3D Gaming*

So how is Killzone 3 working? If it's half 720p (from Mazingerdude's calculations)...at 60 FPS...isn't that 30 hz per eye?

If it's 120hz, how are they quadrupling framerate and only halving resolution? Wouldn't that be too demanding?
 
Rangers said:
So how is Killzone 3 working? If it's half 720p (from Mazingerdude's calculations)...at 60 FPS...isn't that 30 hz per eye?
Click to expand...

Yes, it should be 30fps per eye. Guerilla Games mentioned that they are shooting for 720p "or equivalent". Not sure what tricks they want to employ. ^_^ Clearly they have a tons of optimization to do.
 
So according to Shifty, then Killzone 3 would be flickery (30 hz per eye)?

And if they just halve the resolution, it shouldn't require any other downgrades (half resolution, double framerate)? And should be very simple to program?
 
Rangers said:
So according to Shifty, then Killzone 3 would be flickery (30 hz per eye)?
Click to expand...
gongo was asking about 60 fps monitors. In principle, same as the Sega Master System's 3D specs, you could have 3D on any display using externally sync'd specs. Synchroinisation could maybe be an issue, but it'd shouldn't prevent 3D. However, if we did this on a 60 hz display, we'd get 30 hz per eye - Flicker Central! The new wave of 3D displays buffer left and right eye images and present them to the user as fast as possible; 60 times a second per eye on a 120 Hz TV, 100 times per second on a 200 Hz TV, etc. The game can refresh these frame at whatever refresh rate it likes, at 10 fps if the developer so chooses, or a juddery variable framerate, but the eyes will get a solid, high frequency alternation reducing the visible flickering effect.
 
Rangers said:
So according to Shifty, then Killzone 3 would be flickery (30 hz per eye)?
Click to expand...

Basically you see each frame two times, just as with cinemas where you usually see each frame 3 times. Or with HDTVs supporting 24p you see each frame up to four times. The display itself won't flicker and that's the main goal.
 
So, the problem in 3D is that you have to render the image twice...forcing devs to lower graphic fidelity in the name of an enhanced gameplay experience aka 3D gaming which probably reaches only a small fraction of actual gamers!

Why the heck are devs not willing to sacrifice graphics fidelity to maintain stable 60Hz gameplay - which has a positive impact on gameplay as well, reaching all (i.e. 100%) gamers??

It seems that devs don't have a problem now to introduce two rendering modes: a 2D (high fidelity) and a 3D mode - why not including two render modes, one 2D 30Hz+graphics bling and one 2D with 60Hz?!?
 
Because the difference in experience going from 30hz to 60hz is a lot smaller than going from 2D to 3D. I don't suppose it's justifiable in most cases... but some games do do this with faster MP mode.
 
Iwata 3DS interview:
http://games.venturebeat.com/2010/0...-how-company-toiled-for-years-on-3ds-concept/

We started working on the Nintendo DS. During that development, we never thought of doing 3D. One of the reasons was our failed experiments. Since we introduced dual screens including one touchscreen, we thought we couldn’t afford to add anything more. As soon as the development of the DS was completed six years ago, we immediately started working on the successor, which is today called the Nintendo 3DS. But even then, we did not think of doing 3D at the outset.

The first challenge was to beef up the capabilities of the DS. About two years ago, someone suggested to us that we should incorporate 3D into our design. But a lot of people opposed the idea. The sentiment was that we had failed so many times. We decided to give it a try. The opinion of the developers changed as soon as they saw the images. It was more attractive.
Click to expand...
 
Vizio to introduce Passive 3D err.... 3DTV:
http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/s...Grade_3D_TVs_That_Use_Passive_Technology/4920

You asked for it and Vizio's bringing it. Passive 3D technology means you won't have to shell out $150 for a pair of battery operated glasses, and that's something that people seem to like.

