GT5 going to be in 3D ?

[SCUD77]

Could the delay for gt5 be because sony want to flagship ps3d with gt5 ?.
Its all confirmed that next year the ps3 is going to do 3d and gt5 has been shown at ces running in the format, just an idea..

 

[Pescara for GT5]

I hope not, even though it would be cool, it is unused technology in the video game world, and I think sony would want a no name game to use it before a very established game series, because a lot of sales will come of GT5 if it wins, but if it fails, then possibly the PS3 could fail.

 

[Dave A]

Not really, just having GT5 be 3d enabled wouldn't mean it wouldn't work without being played on a 3d TV or with the 3d head gear. It'd just be like having an option to play the game that way if you have the means to, like having the option for 3 screen support if you have the means for it.

It's worth noting that GT5 has already been shown and played by journalists in 3d as part of a Sony 3d gaming presentation at one of the game shows earlier this year. It would make sense to me that the option would be in if Sony want to try and promote this technology on the PS3.

 

[SCUD77]

yes i meant 3d gameplay in gt5 as a switchable option ,
But you could also say that they could do a double whammy by releasing the most eagerly anticipated game in years along with the biggest "new" thing to gaming in decades to lure new customers toward the ps3 ? judging by the massive boost 3d has given to cinema's in the past couple of years sony are probably thinking it could do the same for the ps3

 

[Kryz11]

Could the delay for gt5 be because sony want to flagship ps3d with gt5 ?.
Its all confirmed that next year the ps3 is going to do 3d and gt5 has been shown at ces running in the format, just an idea..

NO, because they can always Patch in 3D. Also GT5 was available in 3D for many months now when they Showcase it in GT5Prologue.

Game is on Delay, because it will have heck load of Tracks and almost 1000 cars with all of them having damage.. So yeah THAT is the real delay.

 

[vaioleto]

People who doubt the power of 3D have obviously not watched Avatar. When I saw the shot early in the movie with them inside the spaceship thing look at the holograms, I was like OMMGGGG. Gt5 + depth perception + head tracking = virtual reality, calling it now.

 

[Kryz11]

I agree, back in the 60s or 70s when they show 3d it was too early, with today's technology, 3D and EyE Cam for head movement will immerse you even more.

 

[WolfRacer543]

People who doubt the power of 3D have obviously not watched Avatar. When I saw the shot early in the movie with them inside the spaceship thing look at the holograms, I was like OMMGGGG. Gt5 + depth perception + head tracking = virtual reality, calling it now.

I saw Avatar in 3D and was relatively unimpressed. It still needs work IMO, and things often seemed out of scale relative to their percieved depth.

 

[Northstar]

No,currently there is a very limited number of 3DTV's on the market. It would be a waste of resources to put it in GT5 at this point.

 

[Dave A]

It wouldn't take much if any of PD's resources. The kind of work involved would probably not be handled by Kaz and his staff, it would more probably be handled by a different Sony studio that specialises with the 3d technology. As for PS3 rescources, again I don't think displaying the image in a 3d dispalyable format would actually require more power from the PS3.

 

[CarBastard]

Hopefully, Not.

I still cant get my hands on a High Definition TV because they cost a lot where I live, and I have a 16 year old budget, and my mom isn't gonna buy one for me. There are very few 3D TV systems in the world, and they're expensive. So I cant even think in getting them where I live.

GT, and racing sims in general, are for the masses. Making it in 3D would be a waste and will turn it for the few 0.00000001% of the world population that have a 3D TV at home. [/thread]

 

[Dave A]

So just because you don't have the means to use a feature then that feature shouldn't be in??? . Not everyone has a wheel, does that mean the game shouldn't support gaming wheels? Giving the game 3d support would not mean you have to use a 3d TV to play it. You'd be able to play it as normal on a normal TV.

