Oh god don't remind me.USSR said:
3-D is great thought! My dad's always going on about how it's just the latest fad. I still hope it'll stick.
Killzone 2 Getting 3D Update
- Thread starter Logan Westbrook
- Start date
3-D is great thought! My dad's always going on about how it's just the latest fad. I still hope it'll stick.
Hehe, funny, because my dad's always going on about how he went to 3D cinemas when he was a kid.Danny Ocean said:
Maybe you can make some good 3D movies? I forgot his name, but one of the directors who made 3D big back in the 50s actually only had one eye!Jaredin said:
Yeah that's the same thing with me, so I stuck it out and after finally getting the sniper, I loved it. His Spot and Mark ability is mad. The DLC maps are all in a fairly decent bundle now too.Jumplion said:
Anyone who's still into KZ2 know whether people play the map-packs?
Sorry, I think I was a bit misled on that, it seems I didn't fully understand the problem and it is not really anything to do with the refresh rate of any screen or projector... but the camera.SaintWaldo said:
Ok, let me put it this way. One of the reasons I am really annoyed at 3D as being the "next big revolution in mainstream cinema technology" is why the hell are we moving on to 3D when we haven't even gotten 2D working properly?
For example, every single film since The Jazz Singer has been shot at 24 frames/second as standard (bloody talkies, ruined cinema if you ask me*) but have you ever played a video game where the framerate is only 24 frames/sec? It's horrible and juddery isn't it?
Well the same exact problem exists for film, panning shots have to be EXTREMELY slow or use other tricks like focus on an object that moves with the camera in the foreground in centre of view, the background judders but is out of focus and hopefully ignored.
The thing is for DECADES everyone blamed something called "3:2 Pulldown" which is an awkward name for the solution to where if you have 24 frames/sec of footage yet must refresh equally 60 times per second, the solution is to show one frame for 3 passes, then the next frame for 2 passes, then the next frame for 3 passes. Thought this does cause a certain type of barely noticeable judder, it doesn't cause the judder most often seen in panning or fast shots as the problem is in the very raw prints themselves that are not collecting data quick enough to smoothly update how the picture is changing.
All this talk of 120hz and 24hz playback are red herrings. The TVs and projectors aren't causing judder, it's just in the past their blurriness hid an INHERENT problem with cinema film. The idea that the essence of cinema is absolutely pure and wonderful and "as god intended it" is a lie.
Frame Interpolation attempts to solve this by basically looking at two frames of 24fps media and making up 3 "joining frames" based on how the next frame looks and though it looks smooth when it comes to panning shots, it looks like ass as 75% or more of the frames are literally made up on the fly by a computer algorithm.
Really, the next revolution in film should NOT have been this useless 3D crap but start filming stuff at 60 frames per second and playing it back at that speed in cinema and on blu-ray.
See that would REALLY change cinema as so much of filmography is just about keeping the shot as still as possible as if there is any big movement then it all ends up like an earthquake as people seem to teleport around a room. The camera would have a far more natural view and able to move fluidly and catch subtler smoother movements.
Only once THAT technology is pervasive, cheap and accepted throughout cinema and the home should they then try to get it working in 3D. But the problem is frame-rate is a hard sell to the mass market.
And the great thing about tech like this is... it can be rolled out TODAY for the consumers at NO EXTRA COST as every single HDTV and monitor is 60hz compatible, the HDMI cable can handle the bitrate and so can the blu-ray discs. The only slight problem is the capacity, with 2.5x more frames per second the a 20GB movie would be inflated to 50GB and many cinema films on Blu-ray are larger than 20GB on blu-ray when shooting at only 24-frames per second. But Sony are working on a way to up the blu-ray capacity even higher than 50GB that would be available with even a firmware update.
The problem is for the industry how the hell do you sell 'higher refresh-rate' to the mass market? 3D is an easily marketed gimmick, people don't care about annoying shit that they can't put their finger on, they just want someTHING they can say "oh, it's got this".
In fact, that is what I'd much rather have for Killzone 2: a solid 60 frames per second refresh rate with no screen tear, lower the controller latency (input lag) too.
Wipeout HD plays in 1080p60 and it REALLY benefits from that high res and high frame-rate and when there are too many explosions it lowers the resolution temporarily rather than the frame rate.
http://www.projectorcentral.com/judder_24p.htm
I think Asehujiko made an overlooked point about the hardware. Back oh so long ago, Microsoft and Sony probably weren't on the ball about the upcoming 3D innovation... my first 360 didn't even have an HDMI port on it from 2006, so I'm going to guess that it probably won't be up to the task of running 3D games.Asehujiko said:
I can't really see the advantage of 3D gaming in terms of the up-converting that Sony is talking about with previous titles. I can possibly understand LittleBigPlanet... the added depth would help in some FPS games, but I can't see this being good across the board. Maybe the industry will prove me wrong over time.
Why on Earth would you try to update such a great shooter with such a stupid gimmick. Sure having such beautifully detailed Helghast soldiers poppng out at you in 3-D during an ambush would be cool at first, the whole effect would wear itself out after a while in my opinion. Plus, how do we know this will actually work?
Then why are so many developers, this Killzone 2 update and NINTENDO AGAIN are trying to do it again?Fox242 said:How could we? Alot of gamers' eyes were ruined by that damnt thing.Not G. Ivingname said:
Never forgot.
