I watched some games running in 3D yesterday.

Discussion in 'Video Games and Technology' started by Prowl, Mar 22, 2010.

  1. Prowl

    Prowl Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2002
    Posts:
    18,619
    News Credits:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    287
    Likes:
    +34
    Motorstorm, MLB: The Show, Wipeout, and LBP.

    Wipeout was ok, but Motorstorm, The Show, and LBP convinced me that if this is relatively affordable and supported, I'm sooooo fucking in.

    I didn't understand what people meant when they said Gran Turismo in 3D was a different experience because your own natural instincts to gauge perspective kicked in and you found yourself driving better, but Motorstorm looked fucking amazing.

    It really can't be described, but I can say that it looks better than the movies look because the games already have positional and 3 dimensional information, so translating that to visual and making it work well shines a lot smoother than with movies.

    I hope this shit isn't ridiculously expensive because I really want to play the next Elder's Scroll or Dragon Age like this.
     
  2. Hook

    Hook Out of Options Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2002
    Posts:
    11,454
    Trophy Points:
    267
    Location:
    Gatineau, Quebec
    Likes:
    +2
    Facebook:
    Sounds awesome. Where did you see this/what kind of setup was it?
     
  3. Prowl

    Prowl Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2002
    Posts:
    18,619
    News Credits:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    287
    Likes:
    +34
    If you have a Sony Story nearby, they have a demo set. Some of them have playable Wipeout, and sometimes they have a video showing as bunch of different examples of video and games. The Motorstorm, MLB, and LBP looked the best. Stardust looked really awesome as well, but the other 3 had serious depth.
     
  4. Smasher

    Smasher HUNKY BEATS

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2004
    Posts:
    12,705
    News Credits:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    256
    Likes:
    +3
    Wait until you see some games programmed for 3D.

    Basically, every object in a game has some 3D information already.
    It graphs as X, Y, and Z: vertical, horizontal, and depth (or distance from the screen) respectively.

    Well, when games are made to run in 3D, it really enhances the illusion of depth, but all of the Z data is negative; that is, away from the screen.
    When games are programmed for 3D and have a positve value in Z that's when things come off the screen.

    I haven't seen the Sony games you mention, but I suspect that there is no positve Z data, or some has been added here or there for effect.
    When a game is programmed with 3D in mind all objects are given Z data relative to the viewer and they are going to much better than the tech demos you see now -however impressive they may be.
     
  5. Prowl

    Prowl Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2002
    Posts:
    18,619
    News Credits:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    287
    Likes:
    +34
    Nah, there was stuff in +Z, if you mean coming out of the screen. The vehicles in Motorstorm definitely have the illusion that it was in the forground, and in Stardust there are times when the ship flies towards you to move to the next planet, and that one definitely popped into the +Z.

    Regardless... screw movies, I'm buying into 3D for games.
     
  6. Smasher

    Smasher HUNKY BEATS

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2004
    Posts:
    12,705
    News Credits:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    256
    Likes:
    +3
    Well, that's cool.
    Sony is smart then.

    But I still say that when games are created with Z data that all relates to each other, then you will see the GLORIOUS POWER of the THIRD DIMENSION!
    I am particularly wating for there to be effects, like smoke or for, that is thicker the 'closer' it is to the player.
     
  7. Joe Moore

    Joe Moore Is Not Jim... Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2003
    Posts:
    14,471
    News Credits:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    262
    Likes:
    +7
    Ebay:
    Twitter:
    As a glasses wearer, 3D has no appeal for me. The pack-in glasses for the setups aren't meant to accommodate people with existing eyewear, and 3D glasses that do accommodate existing glasses users are an additional, and not very cheap, expense. I can't see myself shelling out for something like this regardless. It makes an already expensive hobby that much harder to justify. Thankfully it's not mandatory.
     
  8. Prowl

    Prowl Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2002
    Posts:
    18,619
    News Credits:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    287
    Likes:
    +34
    I wear glasses too, and they seem to fit well over them. You need to check it out though, Joe. I didn't think I'd care that much until I saw it moving... I hated the feeling that it gave me, like I needed something new, even though I know I didn't remotely need it, lol.
     
