Don't like the snow? You can make a bookmark with the following text instead of a url: javascript:snowStorm.toggleSnow(). Clicking it will toggle the snow on and off.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

PS3 games to be made 3D

CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
edited September 2009 in Games and Technology
http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/04/ps3s-new-3d-mode-captured-on-video-coming-in-2010-to-all-exist/
You know what's absolutely useless? A video of Wipeout HD being played in 3D, with some schmuck wearing 3D glasses and babbling on about how much fun he's having. Well, that schmuck is this Engadget editor, the video can be found after the break, and we've gotta say: we loved it. Especially for something like Wipeout HD, whose neon-infused tracks make for an almost too convenient example of rapidly approaching vanishing points, we'd say 3D could really be a quasi-"killer app" for consoles going forward -- especially if those fancy new motion controllers don't catch on for Microsoft and Sony. In many ways, 3D just seems to make more sense in a video game than for a movie, and the whole problem of finding content to deliver in the format has already been solved: a software update for the PS3 sometime in 2010 will enable it to provide a 3D viewing experience to "all" existing games on the system. We're sure there will be some exceptions, but it sounds very promising. The console itself pumps out a quite regular signal over HDMI, which the TV syncs up with your 3D glasses. A 200Hz TV, for instance, alternates 1080p frames, with 100Hz for each eye. Of course, you'll need a brand new TV, but at least it won't be restricted to just Sony televisions. Start saving those pennies!
I refuse to use goddamn 3D glasses.

Also Sega already did the 3D games with their firs tsystem.

Couscous on
«13

Posts

  • THEPAIN73THEPAIN73 Santabreaker PresentslayerRegistered User regular
    edited September 2009
    One step forward, two steps back.

    Facebook | Amazon | Twitter | Youtube | PSN: ThePain73 | Steam: ThePain73
    3DS FC: 5343-7720-0490
  • darkenedwingdarkenedwing Registered User
    edited September 2009
    ugh I hate the 3D fad that has been going on for the past year or so.
    You know what? fuck 3D. Like when I went to go see UP and I was forced to sue the goddamned 3D glasses, they darkened the colors so much the whole movie looked like shit, and I don't know if something is wrong with me or what but through 3 3D movies ive seen at theaters, I couldn't see a single "3D" looking thing. It looked like a normal movie, but with shit for colors because of the 3D "sunglasses" I had to wear.

    /rant *breathes*

    I don't want 3D games.

    image.php?type=sigpic&userid=29216&dateline=1296970870
  • Unco-ordinatedUnco-ordinated Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    THEPAIN73 wrote: »
    One step forward, two steps back.

    What steps are they taking backwards exactly? This is a fairly useless feature for 99% of the planet but it's not like it's holding a gun to your head and forcing you to use it.

    As for 3D itself, I saw Superman Returns in 3D (for parts of the movie at least) and it looked pretty neat. I wouldnt want to wear those glasses while playing a 30 hour RPG but I'm guessing some people might.

    Steam ID - LiquidSolid170 | PSN ID - LiquidSolid
  • ScottyScotty Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    ugh I hate the 3D fad that has been going on for the past year or so.
    You know what? fuck 3D. Like when I went to go see UP and I was forced to sue the goddamned 3D glasses, they darkened the colors so much the whole movie looked like shit, and I don't know if something is wrong with me or what but through 3 3D movies ive seen at theaters, I couldn't see a single "3D" looking thing. It looked like a normal movie, but with shit for colors because of the 3D "sunglasses" I had to wear.

    /rant *breathes*

    I don't want 3D games.

    Please don't take this as an attack, but, maybe you should get your eyes checked? I saw UP and there was a lot of 3D in that film, everything seemed to pop more, and then there was stuff that came right out of the screen at you. Believe me, the non-3D version wasn't the same.

    3D doesn't mean that everything flies out of the screen at your head.

  • LunkerLunker Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    One step closer to 4D.

