3D coming to all PS3 Games in 2010

gord said:
Firslty I'm not an expert on this but:

200Hz not 200fps.

100Hz per eye. So the games will continue at the same FPS. Whether it doesnt affect FPS or they divide the current FPS between the two outputs.

Either way it won't be magically boosted, unless they've worked out a use for those un-used cell SPUs.
Click to expand...

Eurgh... I don't want to do a big write up now >_<

To do 3D vision each eye needs to see the scene from a slightly different perspective, which requires the game engine to render the scene once per eye, effectively doubling the processing required. A 60fps normal game would need to be capable of being rendered at 120fps in order to accommodate the rendering of both perspectives and maintaining the fluidity of a standard 60fps game.

As an aside, the SPUs aren't unused.

wannabedamned said:
Isnt Wipeout HD 60fps? And isnt it demo'd in that very article? it obviously works :p
Click to expand...

By dropping the resolution/halving the frame rate/using 2 PS3's networked together probably. This can be done, but it can't be done on every game without using substantially more power that the Ps3 has, or halving the frame rate of every game. I don't know about you but I just can't play a game at 15fps.
 
Last edited:
Kreeeee said:
To do 3D vision each eye needs to see the scene from a slightly different perspective, which requires the game engine to render the scene once per eye, effectively doubling the processing required. A 60fps normal game would need to be capable of being rendered at 120fps in order to accommodate the rendering of both perspectives and maintaining the fluidity of a standard 60fps game.

As an aside, the SPUs aren't unused.

By dropping the resolution/halving the frame rate/using 2 PS3's networked together probably. This can be done, but it can't be done on every game without using substantially more power that the Ps3 has, or halving the frame rate of every game. I don't know about you but I just can't play a game at 15fps.
Click to expand...

Not everything has to be 3D on screen. We still see things at a 2D perspective when we look directly at objects. You can see where the 3D perspectives are initiated in the video and there didn't seem to be any noticeable slow-down. I don't think it's quite a job as you make out, I can't see it needing twice the PS3's power or dual networked consoles if only a number of attributes are processed in 3D at any given time.
 
Last edited:
I'll write up a nice long post on Tuesday if you're still interested (can't be bothered to hunt down the references today and I'm away all weekend), but the point behind 3D games is that the whole screen provides accurate depth perception, not just a few tacky characters in a few scenes like the crappy 3D cinema "experiences" requiring blue/red glasses.

While I can't watch the video, as I'm on a 3G connection with severe speed and bandwidth limits, if it's as you've described then how can they say it will be backwards compatible with all games without heavy re-coding? It also seems like a complete waste of time if they're doing it in the cinema styled tacky fashion rather than the PC version of full screen, full game 3D for better immersion.
 
Nexus said:
This obviously conincides with Sony's prediction made yesterday that there will be a 3D TV in every home by the end of next year :rolleyes:

They really are the king of over the top Press Releases. Remember when they told us that the PS2 would be a central hub for everything in our homes, including the toaster.
Click to expand...

I dont think they would have said either of those - so please by all means link to a specific comment(s);)

(they may have said something about PS3's being a home hub .....which it is, and even has vitual toasters in Home :D, however even Sony wouldnt predict 3D tvs in every home come next year - considering how relatively slow HDTV's have been (and 3d is only going ot be even more expensive at first)
 
Kreeeee said:
To do 3D vision each eye needs to see the scene from a slightly different perspective, which requires the game engine to render the scene once per eye, effectively doubling the processing required. A 60fps normal game would need to be capable of being rendered at 120fps in order to accommodate the rendering of both perspectives and maintaining the fluidity of a standard 60fps game.
Click to expand...

I agree in theory, but the games industry is built on higher-performance hacks that look more or less like the real thing (e.g. bump mapping). Is it not possible that there's a similar hack to approximate two points of view separately?
 
Very true, and I appear to have got caught up in the inefficient PC methods currently used when trying to explain it working for all previous games without heavy re-coding.

For future games it doesn't need to take up a lot of power, but retrofitting it to every game like Sony have stated they will do will.
 
KNiVES said:
Well I'm no wizard and I don't even understand how it works - but I've seen the technology with my own eyes (no pun intended) and it certainly works just fine at 60fps at least.
Click to expand...

Its actually running 120 FPS, as kre' said it requires to be rendered once per eye, so 60FPS as your WoW Was running is actually 60FPS Twice, or 120FPS worth of rendering

-edit-

Beaten to it above!
 
FrankJH said:
I dont think they would have said either of those - so please by all means link to a specific comment(s);)

(they may have said something about PS3's being a home hub .....which it is, and even has vitual toasters in Home :D, however even Sony wouldnt predict 3D tvs in every home come next year - considering how relatively slow HDTV's have been (and 3d is only going ot be even more expensive at first)
Click to expand...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technolo...sion-plans-for-every-home-by-end-of-2010.html

*shrugs*
 
Ahh, stereoscopic 3D. I've never experienced it, having excessively poor vision in one eye. If I had half decent vision, this might interest me.
 
Alpherah said:
Its actually running 120 FPS, as kre' said it requires to be rendered once per eye, so 60FPS as your WoW Was running is actually 60FPS Twice, or 120FPS worth of rendering

-edit-

Beaten to it above!
Click to expand...
No, Hertz. Not FPS! The FPS is unnaffected as there is no Vsync.
 
This technology has been described as being compatible with all games (its possible some wont be) GT5P was displayed way back earlier in the year using this technology wasnt it?

Some of you are getting your knickers in a twist as a games rendering framerate has nothing to do with the visual display rate particulary on a TV and were VSYNC isnt applied.

Just for example a game like GT5P running at 60fps doesnt gain any additional frames from the PS3 if its displayed on a SD TV. Sure that would take less processing its locked no matter what output the PS3 scales at.
Likewise if displayed on:

HDTV @ 1080p on:
60HZ TV
100HV TV
120HZ TV
200HZ 3D TV

The PS3 rendering of a game isnt effected.

The TV however is adding increased frames of motion, thats whats happening as has been happening since oh what about 12 or so years ago when Phillips was amongst one of the first to offer 100HZ technology.
(Based on PAL European 50HZ signals)

Adding 3D TV display technology combined with the software tool on the PS3 to adjust the video output is what is being done here. The technology probably doesnt even need to be 200HZ but unlike the monitors at 120HZ yes 2x60HZ = the dual image for the 3D display. Therefore taking TV 100Hz technology and 2x that is the dual image for the 3D display required for 200Hz

Thats my basic thoughts on it, without having to look it up to provide a dead easy way of understanding it. ;)
Maybe im wrong on some of this but to me a bit of common sense is all thats needed guys to understand its nothing to do with the PS3 at all.

I guess common sense isnt so common these days even for Graduates, eh.
 
Last edited:
Welp, I don't really need some dude to tell me that what I saw wasn't real anyway. I've already said I've seen 60fps 3d-vision myself and I don't see the need to carry on with this debate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom