sony ressurects VR glasses as a ps3 periphreal

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for ionusX
#1 Posted by ionusX (25760 posts) -

the term virtual boy is a stain upon nintendo's history and no one forgets it. it seems sony is intent on burying the ps3 at least in asian markets next to that little red headpiece and the grave will be twice as deep.

http://kotaku.com/5836062/meet-the-craziest-sony-product-of-2011/gallery/1

meet the hmz-t1 these are a 3d alternative to your tv the problem is two things. one it doesnt fit well on most people despite sony's best efforts and moving around with it on is a literal chore. as you run the risk of ruining your ability to see the screens properly. the big kicker is the price this tv alternative costs about $790 US !!

yep im definetely certian this is getting next to the virtual boy in the grave for technological failures.

sigh when will console/handheld designers ever get a grip on this virtual reality is far from workable yet. get off that idea and save it for 10 years down the line case in point:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_L3Fi30ooaI

we werent ready for it then. we arent ready for it now.

Avatar image for WilliamRLBaker
#2 Posted by WilliamRLBaker (28915 posts) -

Wont go to any gawker media sites anymore but yeah I saw that on another site and all I can say is...
:lol:

theres a reason Sony's TV section of the buisness has lost them money the past 8 years they offer nothing better then samsung or other products but at about 30% more of the cost. If we were to wait we'd probably see a Samsung or Toshiba set of these that do the exact same thing but at 30% less.

Avatar image for hippiesanta
#3 Posted by hippiesanta (10299 posts) -
can you use psmove with that?
Avatar image for AmnesiaHaze
#4 Posted by AmnesiaHaze (5685 posts) -
can you use psmove with that?hippiesanta
i bet you can use even kinect
Avatar image for BIOKILLER123
#5 Posted by BIOKILLER123 (866 posts) -

Epic fail. :lol:

This thing is going to fail harder than the PSP GO and the Virtual boy. Retrospectively, I thought it looked promising imo.

Avatar image for slipknot0129
#6 Posted by slipknot0129 (5832 posts) -

Be perfect with kinect.

Avatar image for deactivated-583e460ca986b
#7 Posted by deactivated-583e460ca986b (7240 posts) -

Wont go to any gawker media sites anymore but yeah I saw that on another site and all I can say is...
:lol:

theres a reason Sony's TV section of the buisness has lost them money the past 8 years they offer nothing better then samsung or other products but at about 30% more of the cost. If we were to wait we'd probably see a Samsung or Toshiba set of these that do the exact same thing but at 30% less.

WilliamRLBaker
Uh Samsung's TV's are at the high end of the price spectrum. I would almost say the same thing as you but towards Samsung when talking TV's. Samsung's 3D TV's are not much better if any but are consistently $300-$500 more for the same size.
Avatar image for eboyishere
#8 Posted by eboyishere (12681 posts) -

wow....it's..wow.

Avatar image for ChubbyGuy40
#9 Posted by ChubbyGuy40 (26428 posts) -

Sony didn't ressurect these. Vusik has had these glasses for some time. Only difference is I like Sony's design better :P Vusik is cheaper, but they aren't using OLED screens. Wonder how good they'll be.

Avatar image for kuraimen
#10 Posted by kuraimen (28078 posts) -

I'll buy it if it does something like this

Avatar image for FoolwithaLancer
#11 Posted by FoolwithaLancer (2020 posts) -

:lol: That looks so terrible, Hahaha. My god. :lol:

Avatar image for WilliamRLBaker
#12 Posted by WilliamRLBaker (28915 posts) -

[QUOTE="WilliamRLBaker"]

Wont go to any gawker media sites anymore but yeah I saw that on another site and all I can say is...
:lol:

theres a reason Sony's TV section of the buisness has lost them money the past 8 years they offer nothing better then samsung or other products but at about 30% more of the cost. If we were to wait we'd probably see a Samsung or Toshiba set of these that do the exact same thing but at 30% less.

GoldenElementXL

Uh Samsung's TV's are at the high end of the price spectrum. I would almost say the same thing as you but towards Samsung when talking TV's. Samsung's 3D TV's are not much better if any but are consistently $300-$500 more for the same size.

If I walk into Bestbuy right now an equivilent Samsung tv of a Sony tv will cost 300 dollars less.

Avatar image for EmperorSupreme
#13 Posted by EmperorSupreme (7687 posts) -

Playing games on this would be incredible.

Gizmodo had a extremely positive hands on review. Made me want one :)

Won't let me link for some reason, but it's on the front page.

Avatar image for Pug-Nasty
#14 Posted by Pug-Nasty (8508 posts) -

[QUOTE="WilliamRLBaker"]

Wont go to any gawker media sites anymore but yeah I saw that on another site and all I can say is...
:lol:

theres a reason Sony's TV section of the buisness has lost them money the past 8 years they offer nothing better then samsung or other products but at about 30% more of the cost. If we were to wait we'd probably see a Samsung or Toshiba set of these that do the exact same thing but at 30% less.

GoldenElementXL

Uh Samsung's TV's are at the high end of the price spectrum. I would almost say the same thing as you but towards Samsung when talking TV's. Samsung's 3D TV's are not much better if any but are consistently $300-$500 more for the same size.

Samsung's are also made wiith junk components. I like the picture quality, and I have owned two Samsungs, but when I had to repair my latest (the second to die before 18 months of owning it) I got to see the inside. There's a reason for the lower price, and it isn't value.

