The Nuts and Bolts of PlayStation 3D 154
The Digital Foundry blog took an in-depth look at how Sony is introducing 3D technology to PlayStation 3 games. They give a step-by-step description of how the system generates a 3D frame (or rather, a pair of frames), and the graphical hurdles that need be to overcome to ensure the games look good. The article also discusses some of the subtle effects 3D technology can have on gameplay:
"'One interesting thing came through in the immersion aspect was that in the first-person camera view, it felt so much more like being there. Typically when most people play MotorStorm, something like 90 per cent play in the third-person view,' Benson explains. 'As soon as we put the 3D settings in place, the first-person view became a lot more popular, a lot more people were using that view. This could indicate that 3D could perhaps change the standards, if you like.' ... 'We found that in the first-person view the game is giving you all the sorts of cues that you're used to in normal driving: speed perception, the ability to judge distances, things like that. It's far easier to avoid track objects.' The insertion of true stereoscopic 3D into MotorStorm also brings about a new sense of appreciation of the scale and size of the game world and the objects within it."
Re:Goofy glasses (Score:4, Interesting)
3D will never really take off until they can figure out a way to implement it comfortably without requiring the ridiculous glasses.
I dunno, I think we're seeing a new market emerging for designer 3D glasses for this specific purpose..
Re:Goofy glasses (Score:1, Interesting)
But there are a few companies/places/whatever that have gone about developing 3D technology without the need for 3D glasses.
Nintendo is supposedly doing it with the 3DS, with two companies lined up that are suspected of providing the screens that allow it. IIRC, Sharp was one of them.
Re:first post! (Score:3, Interesting)
As for the rendering, it's not 20% of the processing time. It's a lot more than that, especially when you work in all the reflections and other eye-candy that PS3 games are expected to have. I would guess it's pretty close to 90% of the time is spent rendering.
The PS3 has a dedicated graphics chip. It can be running graphics at 100% and still not use up 100% of the CPU, which only hands data off to other components to be rendered.
Of course, it also depends on that game. A game with thousands of AI opponents takes a lot more CPU between renders than a game with just 5.
There is no "between renders". The GPU is working on rendering while the CPU is doing something else.
Re:And how long? (Score:3, Interesting)
How long do you think this feature will last on PS3 once PS4 comes out? :)
Re:Goofy glasses (Score:3, Interesting)
Still a gimmick, even if it generated some publicity lately. Where is the stream of big, good releases? Oh, could it be that we just had another "must see" 3D movie, just like it happens once every few years?
To see better what it is...where's the huge uptake of 3D photographs? I mean, "3D photography" (stereography) is here only slightly shorter than "normal" one - over 150 years. Surely it would be more by now than gimmick of novelty, gimmick for trade shows, gimmick for world expo, or Yugoslav-made toy that collects dust on top of bookshelf? Heck, with cheap CMOS sensors some P&S 3D digicam should take over the world by now...after all it would be only slightly more expensive in production, but so much better...
Re:And how long? (Score:1, Interesting)
that would be suicide. otherOS loss was infuriating but touched so few users to be a statistical anomaly. remotely bricking the console would be action for lawsuits.
EULAs be damned that would be suicide for the platform. Sony may be arrogant bastards but they are not suicidal
Re:first post! (Score:2, Interesting)
The PS3 has a dedicated graphics chip. It can be running graphics at 100% and still not use up 100% of the CPU, which only hands data off to other components to be rendered.
That doesn't change his argument - PCs have had "dedicated graphics chips" for 3D for 10-15 years. This is hardly new information.
Yes, so the GPU does most of the rendering. So if it's running at 100% running a normal game, how exactly do you magically make it render twice as much information, with only a 10-20% slowdown as the OP claimed?
There is no "between renders". The GPU is working on rendering while the CPU is doing something else.
You're being overly pedantic. Firstly, it's still correct to say "between the rendering calls that the CPU makes", which is what he presumably meant. Secondly, yes you could run the CPU rendering calls in a separate thread, but that doesn't really change his point - yes, a game with large amounts of AI might be CPU bound rather than GPU bound, thus you could get extra fill rate with little noticable slowdown. But this doesn't apply to all games, is the point.