3D PS3 games getting a visual downgrade

[Guild McCommunist]

Sony released the patch to make all PlayStation 3s ready to play 3D games earlier this week, but here's a small word of notice for really nitpicky technofiles who plan on buying a 3D TV to play them: Those first batch of 3D games will feature reduced graphical fidelity compared to playing them in 2D.

As part of a thorough look at Sony's 3D development process filled with tons of highly technical details, Eurogamer reveals that two of the first 3D PS3 games -- retrofitted versions of Wipeout HD and MotorStorm: Pacific Rift -- will have downgraded resolutions when played in stereoscopic 3D (via Kotaku). Wipeout HD originally could run as high as 1080p, but will be restricted to 720p in 3D (and with a reduced frame-rate, as well). And MotorStorm: Pacific Rift could run as high as 720p normally, but is actually dropped to a sub-HD resolution when playing in 3D.

The reason for the drop is the extra processing power it takes to render two different interlaced images (which is how the 3D effect is created), and it echoes concerns Ninja Theory co-founder Tameem Antoniades recently voiced about 3D gaming on the current generation of hardware. "The problem is that to do 3D properly you need to render 60 frames per second, per eye. And at least a 720p resolution [per eye]," Antoniades said. "So in essence that's 1080p rendering at 120 frames per second, and the current generation can only process very rudimentary graphics at that spec."

So does that mean 3D gaming on the PlayStation 3 (or Xbox 360, for that matter) will fundamentally always remain limited? If we're to take Antoniades at his word, yes -- and this first batch of games is the initial proof. But then it's really a subjective question: If you're playing a game in stereoscopic 3D, would you really mind if it's not also running at the highest possible resolution as well?

Source

In the end, is the 3D really worth the price? I'd rather just play the games, honestly. 3D seems to be a gimmick still, outside of movies like Avatar.

 

[Livin in a box]

This was to be expected. As developers programme with 3D more and more, the graphics will get better.

 

[r3dfaction]

I don't think were ready for 3D media (games, tv etc.). HD can go way farther than it is now and I'd rather continue that path...IMO

 

[TM2-Megatron]

That's what happens when you try to run something on inadequate hardware. I'd say Nintendo is smarter to stick to 3-D gaming only on their handheld platform for the moment, where there's already existing LCDs that can create the effect without glasses, and where you can build the device from the ground up with that in mind.

Instead of generating just 1 image at a given framerate and resolution, for this the PS3 will need to generate 2 images. Why did anyone expect the resolution or framerate to stay the same, when the most logical way to go about making the game was to reduce them?

 

[Hop2089]

Another Failure for Sony. They should have used their 3D technology for the next gen PSP or better yet the PSPfail.

 

[KingVamp]

Another Failure for Sony. They should have used their 3D technology for the next gen PSP or better yet the PSPfail.

Sad and hilarious if they name it that and it a big hit in sells. XD

 

[Bladexdsl]

guess the ps3 isn't as powerful as it states afterall. it just does everything huh...except 3d in 1080p

 

[Fakie!]

Does this mean we won't be seeing a big graphic upgrade in the 3DS... I hope not.

 

[syko5150]

guess the ps3 isn't as powerful as it states afterall. it just does everything huh...except 3d in 1080p

lol it only does everything(except play PS2 games...since most older systems that do play them are dying out)

 

[Jamstruth]

Of course graphics will take a hit. You're rendering 2 seperate images and laying them on top of each other in just the right way. You need more processing power to do this so obviously something's got to give.

Does this mean we won't be seeing a big graphic upgrade in the 3DS... I hope not.

The 3DS is being designed from the ground up to make a 3D image. They can give it however much of a graphics upgrade they want as they can tailor the hardware to suit. The PS3 usually renders in 2D and is being adapted for 3D

 

[ZAFDeltaForce]

That's to be expected, at least until 3D technology is perfected by the gaming industry. That could take a while though.