It's completely different technology, but don't let that stop you from constantly saying that it's the same thing and getting your increasingly inane laughs.Not G. Ivingname said:Then why are so many developers, this Killzone 2 update and NINTENDO AGAIN are trying to do it again?Fox242 said:How could we? Alot of gamers' eyes were ruined by that damnt thing.Not G. Ivingname said:
Never forgot.
That said it is completely pointless for Sony to do this if 3D compatible TV market penetration is barely there. Then again they thought HD was going to take off like a rocket when the PS3 first came out so it's not like they're good at understanding how the market functions.
They don't seam to grasp that a flat screen can easily immerse a gamer for long periods of time. Why they think they need to add a third demension is beyond me. For Sony, it might be forgivable, since it looks like they are just applying the tech from Avatar and such films to gaming, but why Nintendo trying to make a 3D portable system when the virtual boy tanked, I can't even imagen (I am refering to the upcoming "3DS").AceDiamond said:It's completely different technology, but don't let that stop you from constantly saying that it's the same thing and getting your increasingly inane laughs.Not G. Ivingname said:Then why are so many developers, this Killzone 2 update and NINTENDO AGAIN are trying to do it again?Fox242 said:How could we? Alot of gamers' eyes were ruined by that damnt thing.Not G. Ivingname said:
Never forgot.
That said it is completely pointless for Sony to do this if 3D compatible TV market penetration is barely there. Then again they thought HD was going to take off like a rocket when the PS3 first came out so it's not like they're good at understanding how the market functions.
This looks epic! Though I don't think I have a 3D TV which sucks. If I did then I'd definately check this out (I didn't catch it the first time round but witha 3D upgrade it would totally be worth it).
do you own a 3D TV?
if no STFU because you dont know what your talking about...
I own one and I can play my pc games on a 1080p 3D monitor and it is fucking amazing it makes a massive difference in COD4 online. you those prolems of bumping into stuff as you cant see where they are? All of that dissappers with 3D.
As for headaches i have played for 4 hours straight with no problems at all.
As my monitor is polozerised not the shutter tech is can be use for 3D console gaming as well
Avatar the game is sweet visuals in 3D (story and gameplay still suck thouggh)
if no STFU because you dont know what your talking about...
I own one and I can play my pc games on a 1080p 3D monitor and it is fucking amazing it makes a massive difference in COD4 online. you those prolems of bumping into stuff as you cant see where they are? All of that dissappers with 3D.
As for headaches i have played for 4 hours straight with no problems at all.
As my monitor is polozerised not the shutter tech is can be use for 3D console gaming as well
Avatar the game is sweet visuals in 3D (story and gameplay still suck thouggh)
I got my 3D glasses from the Coraline blu-ray so I'm set....
my TV can't even do 1080p let alone 3D so screw that
my TV can't even do 1080p let alone 3D so screw that
no third party because Sony doesnt really have any. Even Kojima is releasing the next MGS on 360. Sad...they let opportunities slip away. They are lucky they own so many devs
Uh? What?
Sorry, but this doesn't make much sense. 3d is a basic feature that can be turned on and off in hardware;
I've seen it with my PC...
So what exactly are they doing to games? Tweaking? I suppose making the settings as optimal as possible would be worthwhile; it can be a little troublesome.
But, I'm not going to bother with 3d while it still involves glasses.
I'll stick to my PC and the 60 year old Anaglyph technology (red & blue filter glasses) for now, if I bother with it at all...
The glasses are insanely cheap, and, sure, you lose colour, but at least you don't need anything other than a reasonably fast graphics card and some drivers...
Meanwhile, I'm waiting for the jump from stereoscopic to holographic 3d... Like seereal's prototype displays...
That's going to be so much more comfortable in the long run, and you won't need those damn glasses.
Also, the effects won't have to be scaled down to reduce headaches, so...
Yeah.
But what does 3d actually accomplish for gaming anyway?
The only thing that comes to mind is first-person platforming.
Ever had to make difficult jumps in a shooter?
Played Mirror's edge at all?
One of the big problems with jumping in first person, is that it's highly dependent on depth perception. Without it, you can't judge the distance right, and usually get it wrong.
So... 3d... More games like Mirror's edge?
XD
Sorry, but this doesn't make much sense. 3d is a basic feature that can be turned on and off in hardware;
I've seen it with my PC...
So what exactly are they doing to games? Tweaking? I suppose making the settings as optimal as possible would be worthwhile; it can be a little troublesome.
But, I'm not going to bother with 3d while it still involves glasses.
I'll stick to my PC and the 60 year old Anaglyph technology (red & blue filter glasses) for now, if I bother with it at all...
The glasses are insanely cheap, and, sure, you lose colour, but at least you don't need anything other than a reasonably fast graphics card and some drivers...
Meanwhile, I'm waiting for the jump from stereoscopic to holographic 3d... Like seereal's prototype displays...
That's going to be so much more comfortable in the long run, and you won't need those damn glasses.
Also, the effects won't have to be scaled down to reduce headaches, so...
Yeah.
But what does 3d actually accomplish for gaming anyway?
The only thing that comes to mind is first-person platforming.
Ever had to make difficult jumps in a shooter?
Played Mirror's edge at all?
One of the big problems with jumping in first person, is that it's highly dependent on depth perception. Without it, you can't judge the distance right, and usually get it wrong.
So... 3d... More games like Mirror's edge?
XD