play great quality games on a tight budget.
@SuperDre "but the xbox360 is just as capable for 3D as the PS3 is,"
No it's not.
-Not all 360s have HDMI
-360 is stuck at HDMI 1.2
-Requirements for 3D standard TVs is HDMI 1.4
-The 10 MB EDRAM buffer is a huge limitation (PS3 has 256 MB of VRAM dedicated to it's GPU) as tiling slows it down
-PS3's 3D implementation is native to the SDK/firmware, and 360 implementation must be done by the developer
-PS3 can offload certain tasks (ie: culling) to the SPUs, where it would only need to be done once per view (left and right frames) thus reducing the load on the GPU. 360 does not have this ability, everything must be done twice
@r34p3r
You're right, 300 might be tight. But for 500 you've got a quadcore, 4GB ram, a 4850 and 1.5TB storage. What PS3 can do everything that computer does?
@JonE
Dont' forget adding another 100 or so for a motherboard, as well as 50-100 for a case to put it in.
@r34p3r a hundred for case? you got to be kidding me..
I just bought for myself a computer which has:
P5KPL/1600 Motherboard, Quad Core Intel cpu, GeForce 470GTX, and 1TB harddrive, it also has 4 GB of ram, Bluray player, and nice case. it costs about 500 quid now.
is it too much? I wouldnt say so, the games are much cheaper on PC's, so even if it costs more than Console it's still cheaper in "longer run".
and it's a PC, it will last for at least 5-8 years, and won't broke.
@Fr3sh2De4th I won't accept the downgrade just to get a softer, less detailed 3D. I'll stick with 1080p.
@r34p3r
Theres a reason for that... 3D IS A FAD RIGHT NOW AND ITS NOT WORTH THE TIME TO SUPPORT SOMETHING NOT LIKELY TO BE AROUND BY THE TIME THE SYSTEM GETS REPLACE...
@r34p3r Meanwhile, I could care less about 3-D. Just great games, thank you. Gimmicks are for the Wii.
@Firewave
Seriously? The fucking Wii is still standard def!
@Extinction
Ummm the PS3 reliese heavily on the SPU over the GPU, thus the reason why 360 GPU created game graphics suck when they are direct ported to the PS3, because it doesn't have the GPU to handle them.
@r34p3r
You're putting a restrictions on a PC by saying $300 for everything the PS3 can do, because even an out of the box $500 PC from best buy can do 10x more than the PS3 can do and it doesn't even have the specifications of the PS3, you go and build your own and if all it can do is what the PS3 can do you suck at building computers, even if you can get it into that $300 restriction.
@04k3R
like they did bluray?
@r34p3r
can your $300 computer play God Of War 3? :p
Eh, even Final Fantasy XIII is native spec 720p, there really are only a handful of games that are true 1080p, and most of them aren't rather good. 1080p at 60fps, or even 30 fps can be hard to hit. I'm used to it by now on my xbox, ps3, though my laptop does manage 1080p on anything that isn't crysis, unless I play it on medium settings, then it can run 1080p, but who wants bigger worse graphics instead of smaller better ones?
@Firewave
The PS3 isn't powerful enough to do 1920x1080x120hz.. not even close - 1280x720x60 is hard enough. (No neither is the X360 this isn't a brand loyalty thing)
Funny thing is, it's not about HDMI 1.4 either.. as that particular pointless standard doesn't have mandatory support for 1920x1080x120..
@Extinction HDMI 1.4 isn't an issue.Look at DirecTV's 3D offering.
There are other ways of transmitting 3D to a TV, yes even over component cables. There are trade-offs to different methods but there's always a way to get it done.
As for the EDRAM, for the 360 to do 3D it would have to output two half-height or half-width images at the same time and have the TV split it. This would allow developers to render at half the resolution in whichever split is used, reducing the need for tiling. Of course, yes this means it probably wouldn't look as good as PS3's, half-res at all times unless they can software update it away.
PS: If Microsoft does hop on to 3D officially (they will if adoption of the equipment takes off) they WILL add it to their own SDK and firmware. Also, why wouldn't the 360 be able to offload some work to the CPU if needed? AFAIK there isn't something blocking a dev from doing this.
@Firewave As much as I loath Sony as a whole, I have to stand up. HDMI does not have the throughput to handle Full HD in 3D. It is not the fault of Sony.
ps3 is already struggling at 1080p games.
only a dreamer could expect to play 3D 1080p on a ps3?
ps3 hardware is OUT-OF-DATE people WAKE UP!!!
@mahmut Well, since only a handful of natively 1080p games are available on both the PS3 and XBox 360, you should rather say that both those consoles are "out of date".
The prob now is that last gen consoles can not all be "out of date" at the same time. It is like stating that non flying cars are out of date in respect to non existing future cars that might one day fly.
@AWx
30+mpg fuel injected engines exist, therefor if Ford, Honda, and Toyota were only still using 20mpg carbureted engines in 2010, they would technically still be out of date. The same kind of applies to the old powerPC processors and old GPUs still being sold today.
@mahmut Ironically, PS3 has a lot more native 1080p games than 360 does. You were saying?
@Extinction
He didn't even mention the xbox. Why the fuck do people do this? You dont have to feel threatened. Theres no amazing secret users on the other side are keeping and if you own either console your not missing out so stfu and enjoy what you have.
3D is at best a gimmick feature right now because reletive to the number of people who own consoles the number of people with "3D-Ready" setups is tiny.
@tobsmonster2
Thank you for the explanation.
I'm not a fanboy of any consoles.
All i'm sayin is that you get better performance from a 500$ pc than both of them.
Just because game companies want to push prices on unhacked systems, you console owners settle for the technology of 2006.
Lately I played Red Dead Redemption on PS3 and thought to myself such a beautiful game, too bad i have to play it in such a bad quality.
Xbox owners, please don't be silly to tell me i should've played it on Xbox.
@mahmut
My experience of GTA 4 on all three platforms:
Xbox 360- Medium quality graphics, relatively high frame rates.
PS3- High quality graphics, low frame rates but smooth enough to be playable.
PC(Gaming)- High quality graphics, high frame rates.
This is usually the situation of most cross platform games this generation. However, exclusives on either console generally look and perform better the cross platforms.
Fact is PC(Gaming) > PS3 > Xbox in terms of hardware. What that translates to in terms of performance is down to the devs.
Saw this ages ago on Joystiq!
I love how they keep trying to take this stuff to a new level but don't always quite make it.
For a console that's almost 4 years old to be able to play stereoscopic 3D games in 720p I find to be just fine
@DroidYou weird, the good post is marked as low rank but this troll one is high?
@htd i think its because there is no trails of fanboyism in it.
@DroidYou also, how many non-3D games are there that are 1080p for the ps3? I don't think there are too many last time I checked. So if 720p is fine for regular games, then it will be fine for 3d.
Typical...