    Tweet my Face: @heyitslunker | Save money at CheapAssGamer (not an affiliate link)
  • darkenedwingdarkenedwing Registered User
    edited September 2009
    Scotty wrote: »
    ugh I hate the 3D fad that has been going on for the past year or so.
    You know what? fuck 3D. Like when I went to go see UP and I was forced to sue the goddamned 3D glasses, they darkened the colors so much the whole movie looked like shit, and I don't know if something is wrong with me or what but through 3 3D movies ive seen at theaters, I couldn't see a single "3D" looking thing. It looked like a normal movie, but with shit for colors because of the 3D "sunglasses" I had to wear.

    /rant *breathes*

    I don't want 3D games.

    Please don't take this as an attack, but, maybe you should get your eyes checked? I saw UP and there was a lot of 3D in that film, everything seemed to pop more, and then there was stuff that came right out of the screen at you. Believe me, the non-3D version wasn't the same.

    3D doesn't mean that everything flies out of the screen at your head.

    I have pretty shitty eyesight (so I wear glasses), and some things wrong with my eyes (weird shaped optic nerves), but I don't think that would affect it. Like, I could see the 3D in the commercials before-hand for Bolt, but I don't think I seen much, if any 3D effects during the movie. Same with Up.

    Maybe i'm just weird :/

    image.php?type=sigpic&userid=29216&dateline=1296970870
  • Radikal_DreamerRadikal_Dreamer Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    ugh I hate the 3D fad that has been going on for the past year or so.
    You know what? fuck 3D. Like when I went to go see UP and I was forced to sue the goddamned 3D glasses, they darkened the colors so much the whole movie looked like shit, and I don't know if something is wrong with me or what but through 3 3D movies ive seen at theaters, I couldn't see a single "3D" looking thing. It looked like a normal movie, but with shit for colors because of the 3D "sunglasses" I had to wear.

    /rant *breathes*

    I don't want 3D games.

    I went and saw Coraline and while I could see some 3D it fucked up the colors a lot. The screen just wasn't vibrant like it should be. It was muted and blah compared to without the glasses. The group of friends I went with felt the same and when we saw Up we refused to see it in 3D. And then Coraline on Blu-Ray's 3D option was beyond bad. I couldn't watch more than a scene in it. The colors were just awful and had a weird purple and green tint to them. It just kind of hurt to watch it like that. If 3D gaming starts anywhere near that bad I will not be getting in on that for a while.

    theincidentsig.jpg
  • DrunkMcDrunkMc Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    Scotty wrote: »
    ugh I hate the 3D fad that has been going on for the past year or so.
    You know what? fuck 3D. Like when I went to go see UP and I was forced to sue the goddamned 3D glasses, they darkened the colors so much the whole movie looked like shit, and I don't know if something is wrong with me or what but through 3 3D movies ive seen at theaters, I couldn't see a single "3D" looking thing. It looked like a normal movie, but with shit for colors because of the 3D "sunglasses" I had to wear.

    /rant *breathes*

    I don't want 3D games.

    Please don't take this as an attack, but, maybe you should get your eyes checked? I saw UP and there was a lot of 3D in that film, everything seemed to pop more, and then there was stuff that came right out of the screen at you. Believe me, the non-3D version wasn't the same.

    3D doesn't mean that everything flies out of the screen at your head.

    Yeah, UP was amazing in 3D. Like Scotty said, not everything flew out of the screen, a lot of it was just showing distance between foreground, middle-ground and background and it gave an amazing sense of depth. The same for Monsters vs. Aliens and the first 15mins of Half-Blood Prince.

    The huge thing with this I don't like though is, the game will look like shit to anyone trying to watch you play. You'll need to have glasses on just to watch someone play? That'd get annoying real quick, and I can pretty much say good-bye to having my gf tolerate and watch video games.

    But, if you can toggle it and only do it for a bit of fun here and there, it'd be a neat little trick.

  • darkenedwingdarkenedwing Registered User
    edited September 2009
    ugh I hate the 3D fad that has been going on for the past year or so.
    You know what? fuck 3D. Like when I went to go see UP and I was forced to sue the goddamned 3D glasses, they darkened the colors so much the whole movie looked like shit, and I don't know if something is wrong with me or what but through 3 3D movies ive seen at theaters, I couldn't see a single "3D" looking thing. It looked like a normal movie, but with shit for colors because of the 3D "sunglasses" I had to wear.