  9. Joe Moore

    Joe Moore Is Not Jim... Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2003
    Posts:
    14,471
    News Credits:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    262
    Likes:
    +7
    Ebay:
    Twitter:
    Which glasses did they "showcase"? Were they the standard ones coming with the TV or blu-ray set or were they the ones you had to buy separately? I would need to buy at least 4 and up to 6 extra pair of glasses.

    EDIT:
    Actually, none of the TV's or blu-ray players out actually come with any glasses. And at $150 - $350 each, that's just absurdly expensive.

    EDIT 2:
    Plus the Samsung ones need batteries...Most of them are sold separately? Consumers are really in for some serious sticker shock when they actually go to buy this stuff.
     
  10. Smasher

    Smasher HUNKY BEATS

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2004
    Posts:
    12,705
    News Credits:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    256
    Likes:
    +3
    Joe's point is valid.
    Currently, the glasses that fit over eyewear are quite expensive.

    They need to come down a lot for the market penetration they want.
    Typically, they are so expensive because they actively shutter.

    But, it is possible to use glasses that are just polarized.

    Prowl, did you notice the glasses you had?
    Were they NVIDIA?
    If so, they would have had green earpieces.

    Did they sort of 'brighten' if you looked away from the display?
    If that was the case, that would mean they stopped shuttering because the display was not in view.

    If it was not NVIDIA glasses nor another type of actively shuttering brand, then that would mean that Sony is at least exploring passive, polarized glasses and that is encouraging.

    [RANT]
    I really wish that "my friend" hadn't stolen the investment money and actually taken care of business, when I worked for the company that had a chance to get in on the ground floor of 3D entertainment.
    It would be nice to be actively involved in this stuff again.
    [/RANT]
     
  11. Prowl

    Prowl Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2002
    Posts:
    18,619
    News Credits:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    287
    Likes:
    +34
    While he is no expert, the guy at the Sony store said that he heard bundles were going to be part of the setup, and at Best Buy, the 50inch $2,999 50 inch comes with two pairs. They are charge through a typical USB like the PS3 controller.

    Everyone call me a sucker, because I am probably early-adopting this. The shit I saw yesterday (especially motorstorm) was amazing. I think a lot of people who can't play fast racing games, etc etc, will find themselves doing better as the innate perspective instinct kicks in and you can better see things as they wiz right by you.
     
    Last edited: Mar 22, 2010
  12. Smasher

    Smasher HUNKY BEATS

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2004
    Posts:
    12,705
    News Credits:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    256
    Likes:
    +3
    If they charge through USB then they actively shutter.
    Glasses that actively shutter are supposed to be easier on your eyes for long term viewing although that benefit is never stated so that it doesn't imply the opposite: 3D viewing may be hard on your eyes.

    I won't call you a sucker.
    Not for this, anyway.
     
  13. RabidYak

    RabidYak Go Ninja Go Ninja Go

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2003
    Posts:
    8,476
    Trophy Points:
    232
    Likes:
    +40
    I can't wait to get my hands on this stuff either, althougth i'll probably sit out for 6 months or so whilst everybody thrashes out the pricing and gets the competition going.

    I've never had any problem with wearing polarised cinema glasses in front of my regular ones, althougth I suppose active shutter pairs might be a bit more agro with the extra weight.
     
  14. ChldsPlay

    ChldsPlay Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2006
    Posts:
    2,071
    Trophy Points:
    186
    Likes:
    +0
    I'll probably be getting this some time later this year when there is more material available and once there is more of a selection of TVs to choose from. I have the money though (yay work. comp.) so it's just a matter of time.
     
  15. Prowl

    Prowl Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2002
    Posts:
    18,619
    News Credits:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    287
    Likes:
    +34
    Yeah, as much as I want to buy one Right Now, I may wait a bit for A) the price to submit to competition B) There to be at least a handful of supporting games. I don't mind replaying Motorstorm like this.

    That's one thing I noticed. Watching Avatar, I felt a little strained afterwards. Watching this felt a lot like simply watching it, but it was in 3D. And for all the complaining about the glasses, they look slick.

    By the way, Sega had this technology during the Master System days.
     

Share This Page