Who Won E3?

Who Won e3??

  • Total voters
    209
alg7_munif said:
Please tell me how much money would you pay to have this accessory for your XBox? Then please look around for a high resolution webcam and see how much is the price.
Click to expand...

Even if any of your arguments made sense, let's ask this: If before the ps3 came out we asked with its features "how much is the price", would you still be insisting like you are now that the PS3 couldn't possibly exist because your calculated cost of the components did not equal the target price?

You seem very very invested, in spite of massive evidence in contrary to all of your posts, in proving, in spite of the now dozens of hands on that contradict you, that this is just not possible.

I wonder why that is?
 
alg7_munif said:
They were not using a webcam sized camera, they were using a device that looks like a mid size projector. If you don't know how a mid size projector looks like, you can find some here:
http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&q=mid size projector&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wi
Click to expand...
Yes... because when you're doing concept hardware the absolute first thing you do is put it in the final retail body. Going back to your cost argument... the very same z-cam which has been discussed repeatedly (with a planned sub $100 street price) was capable of 1280x1024 for the RGB camera (You seem to be talking about resolution now for some reason... I'm not entirely sure why).

It's beyond a joke at this stage. Again, and again, and again you've been shown the the example of the tech which is in a normal (ok, maybe slightly chunky) sized webcam, which can do all the same things (aside from voice / audio related stuff) as the Natal tech yet you keep ignoring it. What on earth is wrong with you? It's gotten to the stage that I don't even know what you're trying to prove any more. I'm not sure you even do.
 
Last edited:
Wow, two guys quoted parts of my post while ignoring the rest of it and yet they still ask questions that were already answered in the exact same post but in the part that they ignored :eek:
alg7_munif said:
The key for the face recognition is the resolution especially when you are standing at a distance from the CCD. You also need to capture the whole body at the same time. My guess they would need at least 3Mpixel to be able to do it. They could use a larger image but then they would also need a faster processor since they need to do the tracking in real time. Like I said before, it is possible to do it but the technology is still unrealistic for a consumer market.
Click to expand...
 
So again, you're saying that the previously shown real world example is fake? I just want to be sure. I think perhaps you should read the tech to understand that it doesn't just use the RGB camera to do facial recognition. (Ha, who am I kidding)

Could you do everyone a favour and put all your claims on the table at once? It would make it a lot easier.
 
Like I said before, it is possible to do it but the technology is still unrealistic for a consumer market.
 
only time will tell on this one, I for one would love to hook it up in the bathroom and let it record me take a shit; like you guys have done to this thread.


Just a joke calm down I know how serious these internet's can be.
 
alg7_munif said:
Like I said before, it is possible to do it but the technology is still unrealistic for a consumer market.
Click to expand...
So then 3DV weren't actually able to combine depth data with their RGB data for adequate facial recognition? Either that or they were lying and actually put a 3 megapixel CCD in their camera without telling anyone? Even if both of those were true... I could personally go out and buy a 3 megapixel webcam for £40 (~$65) this very second. How much do you think MS could get the optics / sensor for? Unrealistic for a consumer market my arse.

Edit - Apologies stevedave (and others). I'll discuss this no more in this thread... there's another perfectly suited to it.
 
Psychotext said:
So then 3DV weren't actually able to combine depth data with their RGB data for adequate facial recognition? Either that or they were lying and actually put a 3 megapixel CCD in their camera without telling anyone? Even if both of those were true... I could go out and buy a 3 megapixel webcam for £40 (~$65) this very second. How much do you think MS could get them for? Unrealistic for a consumer market my arse.

Edit - Apologies stevedave (and others). I'll discuss this no more in this thread... there's another perfectly suited to it.
Click to expand...

When did they tell what kind of CCD they have used for the Project Natal demo at E3?
 
I realize this train left the track a long time ago, but I will pretend it didn't nonetheless...

I really think it is a toss-up between Sony and MS. I would tend to lean slightly towards Sony because I was more impressed with the games, but the Natal thing is really outside the box thinking. It could be absolutely awesome if done right, and by all accounts it seems like it will be.

So, I will just say flip a coin and determine who was better.
<flips coin>
It landed on the edge. Nintendo wins.
 
I gave it to Sony because im more interested in their games. Natal, motion plus, sonys controller.. all gimmicks. When i play games i want to sit and relax.
 