 

[J-Mirage]

Sony :facepalm:

Only 3DS will have stereoscopic 3D (Paper Mario

)

 

[Arm73]

I can say I saw this coming, so just to quote myself :

I think this Sony going 3D with the PS3 is a huge failure..................and they criticize Nintendo for trying something new with an handled built from scratch to support 3D......
They'll never succeed in the 3D realm for several reasons ( and mark my words ):

- The TV capable of 3D are very expensive and I don't see them being part of most of the households in the near 5 years or so.
- As much as I love stereoscopic 3D , the glasses are expensive( You think everybody is gonna buy some ?), heavy and uncomfortable to watch a 90 minutes movie, let alone a long gaming session.
- What about local mutliplayer ?
- And finally, my most important point ( that nobody seem to pay attention, everybody is concerned about the price ), is the PERFORMANCE.

I'm speaking about performance because I experienced nVidia 3D vision first hand, and I'm telling you that the video processor has to draw each frame twice ( one for each eye ) thus giving a certain hit on the performance of the PC, which can be easily compensated with s better video card , or faster processor.........but..........what about the PS3 ?
Programmers are already struggling when porting games from the 360 to maintain e decent framerate ( usually 30 fps ) and keep all the eye candy....
Are you telling me that games will be in 3D , gorgeous looking and still smooth to play ? No way man, I'm telling you.
They constantly try to improve A.I in games, and the graphic too, now tell me what's gonna happen when they will be forced by Sony to implement 3D as well ?
Games will have to be scaled down some how, or be less enjoyable.......couple that with the annoyance of wearing glasses and the expensive gear that you have to buy to make it all work..............

I'd like to be optimistic, and honestly I love 3D stereoscopic, but there is a reason why I didn't even bother to get the already available nVidia 3D for my PC...
I'm pretty sure that Sony will never make it in this generation, while Nintendo already has working 3DS prototypes somewhere and when they'll present us the new technology, I'm sure it will be amazing, affordable, and hassle free.

And that was from a post I wrote about a month ago.
That's what I've been trying to say all along.

Stereoscopic 3D needs more processing power, I don't think either PS3 or Xbox360 can handle it right now or in the future without making it feel gimmick or inferior to standard games.
It's bound to fail, only now people are starting to see that as well.

 

[Joe88]

why is everybody whining in here?

its just tie in for their new 3d hdtv's
they are expensive as hell
and probably will sell barely any just like every other maker of 3d tv's

probably will never even see one or know anyone who will have one besides in a store
I am curious how games like gow3 and uncharted 2 would be like in 3d

but anyway all this stuff wont affect anyone here, so stop bitching and moaning, slower games and downsized res arnt being forced on people who dont have 3d tv's

 

[cocomonk22]

This is the same as when playing PC games in 3D with shutter glasses or 3D monitors since it has to produce two images simultaneously.

 

[Bladexdsl]

and just so every1 knows 3d gaming has been on pc for years and it has NEVER taken off (been popular).

 

[Maikel Steneker]

It surprises me that the difference is so huge. It's only natural that the resolution for existing games can't be as good, but isn't splitscreen multiplayer at least as hard for the PS3? Still, games like Resident Evil 5 look great. I can imagine that 3D is easier to render, as the images are still largely the same.

I think this just needs time. I'm sure the games from 2012 or 2013 will all look great and will probably all run in 3D just fine.

 

[shakirmoledina]

3d or not... something new is what makes things interesting
is avatar better than LoTR? i dont think so... 3d, but still not as interesting
the best final fantasy is 7 or 13?

 

[spinal_cord]

Why is everyone comparing 3d with split screen?
What you guys seem to forget, is that in split screen mode, each scene is only HALF the size of full screen.

Two half screen renders will use about the same resources as a single full screen render. It makes perfect sense that you can not do two full screen renders with the same resources as a current split screen game because its doing twice as much work.

If you want full 3D, on the same machine, you have to either cut the screen resolution by around half, or drop the frame rate by half. Now assuming that they don't want incredibly choppy gameplay, the resolution is the logical choice to sacrifice.

 

[DCG]

I think 3D still will be cool. and if you want high quality gaming you can just turn the 3D off.