    /rant *breathes*

    I don't want 3D games.

    I went and saw Coraline and while I could see some 3D it fucked up the colors a lot. The screen just wasn't vibrant like it should be. It was muted and blah compared to without the glasses. The group of friends I went with felt the same and when we saw Up we refused to see it in 3D. And then Coraline on Blu-Ray's 3D option was beyond bad. I couldn't watch more than a scene in it. The colors were just awful and had a weird purple and green tint to them. It just kind of hurt to watch it like that. If 3D gaming starts anywhere near that bad I will not be getting in on that for a while.

    I know, the colors in 3D movies, because of the glasses, are just terrible. I seen Ice Age 3 in 2D instead of 3D and it was great. No glasses, and the colors were how they should be. I really feel I would of enjoyed UP more if it wasn't in 3D.

    image.php?type=sigpic&userid=29216&dateline=1296970870
  • Penguin_OtakuPenguin_Otaku Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    3D sucks and isn't fun.

    UP looked ok in 3D, would've enjoyed it just as much normally.

    Wasted money to see Superman Returns in 3D because none of the good scenes were actually in 3D.

    Fuck Sony and this idea.

    sig-1.jpg
  • HalfmexHalfmex Matter of fact... I didn't even give you my coat!Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    I don't want 3D games.
    Yeah, ditto. I've never watched a film or television show for which 3D has truly added something to the experience that would not have existed without it (and I've watched quite a bit of it over the years). "Stuff, like, comes right out at you, man!" was fun for the first few times I experienced it, after that the novelty wore off quickly. I really hope this trend dies out quickly; 3D was lame in the 80s and it hasn't gotten any better since.

    Quasi-related: They're planning to film a new Resident Evil movie (the Milla Jovovich kind). It will be in 3D.

  • BallmanBallman Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    Well, to play devil's advocate, that article snippet in the OP makes it sound like the 3D effect won't be created with different colors, but with alternating frames displayed by the TV. They don't give much info, though.

    JC of DI wrote:
    Mr. G wrote: »
    So, there's a video of Kurt Cobain in [Guitar Hero 5] out. I feel dirty watching this, he just looks wrong.

    Well Cobain's mo-cap session was completely useless, so you can't blame them.
  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    I don't really care for it either way, as the 3D movies I have seen didn't have the 3D add much to it. It doesn't help that I have glasses.

  • MazzyxMazzyx A Restoration through Revolution. Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    Saw half-blood prince with the opening in 3D. To tell the truth wasn't that great, but of course I found the movie rather blah overall so that might of tainted my view of the 3d.

    meijisig.png
  • FireflashFireflash Montreal, QCRegistered User regular
    edited September 2009
    Ballman wrote: »
    Well, to play devil's advocate, that article snippet in the OP makes it sound like the 3D effect won't be created with different colors, but with alternating frames displayed by the TV. They don't give much info, though.

    Yeah, but you need a TV that's made for 3d technology for it to work. Either a TV that has electronic 3D glasses (those hurt my eyes) or a TV that supports Sensio/RealD, the same glasses that you get when you go see movies in 3D. Gaming with those is easier on the eyes.

    PSN / XBL: PatParadize
  • dragonsamadragonsama Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    3D movies are stupid. The gimmick does not work and it gives me a headache. I'm sure this fad will pass in a year or 2 and all the people who buy these "3D" TVs will feel like schmucks.

  • DrakeDrake Blow it all up ForeverRegistered User regular
    edited September 2009
    As long as it's an optional feature it's fine with me. I'll never use it and Sony should be allowed to throw their money down a hole if they want.

  • Rigor MortisRigor Mortis Registered User
    edited September 2009
    This shit would be too expensive for users to be a draw. Sony needs to use that face-tracking software they got, combine it with the PSEye, and make head tracking a standard feature of games. Same result, no glasses, no messed up color, less cost all round.