At the ESA Line expo, Vizio is going to be demonstrating a 65 inch television that uses passive 3D tech. There's no word on availability or pricing, but since it's aimed at traditional consumers – and it's from Vizio – it should be fairly reasonable.
Click to expand...

EDIT:
Interview with Sony's Arturo Jordan (product manager) on 3DTV issues and solutions:
http://www.cepro.com/article/breaking_sony_3d_news_from_cepro_live_glasses_ir_interference_more/K5
 
It's easy enough with DLP projection ... DLP has huge amount of excess bandwidth, 120 or 144 Hz is really not a problem. So just put a polarization filter wheel in front and hey presto, "passive" 3D.
 
Billy Idol said:
So, the problem in 3D is that you have to render the image twice...forcing devs to lower graphic fidelity in the name of an enhanced gameplay experience aka 3D gaming which probably reaches only a small fraction of actual gamers!
Click to expand...

What does it matter to the 2d user if the fidelity decreases in 3d? So far we actually benefited from it. Thanks to its engine overhaul to make 3d possible at acceptable framerates and high image quality, we can now enjoy Stardust HD at native 1080p and 60fps in multiplayer mode. That game looked amazing back then, now it looks even better. Looking at the Killzone3 trailers in 2d, Guerilla isn't exactly dialing back the spectacle either.
 
MfA said:
It's easy enough with DLP projection ... DLP has huge amount of excess bandwidth, 120 or 144 Hz is really not a problem. So just put a polarization filter wheel in front and hey presto, "passive" 3D.
Click to expand...

As long as you have a screen that won't de-polarize the result.
There currently don't appear to be a lot of reasonably priced silver screens available.

For a DLP projector passive 3D is a much better solution than shutter glasses IMO, you'll get less brightness, and the manufacturing cost differential should be minimal, but until silver screens are widely available at reasonable prices, I can't see any of the manufacturers jumping in.
 
Rear projection uses mostly lenticular and embedded beads I think, Both should preserve polarization AFAIK.
 
Sigfried1977 said:
What does it matter to the 2d user if the fidelity decreases in 3d? So far we actually benefited from it. Thanks to its engine overhaul to make 3d possible at acceptable framerates and high image quality, we can now enjoy Stardust HD at native 1080p and 60fps in multiplayer mode. That game looked amazing back then, now it looks even better. Looking at the Killzone3 trailers in 2d, Guerilla isn't exactly dialing back the spectacle either.
Click to expand...

You got me wrong here...I did not say that the devs downgrade the 2D case (this would be ridiculous), but that they obviously have to downgrade 3D mode to make it run, and they are not afraid of it due to the 3D buzz they get....why not do the same for a 60Hz gameplay option was my question, as a lot of core gamers would appreciate this (maybe even a higher fraction of the consumers, compared to the fraction of 3D consumers they target)!
 
I agree that a big advantage of 3D support could be that more and more 2D games would get 60fps support. That's not necessarily a bad thing, imho. Better controls with Move combined with better framerates could focus the attention more on better gameplay, while there is still a 3D experience available if you want a graphical wow-factor. Nice to have that kind of choice. ;)

I have no idea how this turns out in practice, but looking at a game like Super Stardust HD now supporting 1920x1080x60 is certainly promising.
 
Some weeks ago, I saw 3d content on a big screen, with polarized glasses.

The 3d effects were great, in my opinion, but, is the shutter glasses method supposed to be better?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

F
Dedicated gaming GPUs bottom of the priority list?
2
Replies
34
Views
3K
Seanspeed
S
F
RDNA5 Speculation
Replies
2
Views
1K
Erinyes
E
R
Gaming and gaming hardware trends
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
eastmen
E
B
Game Engine Convergence And The Problem With UE5
4 5 6
Replies
104
Views
17K
cheapchips
C
Cyan
Playtron : new Linux based platform-agnostic open gaming OS
Replies
10
Views
2K
MfA
M
Back
Top