What a great idea. Instead of having to invest way too much time, effort, and development into just normal good graphics let's invest even more into THREE-DIMENSIONAL graphics, thereby having games with atrocious gameplay because all the money goes into a gimmick.
It won't be viable until the price is within a normal person's reach.
Regardless of the costs involved, I don't think 3D sports games would even work unless we start watching live sports in 3D, I mean most sporting games resemble watching it on a tv don't they
As someone who wears glasses every waking hour, and one who prefers to wear a headset mic+phones, I really don't get what all the whining about glasses is about (though I might prefer a filtering version to a shuttering version, hardware prices notwithstanding).
GeneralGrant said:
What a great idea. Instead of having to invest way too much time, effort, and development into just normal good graphics let's invest even more into THREE-DIMENSIONAL graphics, thereby having games with atrocious gameplay because all the money goes into a gimmick.
It won't be viable until the price is within a normal person's reach.
Implementing 3D from a software perspective can be as simple as rendering the same scene twice, from slightly different angles. You could take a 60fps game and make it better than 30fps+3D (not needing to recalc netcode, input, physics, sound, ai). (This much can be covered in a few days in an undergraduate second or third year graphics programming course, if you include time for a small project demonstrating the topic.)
Video drivers (and maybe the cards themselves, depending on how you wanted to handle output) would also need an update, but again it would essentially be doing what it was before, only a little more so. I expect there are more efficient ways to do it (some of which can perhaps not be pulled up into the graphics library or hardware), but the big difficulty is in the display hardware, which anyone so inclined can solve with some money and some glasses.
Sporky111 said:
Motion controls seemed like a good idea, and I still don't think they've been taken advantage of in a way that makes me want to give up a controller, even with the Wii, Natal and that-Sony-thing-that-I-just-heard-of.
That's kind of a broken comparison in that you don't have to give up 2D, and you will probably have a choice between lower-fidelity 3D and higher-fidelity 2D. At least until a hypothetical future when 3D becomes the standard on consoles, where even if you can still output in 2D, you'll probably be using the lower-fidelity 3D resources and processes. (But PC games need to stay scalable, regardless.)
On the other hand, I wish more games supported this kind of supplemental motion control.
4:26, 6:52, 7:17 for e.g., if you're impatient. It's kind of a dry plug, but it's the concept that's important.
(He's using his head movement to look around in-game, independent of "forward". ~145 USD on ebay.)
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