  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    Fireflash wrote: »
    Ballman wrote: »
    Well, to play devil's advocate, that article snippet in the OP makes it sound like the 3D effect won't be created with different colors, but with alternating frames displayed by the TV. They don't give much info, though.

    Yeah, but you need a TV that's made for 3d technology for it to work. Either a TV that has electronic 3D glasses (those hurt my eyes) or a TV that supports Sensio/RealD, the same glasses that you get when you go see movies in 3D. Gaming with those is easier on the eyes.
    Sony plans to use shutter glasses for their 3D stuff.
    http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/f518a6b2-97e4-11de-8d3d-00144feabdc0.html
    Sony’s plans to hasten the mass market adoption of 3D technology by launching a range of 3D televisions globally by the end of next year received a further boost when the Blu-ray Disc Association said it would incorporate 3D into the Blu-ray technical format.

    Sony, which is a founding member of the BDA, announced earlier on Wednesday that it would introduce a 3D compatible Bravia HDTV in 2010 incorporating Sony’s proprietary high frame rate technology and ‘active-shutter’ electronic glasses to be worn by viewers.

    The association whose 180 members also include leading IT companies, rival consumer electronics manufacturers and content creators including Twentieth Century Fox, Walt Disney, and Warner Bros Entertainment, said it is working on a “uniform specification to ensure consistent delivery of 3D content across the Blu-ray disc platform.

    “The rapid and enthusiastic consumer adoption of Blu-ray disc, coupled with the format’s technical capabilities and capacity make it the ideal format for bringing a vibrant 3D experience to consumers,” the Association said.

    While the BDA said it will examine “a number of criteria” before settling on a 3D specification, its decision to incorporate 3D technology into the Blu-ray format is seen as crucial if the industry is to avoid another damaging ‘format war’ akin to that between Blu-ray and HD-DVD, which Sony’s Blu-ray format eventually won, or VHS and Betamax.

    TV manufacturers and consumer electronics groups are betting that 3D technology will provide the next big boost to the industry following the switch from analogue to digital TV and the boom in high definition TV sales over the past few years. However the leading HDTV makers, including Hyundai, Sony, Samsung and Panasonic, have each developed their own 3D technology systems.

    Korea’s Hyundai is already producing early 3D sets for the Japanese market and Panasonic has been demonstrating 3D home theatre system aimed at the Japanese market.

    The Los-Angeles-based Association said that ‘at a minimum’ the specification will require delivery of 1080p resolution to each eye and backward compatibility for both discs and players, meaning that 3D discs will also include a 2D version of the film that can be viewed on existing 2D players and 3D players will enable consumers to playback their existing libraries of 2D content.

    “The BDA intends to take full advantage of the format’s high bandwidth and capacity to achieve the very highest possible quality 3D experience,” said Victor Matsuda, chairman of the Association’s global promotions committee. “Just as Blu-ray Disc has paved the way for next generation, high definition home entertainment, it will also set the standard for 3D home viewing in the future.”

    Cheesy video here:
    http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/09/sony-gets-3d-fever-3d-bravia-tv-next-year-playstation-3-support-planned/

  • MorvidusMorvidus Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    The future of 3D is not in glasses, its in autostereoscopy. Of course, you need triple the resolution, but it wasn't long ago when I though 680x460 was fucking uber.

  • FireflashFireflash Montreal, QCRegistered User regular
    edited September 2009
    I don't think head tracking would have the same result. In real life we see depth because we combine 2 images together. With head tracking you still only get one image.

    PSN / XBL: PatParadize
  • FireflashFireflash Montreal, QCRegistered User regular
    edited September 2009
    Yeah. Those electronic glasses hurt my eyes. The TV I've tested it on isn't a Sony but still, I figure it's the same tech. It's pretty cool at first but after 10-15 minutes I want to stop playing.

    PSN / XBL: PatParadize
  • MoioinkMoioink Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    I am open minded about 3D but next year is too soon. In a few years time with PS4 and cheaper 3D capable TVs I think this could be a neat way to play games.

