50+ PS3 Games Going 3D

[Arm73]

who were the idiot who said 3D is a gimick? and now they're adding 3D to their games NAOW??

These games are for people who already have 3DTVs, unless there's something we can play these games on a regular TV.

But of course you will be able to play those games on a regular TV as well, what do you think ?
We know how stupid can Sony be, but with 3D games you always get the option to turn the 3D effect off, and play them that way with or without 3D TVs.

I guess nobody here ever heard of nVidia Stereoscopic 3D drivers.
You can play almost every new PC game in 3D ( but you need a [guess what?] 3D capable monitor with 120hz refresh rate of course, and the $100 glasses as well.
Not only that, but most games ( even old ones ) not meant to be played in 3D can be played in 3D by activating an driver option via an hot key, but of course the result can be less then perfect if the game hasn't been optimized.
It's only a matter of calculation, the effect can be applied to any game with the right drivers.
Sony could make it so that every PS3 game could be played in stereoscopic 3D, even the old ones, it's only a matter of setting up the firmware and the drivers.

But let me tell you something: I tried the nVidia sterescopic drivers on the PC, and while the work great, there is a small problem : A performance hit.
Games like Batman AA or RE5 ( all tested and approved for nVidia 3D ) get a significant drop in frame rate when I enable the 3D effect.
Being that a PC game, I can counteract by lowering the resolution or by rendering less details ( shadows , particles etc. etc.. ) , but what about the PS3 ?
PS3 games today are already struggling to maintain a decent frame rate at their precious 1080p ( usually 35-40 fps ), but what's gonna happen to their much advertised HD graphic once they activate the 3D drivers ?
Will they downgrade it to 720p or something ? So much for an HD next gen console LOL....
And just a week or so ago I went to the Sony store on Madison Avenue and I tried their 3D glasses on with a really big 3D TV playing Alice in wonderland, and you know what ? It kind of sucked for me.
I really like stereoscopic 3D actually, and I like to watch 3D movies, but the image I saw..........The colours were bland, and the image was flat, like you can expect from those pop up children books.
I was totally unimpressed.
The $100 glasses on the other hand seemed to be pretty light and comfortable.
So would I want to spend $$$$ on such a Tv +$$$ glasses, $$$ PS3, games and all ?
NOT A CHANCE.

 

[Hyborix3]

God of War in 3DS anyone?

 

[SamAsh07]

Lol good luck Sony.

 

[naglaro00]

i once tried 3D GT5
Not that good :|

 

[_Chaz_]

who were the idiot who said 3D is a gimick? and now they're adding 3D to their games NAOW??

These games are for people who already have 3DTVs, unless there's something we can play these games on a regular TV.

Remember PlayStation EyeToy?
Now they bash Microsoft for having a better developed version.

Remember them calling Wii's motion gaming a "gimmick"?
Now they have the PlayStation Move (which people say they were developing before the Wii, but then why bash it?)

And I do recall them having something to say about the 3DS and its 3D-ness.
I can't recall if it was negative, but knowing Sony, it's very likely.

 

[Chris_Skylock]

i was refering to sony. they said 3D is a gimick about the 3DS. same bastards who promotes motion gaming is the future. FUUUUU

 

[Delta517]

Here's a example of somebody trying 3DTV:

"Wow! This is so cool!"
10 min later...
"AAAAARGGGG!!! MY HEAD!!!!"

 

[KingVamp]

Here's a example of somebody trying 3DTV:

"Wow! This is so cool!"
10 min later...
"AAAAARGGGG!!! MY HEAD!!!!"

Well at less it got the cool part.

 

[Guild McCommunist]

who were the idiot who said 3D is a gimick? and now they're adding 3D to their games NAOW??

These games are for people who already have 3DTVs, unless there's something we can play these games on a regular TV.

Remember PlayStation EyeToy?
Now they bash Microsoft for having a better developed version.

Remember them calling Wii's motion gaming a "gimmick"?
Now they have the PlayStation Move (which people say they were developing before the Wii, but then why bash it?)

And I do recall them having something to say about the 3DS and its 3D-ness.
I can't recall if it was negative, but knowing Sony, it's very likely.


The EyeToy was a pretty poor product that was made a generation ago. Sony abandoned the concept with the Move and rightly so. The Kinect is a poor product, even if it is a better EyeToy.

Not quite sure on the Wii motion gimmick thing, I don't remember the press release for that.

And Sony didn't criticize the 3DS for its 3D. Sony started doing 3D before the 3DS was announced. If there was anything on it at the time, it was purely speculation.

QUOTE(shakirmoledina @ Nov 23 2010, 08:55 PM)

the 3ds will have all its game in 3d

I think this is untrue, developers can choose to make games in 2D and 3D. The 3DS supports both 2D and 3D. Surely a lot of shovelware devs will skip 3D and just make 2D games, seeing how pricey 3D games can be.

 

[cwstjdenobs]

I think this is untrue, developers can choose to make games in 2D and 3D. The 3DS supports both 2D and 3D. Surely a lot of shovelware devs will skip 3D and just make 2D games, seeing how pricey 3D games can be.

I don't buy that they are any more expensive to make. The API will do it all for them, probably only a couple more lines of code, if not one. But I don't buy that HD is any more expensive, how long has the PC had near PC resolutions?

 

[Guild McCommunist]

I think this is untrue, developers can choose to make games in 2D and 3D. The 3DS supports both 2D and 3D. Surely a lot of shovelware devs will skip 3D and just make 2D games, seeing how pricey 3D games can be.

I don't buy that they are any more expensive to make. The API will do it all for them, probably only a couple more lines of code, if not one. But I don't buy that HD is any more expensive, how long has the PC had near PC resolutions?

This begs to differ. I'm not sure if this is because it's a new system or because of the 3D, but games seem to be pricier.

 

[cwstjdenobs]

But the vast majority of handheld games are still 2D. The costs their are probably going to be higher because most companies will stop doing 2D games to make 3D 3D games.

 

[ThatDudeWithTheFood]

3D hurts my eyes and really whats wrong with 2d anyone with a brain notices depth in 2d why do we need more depth in 3d.

 

[cwstjdenobs]

I think we need a new phrase for stereoscopic 3D. When people say 2D I think Street Fighter 2 and 3D Mario 64.

S3D, 23D?

Edit: 3D2 maybe?

 

[Guild McCommunist]

3D hurts my eyes and really whats wrong with 2d anyone with a brain notices depth in 2d why do we need more depth in 3d.

If I drew a picture of a ball that had accurate illusions of depth to it and then gave you an actual ball that had real depth, which would be better? You can tell the depth in a 2D video game but sure looks a lot cooler in 3D.

...Well, it will look a lot cooler once the 3D is really good.

 

[Maz7006]

3D gaming still isn't sinking too much for me

why can't things be simple and fun - i understand the point behind HD, but this is just overboard and god damn expensive.

 

[Arm73]

I don't think it should cost more to develop games in stereoscopic 3D when they are already in 3D.
Remember with the nVidia stereoscopic drivers for the PC ( which have been around for quite some time now ) you can render almost any game in stereoscopic , the drivers automatically draw to slightly different images for each eye, that's all.
The other day I played Outrun 2006 in 3D and I had a blast.
That didn't cost anything to the developers, I'm sure, those drivers weren't around in 2006

!