 

[CarBastard]

So just because you don't have the means to use a feature then that feature shouldn't be in??? . Not everyone has a wheel, does that mean the game shouldn't support gaming wheels? Giving the game 3d support would not mean you have to use a 3d TV to play it. You'd be able to play it as normal on a normal TV.

I'm trying to say how limited the acces to a 3D TV system would be which make the 3D support idea, a pointless waste of time. It would only work for showing off because, I suspect, most of the current GT player base cant afford a 3D TV.

 

[Stonemonkey]

It wouldn't take much if any of PD's resources. The kind of work involved would probably not be handled by Kaz and his staff, it would more probably be handled by a different Sony studio that specialises with the 3d technology. As for PS3 rescources, again I don't think displaying the image in a 3d dispalyable format would actually require more power from the PS3.

It needs two full renders per frame.

 

[Dave A]

You do realise that Sony already have versions of GT5 and GT5 demos running in 3d don't you? It is not more taxing on the PS3. The PS3 does not have to render twice the data der frame. You guys are going on like the option would be terrible, it would just be an option for thoes who can, like the multi screen support for thoes with 3 TV's, 3 PS3's and 3 copies of the game. Having the option there regardless of it being heavilly used or not isn't detracting from the game to thoes who can't use it. It makes perfect sense to me for the option to be in the game, either at launch, or to bepatched in at some point. Sony are very keen on pushing 3d technology into peoples homes and they will use games (in fact they already are to a degree) as one avenue to promote the technology.

 

[CarBastard]

You do realise that Sony already have versions of GT5 and GT5 demos running in 3d don't you? It is not more taxing on the PS3. The PS3 does not have to render twice the data der frame. You guys are going on like the option would be terrible, it would just be an option for thoes who can, like the multi screen support for thoes with 3 TV's, 3 PS3's and 3 copies of the game. Having the option there regardless of it being heavilly used or not isn't detracting from the game to thoes who can't use it. It makes perfect sense to me for the option to be in the game, either at launch, or to bepatched in at some point. Sony are very keen on pushing 3d technology into peoples homes and they will use games (in fact they already are to a degree) as one avenue to promote the technology.

My criticism is regarding the possible delay of GT5 suggested by the OP due to the inclusion of 3D. Do you want GT5 soon? Do you have a 3D TV? Most common answers would be "Yes", and "No". It would be pointless spending time, delaying the game, to introduce something few people would use. If Sony and PD would like to do so after the release of GT5 in a way of a patch, update or DLC, it's up to them and the few people that own a 3D TV.

 

[Dave A]

That's a fair view and I'd agree if that were likely to be the case. But it's highly improbable that a feature like this would affect the games schedule in any way. Implementing a feature like this would not be handled by PD, it would be handled by one of Sony's other studios that are more specialised that would otherwise have nothing to do with GT5's development. Therefore, no time would be taken away from GT5's development as far as PD are concerned. If the feaure wasn't ready in time for the game going gold then ofcourse it could be patched in, but either way a feature like this would not add any real burden to PD.

 

[Stonemonkey]

You do realise that Sony already have versions of GT5 and GT5 demos running in 3d don't you? It is not more taxing on the PS3. The PS3 does not have to render twice the data der frame. You guys are going on like the option would be terrible, it would just be an option for thoes who can, like the multi screen support for thoes with 3 TV's, 3 PS3's and 3 copies of the game. Having the option there regardless of it being heavilly used or not isn't detracting from the game to thoes who can't use it. It makes perfect sense to me for the option to be in the game, either at launch, or to bepatched in at some point. Sony are very keen on pushing 3d technology into peoples homes and they will use games (in fact they already are to a degree) as one avenue to promote the technology.

Excuse me? I'm one of the few who have spoken out for this previously on this forum and have already said that I think that the inclusion of this along with headtracking in GT5 could well be part of Sonys 3D campaign.

I know Sony have shown some games running with this, supposedly only with a system update which brings up some questions in my mind as to how long they've been working on this and is it part of the reason for the longer dev time cross platform games have taken on the PS3, I also know for a fact that two complete renders per frame are required, one for each eye.