  • RonaldoTheGypsyRonaldoTheGypsy Do you like dags? Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    I wear my sunglasses at night

    so I can so I can

    play ps3

    I'm sure some people will enjoy it.

    I'll stick to my dumb computer games and retro-fitted Wii nonsense.

    RonaldoTheGypsy.png
  • Rigor MortisRigor Mortis Registered User
    edited September 2009
    Fireflash wrote: »
    I don't think head tracking would have the same result. In real life we see depth because we combine 2 images together. With head tracking you still only get one image.
    But the movement of objects in the field of view also produces depth perception. I've been told this is, erm, why chickens and pigeons bob their heads when they walk. So unless your head was braced against something to keep it perfectly still, your body's natural constant slight movement should help make head tracking quite convincing.

  • SlicerSlicer Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    The only movie I've ever seen in 3D was Up, which did it spectacularly. Even wearing the 3D glasses over my own glasses wasn't too much of a bother after a little bit. If the 3D this offers is even half as good as Up's, then I see this as a good thing.

    At any rate this sounds optional so I don't see why there should be any fuss about it.

  • FireflashFireflash Montreal, QCRegistered User regular
    edited September 2009
    Fireflash wrote: »
    I don't think head tracking would have the same result. In real life we see depth because we combine 2 images together. With head tracking you still only get one image.
    But the movement of objects in the field of view also produces depth perception. I've been told this is, erm, why chickens and pigeons bob their heads when they walk. So unless your head was braced against something to keep it perfectly still, your body's natural constant slight movement should help make head tracking quite convincing.

    Ah I didn't know that, that's a fun fact.

    PSN / XBL: PatParadize
  • Dignified PauperDignified Pauper Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    Why don't we just make this:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n2gzRQ5f3No

    PSN: DignifiedPauper
    3DSFF: 5026-4429-6577
  • EvilMonkeyEvilMonkey Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    As long as they don't decide to make something like an Uncharted 3D with no vanilla-mode option I could care less. 3D-only shovelware, go nuts but leave me in my non-3D viewing world where my head doesn't hurt after 20 minutes. Even Up messed with me but admittedly not as bad as other shows / movies.

    [PSN: SciencePiggy] [Steam]
  • MagicPrimeMagicPrime "We're ready to believe you..." FireSideWizardRegistered User regular
    edited September 2009
    If they make a 3D game where you have to wear glasses. Imagine if they took it up a level and made the glasses with a bluetooth connection to the PS3 and the glasses acted like your HUD!

    flzthy.png
    This neo-feudalism would be more tolerable if our betters had fancy titles.
  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    MagicPrime wrote: »
    If they make a 3D game where you have to wear glasses. Imagine if they took it up a level and made the glasses with a bluetooth connection to the PS3 and the glasses acted like your HUD!

    They would then cost a bajillion dollars instead of just a lot of money.

  • cloudeaglecloudeagle Zhu-Li, do the thing! Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    Couscous wrote: »
    MagicPrime wrote: »
    If they make a 3D game where you have to wear glasses. Imagine if they took it up a level and made the glasses with a bluetooth connection to the PS3 and the glasses acted like your HUD!

    They would then cost a bajillion dollars instead of just a lot of money.

    Wasn't it $100 per pair of glasses under Sony's plan?

    Yeah, after a half-century of freebie 3D glasses, that plan won't fly.

    3DS: 0344-9335-6762
  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    cloudeagle wrote: »
    Couscous wrote: »
    MagicPrime wrote: »
    If they make a 3D game where you have to wear glasses. Imagine if they took it up a level and made the glasses with a bluetooth connection to the PS3 and the glasses acted like your HUD!

    They would then cost a bajillion dollars instead of just a lot of money.

    Wasn't it $100 per pair of glasses under Sony's plan?

    Yeah, after a half-century of freebie 3D glasses, that plan won't fly.

    Nah, that was just wikipedia. I'm trying to find a price for them other than on ebay.