I have to say Microsoft. Project Natal looks pretty cool if implemented correctly and after reading a couple of hands-on, it's going to be good. I can see this being popular with XBLA titles. I'm excited for Crackdown 2 as well and buying Xbox 360 games off Live is always a plus.
 
stevedave said:
nintendo almost won the vote for me because of golden sun DS, but considering that was camolots doing and not nintendo's I went with Sony.
Click to expand...

I just looked it up and it looks very impressive given the hardware it runs on.

I'd have to say Microsoft won, because Sony's stuff was either brought up last year or it wont be out until 3Q '10. It was damn impressive however.
 
Spaceman_Spiff said:
I'm sick of seeing trailers for games that are a year + out. In all likelihood Sony will be showing GT5 and FF XIV next year at E3 and everyone will give them credit for it then too. Microsoft's showed real games, rather than just trailers. Long term buildup with cgi trailers just doesn't do it for me anymore.
Click to expand...

I agree. May as well show Duke Nukem' Forever trailers...
 
Meh, they need more new ideas, no one won imo, it's all THIS 2, THIS 3, THIS 384398.
 
I give the nod to MS. Even though I care nothing for Facebook or Twitter, I think the integration is going a long way towards making the 360 a true focal piece of the living room, which is what MS wanted all along. Natal looks interesting - likely a ways away but only because it's different than the Wiimote.

Sony had more new games to show, but I give a push to their motion controller - too similar to Nintendo for me. Very excited about Uncharted.

Nintendo was...Nintendo. Loved the new Metroid game, though.

Who am I kidding: MS had me at Crackdown 2. They could have just put up that splash screen and ended E3 right there for me.
 
Mircosoft Def. did you see the Milo thingy? now THAT is amazing, even tho sony had a motion thing to but MS didnt need a controller like they did.
 
Some games are coming this year. Like Uncharted 2, that was one of, if not the most impressive game at the show IMO.
 
It was pretty even between Sony & Microsoft IMO, I kind of liked Sony more because it offered games that I'm more interested in:

Xbox 360:
Project Natal
Alan Wake (looks awesome)
Splinter Cell

Sony:
PSP MGS:peace Walker (I'm a HUGE MGS fan)
PSP GT, another great title that'll be awesome to play anywhere you want via PSP
Final Fantasy 14 > Awesome !!!
GT5
The Last Guardian


Nintento's show TOTALLY SUCKED though, I mean my God was that show pathetic!!
 
alg7_munif said:
Nobody is going to post any picture showing the hardware on stage?
Click to expand...

Posts like the ones you've left in this thread usually don't bother me, but you managed to derail a thread I was interested in for so long that you've aggravated me enough to actually revisit this thread.

http://www.engadget.com/2009/06/10/project-natal-prototype-hardware-pictured-on-jimmy-fallon/#comments

6-10-09natalfallon.jpg


As has been told to you many, many times, it's still a prototype, and that's obviously not the final design. But really, if you still insist that there are several hidden cameras tucked away on the stage to make this work, and that they'd demo this tech knowing it wouldn't be remotely possible to even partially deliver what they've demoed, I'll be sorely disappointed.
 
Haha, I just got done posting a link to that engadget article, in the "How much would you pay for the Project Natal device" thread. I don't like Jimmy Fallon, but I'll try to catch that segment.
 
Taikero said:
Posts like the ones you've left in this thread usually don't bother me, but you managed to derail a thread I was interested in for so long that you've aggravated me enough to actually revisit this thread.

http://www.engadget.com/2009/06/10/project-natal-prototype-hardware-pictured-on-jimmy-fallon/#comments

6-10-09natalfallon.jpg


As has been told to you many, many times, it's still a prototype, and that's obviously not the final design. But really, if you still insist that there are several hidden cameras tucked away on the stage to make this work, and that they'd demo this tech knowing it wouldn't be remotely possible to even partially deliver what they've demoed, I'll be sorely disappointed.
Click to expand...

That doesn't fit the earlier description from engadget:
The first thing to note is that Microsoft is very protective of the actual technology right now, so they weren't letting us film or photograph any of the box itself, though what they had was an extremely rough version of what the device will look like (not at all like the press shot above). It consisted of a small, black box aimed out into the room -- about the size of a Roku Player -- with sensors along the front. It almost looked a bit like a mid-size (between pico and full size) projector.
Click to expand...
http://www.engadget.com/2009/06/03/project-natal-video-hands-on-impressions-and-further-details/

The blurred device fits the description better than the pic above:
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top