 

[Dave A]

I know Sony have shown some games running with this, supposedly only with a system update which brings up some questions in my mind as to how long they've been working on this and is it part of the reason for the longer dev time cross platform games have taken on the PS3, I also know for a fact that two complete renders per frame are required, one for each eye.

No, to do two complete renders per frame means to render twice the data. No console could do that with any but the more graphically simple games. Needing two renders per frame, one for each eye and needing two complete renders per frame are not the same thing. The PS3 is not rendering twice the data per frame in the GT5 3D demo compared to GT5.

Again, I don't see this as adding time onto a games development, mainly because it's specility teams that would handle this sort of thing and not the game developers themselves. And secondly, beacuse it's not the kind of feature that would be difficult to patch in at a later date if the timing wasn't right for the games launch.

 

[Stonemonkey]

No, to do two complete renders per frame means to render twice the data. No console could do that with any but the more graphically simple games. Needing two renders per frome, one for each eye and needing two complete renders per frame are not the same thing. The P3S is not rendering twice the data per frame in the GT5 3D demo compared to GT5.

Again, I don't see this as adding time onto a games development, mainly because it's specility teams that would handle this sort of thing and not the game developers themselves. And secondly, beacuse it's not the kind of feature that would be difficult to patch in at a later date if the timing wasn't right for the games launch.

Yes, each eye sees from a different viewpoint, different position, different scene geometry, different clipping, different culling, different occlusion, different lighting.

I agree with you that a graphics pipeline could be set up in such a way so that it's not two entirely seperate renders but unless Sony have done something really wild from the initial design of the PS3 and kept it secret they are not going to be done in parallel so yes, it takes more power to render stereoscopic.

That graphics pipeline is created by the developer, if it's not optimised for stereoscopic rendering then you will need two full seperate renders so yes, the game/graphics engine developers have a big part in that.

 

[WolfRacer543]

Actually, I dont want GT5 in 3D. Even if all the technical issues were overcome, the 3D stuff I've watched looks terribly fake and forced 3D, something that'd be more at home in a need for speed game than GT5.

When they can make 3D look real instead of forced, then it can be in a GT game

 

[Micdog49]

Yeah, unless GT can nail it, I don't want it in my game. For all the time we've waited and the short span to GT5's release, implementing it would seem like wasting time for such a generally unused feature. All those resources and funds should be poured into the GT magic i.e. the cars and tracks. That time could be spent improving the damage engine (which everyone will use) and putting that final 'finish' in the game to make it special. But if they can nail it....

 

[Myansie]

Yes, each eye sees from a different viewpoint, different position, different scene geometry, different clipping, different culling, different occlusion, different lighting.

Every pixel on the same 2D screen has a slightly different viewpoint, different position, different scene geometry, different clipping, different culling, different occlusion, different lighting.

Rendering in 3D is no different to doubling the screen resolution as far as resources go. Your just shifting your pixels slightly further to the right. We`ll get a hit to the resolution and anti-aliasing by having 3D, but that`s cool. If they`re hitting 1080p now with AA, then it`s pretty reasonable to expect 3D in 720p.

It`s not going to cause any delays and having depth perception will help to judge speed and braking points. Shrinking my lap times.

Bring it on I say.

 

[Dave A]

Yes, each eye sees from a different viewpoint, different position, different scene geometry, different clipping, different culling, different occlusion, different lighting.

I agree with you that a graphics pipeline could be set up in such a way so that it's not two entirely seperate renders but unless Sony have done something really wild from the initial design of the PS3 and kept it secret they are not going to be done in parallel so yes, it takes more power to render stereoscopic.

That graphics pipeline is created by the developer, if it's not optimised for stereoscopic rendering then you will need two full seperate renders so yes, the game/graphics engine developers have a big part in that.