  • Mr_GrinchMr_Grinch Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    I've never heard so much bitching in a long time. 3D is a fantastic development, the polarising glasses are great, perhaps you've all been to shitty cinemas. The prints are generally lightened to compensate for the glasses darkening them.

    And for those that can't "see" the 3D effects, things aren't really MEANT to pop right out and be in your face, the best use of 3D is for depth, it adds extra realism and a sense of immersion. Personally I'll be shelling out for a new tv when the opportunity arrises.

    Steam: Sir_Grinch
    PSN: SirGrinchX
    Xbox Live: SirGrinch X
  • Cameron_TalleyCameron_Talley Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    The only problem with UP in 3d was that I had to keep taking off my glasses and the 3d glasses to wipe the tears away...

    Also, does anyone remember pressing select in "Rad Racer" to engage the 3D mode?

    3DS code: 0404-6826-4588 PM if you add.
  • DiarmuidDiarmuid Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    I can imagine WipeOut HD being almost brain meltingly good in 3D, but there's no way in Hell I'm buying an insanely expensive TV just to find out.

    7civoyfa87k5.png
  • darleysamdarleysam Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    Mr_Grinch wrote: »
    I've never heard so much bitching in a long time. 3D is a fantastic development, the polarising glasses are great, perhaps you've all been to shitty cinemas. The prints are generally lightened to compensate for the glasses darkening them.

    And for those that can't "see" the 3D effects, things aren't really MEANT to pop right out and be in your face, the best use of 3D is for depth, it adds extra realism and a sense of immersion. Personally I'll be shelling out for a new tv when the opportunity arrises.

    Hi5 my non-luddite brother. I've only recently bought a new HDTV so I won't be upgrading yet (Sony's plan of every home having a 3d-capable TV by the end of 2010 is absurd to a whole new level), but I am absolutely for the inclusion of 3D technology in things.

    It's not going to be mandatory, people bitching about that need to grow up.
    It won't be anaglyph either, that's unreliable and butchers the colours.

    I've been to an IMAX twice and both times it was awesome.

  • BlueDestinyBlueDestiny Registered User
    edited September 2009
    Drake wrote: »
    As long as it's an optional feature it's fine with me. I'll never use it and Sony should be allowed to throw their money down a hole if they want.

    Any sufficiently advanced friendship is indistinguishable from magic.
  • subediisubedii Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    From a technical standpoint, I don't think 3D is really feasible for this generation. With films yes, but not for games.

    The reason you need a TV with at least 120Hz is because the image has to be rendered twice, once for each eye. To get approximately 30FPS, that means you're actually rendering 60 frames every second. This is how Nvidia's 3D goggles for the PC work as well, and whilst they do work, it entails a lot more processing power if you want to use them. If you go less than that (this isn't the first time Nvidia have tried 3D goggles, and whilst it's Sony doing it here, the hardware and the principles at work are fundamentally the same) you're going to for 15FPS, which back in the old days, caused any number of headaches and nausea simply because the picture wasn't smooth.

    Most of the high end games this generation have a hard enough time maintaining a steady 30 FPS, quite a few don't, even after they drop the resolution from 720p. Having to render twice as many frames will result in some hefty slowdown, even on older generation games that weren't particularly pushing the hardware. I think a game like CoD4 would probably be guaranteed headache territory until some newer hardware becomes available.


    EDIT: Actually I think I got my numbers wrong for the Nvidia glasses. The new ones output at 60FPS (60 per eye, 120 frames rendered total per second), the old ones from years ago output at 30. V-Sync needs to be kept on as well in order for it to work, but that's standard in PS3 games IIRC.

  • AbsoluteZeroAbsoluteZero Registered User regular
    edited September 2009
    Figure out how to do it without me having to wear some goofy fucking glasses and I'm game.

    Also, why does shit need to pop out of my tv? That's not very realistic. I'd rather have realistic depth perception, as though rather than looking at a tv, I'm looking out a window into another world.

    ix3uu000mwdx.jpg
    3DS Friend Code: 0817-5033-8184 // Nintendo Network ID: AbsoluteZero
«13
Sign In or Register to comment.