Avatar image for g0ddyX
#15 Posted by g0ddyX (3914 posts) -

Seriously?

Avatar image for super600
#16 Posted by super600 (32418 posts) -

I don't think many people are going to buy this perpherial.

Avatar image for r12qi
#17 Posted by r12qi (1018 posts) -

I don't think many people are going to buy this perpherial.

super600

it's kinda good alternative to 3d tv, with us price $600 (it's japan that $800) i probably buy one for my self

Avatar image for AsadMahdi59
#18 Posted by AsadMahdi59 (6846 posts) -

sure it looks silly when you wear it, and it's expensive but itseems cool. hopefully doesn't make you go blind w/ excessive use or anything like that

Avatar image for Chogyam
#19 Posted by Chogyam (1887 posts) -

lol, made me think of

http://www.break.com/usercontent/2009/4/cnn-sony-releases-stupid-piece-of-stuff-that-doesnt-work-709778

sorry, won't let me link.

Avatar image for Smash-in-3d
#20 Posted by Smash-in-3d (25 posts) -

I think sony likes to waste their money on no potential products like these.

Avatar image for Nonstop-Madness
#21 Posted by Nonstop-Madness (9849 posts) -
oh cmon, this is a gaming website ..... how are VR glasses not awesome to people here? haven't you always wanted one of those. Its a cool concept but there is no need for it just yet.
Avatar image for Pug-Nasty
#22 Posted by Pug-Nasty (8508 posts) -

oh cmon, this is a gaming website ..... how are VR glasses not awesome to people here? haven't you always wanted one of those. Its a cool concept but there is no need for it just yet.Nonstop-Madness

VR is one of the coolest concepts, but I don't think glasses are the way to get there. I'm thinking more like sensors on the head while being in a hypnotic kind of state.

Avatar image for NVIDIATI
#23 Posted by NVIDIATI (8394 posts) -

If I walk into Bestbuy right now an equivilent Samsung tv of a Sony tv will cost 300 dollars less.

WilliamRLBaker

Sony's TVs have been horrible ever since they started production of LCDs, they're nothing like they had been in the days of CRT. Now its just overpriced displays lacking in performance, obsessed with size, weight and power consumption as Sony hit a dead end with LCD and missed out on Plasma long ago.

Avatar image for christiankhs-2
#24 Posted by christiankhs-2 (156 posts) -

im a sheep but i hope i doesnt fail, my dreamwith videogames has always been Virtual reality

Avatar image for F1ame_Shie1d
#25 Posted by F1ame_Shie1d (1389 posts) -

[QUOTE="WilliamRLBaker"]

If I walk into Bestbuy right now an equivilent Samsung tv of a Sony tv will cost 300 dollars less.

NVIDIATI

Sony's TVs have been horrible ever since they started production of LCDs, they're nothing like they had been in the days of CRT. Now its just overpriced displays lacking in performance, obsessed with size, weight and power consumption as Sony hit a dead end with LCD and missed out on Plasma long ago.

Sharp are the guys going to oversized tv's not Sony. That said you can get Sharps 70" tv for around the same price as either Sony or Samsungs 55" tv if you get into the XBR or Series 8000.

As for Samsung being cheaper? Sorry but that's simply not the case unless you're comparing Samsung plasmas to other companies LED tv's in which case you'd be right. But ALL plasma tv's are cheaper then their LCD counter parts.

Also william you're wrong about cost. Sony's 55" XBR is around $3000 while Samsungs 55" Series 8000 is around $3300. You got your numbers backwards. Both tv's are 3d, LED, 960 CMR, etc, etc...

Avatar image for BIOKILLER123
#26 Posted by BIOKILLER123 (866 posts) -

lol, made me think of

http://www.break.com/usercontent/2009/4/cnn-sony-releases-stupid-piece-of-stuff-that-doesnt-work-709778

sorry, won't let me link.

Chogyam

:lol:

This is so funny if the news was like this I'd watch it everyday.

Avatar image for NVIDIATI
#27 Posted by NVIDIATI (8394 posts) -

[QUOTE="NVIDIATI"]

[QUOTE="WilliamRLBaker"]

If I walk into Bestbuy right now an equivilent Samsung tv of a Sony tv will cost 300 dollars less.

F1ame_Shie1d

Sony's TVs have been horrible ever since they started production of LCDs, they're nothing like they had been in the days of CRT. Now its just overpriced displays lacking in performance, obsessed with size, weight and power consumption as Sony hit a dead end with LCD and missed out on Plasma long ago.

Sharp are the guys going to oversized tv's not Sony. That said you can get Sharps 70" tv for around the same price as either Sony or Samsungs 55" tv if you get into the XBR or Series 8000.

As for Samsung being cheaper? Sorry but that's simply not the case unless you're comparing Samsung plasmas to other companies LED tv's in which case you'd be right. But ALL plasma tv's are cheaper then their LCD counter parts.

Also william you're wrong about cost. Sony's 55" XBR is around $3000 while Samsungs 55" Series 8000 is around $3300. You got your numbers backwards. Both tv's are 3d, LED, 960 CMR, etc, etc...

When I said size I should have been more specific as I realised you interpreted that as screen size. What I meant is the overall size of thedisplay, so the frame, stand, thickness, etc.