It's not so much a game engine issue as a display issue, yes the game developers usually create a game with a certain resolution in mind but displaying the game in 3D won't change the resolution. It's as simple as giving the left eye view lines 1, 3, 5, 7 etc and the right eye view lines 2, 4, 6, 8 etc and maybe alternating the layers. Ultimately there's still the same number of pixels being rendered on screen. The developers would not need to be involved in this, it's not something thats built deep into a game engine. It'd all be handled by whoever is implementing the 3D view.

 

[Stonemonkey]

Every pixel on the same 2D screen has a slightly different viewpoint, different position, different scene geometry, different clipping, different culling, different occlusion, different lighting.

For filming 3D movies, two cameras side by side are used. It is similar for rendering graphics, there are effectively two virtual cameras and all the geometry, lighting, culling, clipping and to some extent the occlusion has to be calculated twice. And those things have nothing to do with pixels, this isn't raytracing.

Rendering in 3D is no different to doubling the screen resolution as far as resources go. Your just shifting your pixels slightly further to the right. We`ll get a hit to the resolution and anti-aliasing by having 3D, but that`s cool. If they`re hitting 1080p now with AA, then it`s pretty reasonable to expect 3D in 720p.

No it's definitely not just a matter of shifting pixels sideways.

It`s not going to cause any delays and having depth perception will help to judge speed and braking points. Shrinking my lap times.

Bring it on I say.

Yeah, I want to see it too.

It's not so much a game engine issue as a display issue, yes the game developers usually create a game with a certain resolution in mind but displaying the game in 3D won't change the resolution. It's as simple as giving the left eye view lines 1, 3, 5, 7 etc and the right eye view lines 2, 4, 6, 8 etc and maybe alternating the layers. Ultimately there's still the same number of pixels being rendered on screen. The developers would not need to be involved in this, it's not something thats built deep into a game engine. It'd all be handled by whoever is implementing the 3D view.

If it's as simple as that can you please explain how the rasteriser deals with the odd and even rows?

 

[Dave A]

If it's as simple as that can you please explain how the rasteriser deals with the odd and even rows?

I've just looked into some information on the new NVidia 3D technology and I have the odd and even frames idea wrong. That is a method of falsley increaseing screen resolution as I'm sure your aware and I figured that was how Sony achieved the 3D view in thier PS3 demos. But NVidia are alternating entire frames between the left and right perspective, so frame 1 is left, frame 2 right, frame 3 left etc. Again though, this does not require the computer to process any more data than it would otherwise be rendering per frame. Which was my original point, that the PS3 is not capable doubling the rendring data for GT5, but Sony have GT5 in 3D, although I couldn't find anytihng that stated how it was achieved, it would make sense that it's similar in principal to what NVidia have done to overcome the technical barriers that a home computer would have.

 

[Stonemonkey]

But NVidia are alternating entire frames between the left and right perspective, so frame 1 is left, frame 2 right, frame 3 left etc. Again though, this does not require the computer to process any more data than it would otherwise be rendering per frame.

Say each frame is drawn in 1/60th of a second, you get 60 fps, BUT half those frames go to the left eye and half go to the right eye, so each eye only recieves 30 fps.

For the problems of actually rendering stereoscopic frames, imagine holding a dice directly in front of your right eye, your right eye will see only one face and it will be square, your left eye however will see the same face at an angle, it will no longer appear square and it will also see the side face of the dice, also not square. What can be seen from each eye viewpoint is completely different and isn't just a shifted image.

 

[Smoke&Slide]

I remember going to Granada Studios in Manchester & seeing Robocop The Ride.That is 3d, would this ride work in the same way as GT5 or different because its a video game.

 

[Dave A]

Yeah, I'm not disputing that, displaying the two view points in alternating frames will still not require more processing power.

And yes, each view is running at 30fps in a 60fps game.

 

[Smoke&Slide]

This article might help fellas.It covers almost everything i guess. http://www.engadget.com/2009/10/26/ready-or-not-the-latest-3d-technology-is-coming-home/