PlayStation 3 limits 3D gaming to 720p

[News Portal]

Oho, fanboys! Time to get your flame on! In a move considered both a shocking admission of the incredible fail of their console by one camp, and a sensible acknowledgment of the inarguable limitations of existing graphics technologies by the other, [comp=450]Sony[/comp] have announced that games developed with stereoscopic 3D will be limited to 720p output. Let us rage at each other.

Read full article by Brenna Hillier

[jpeyper]

at least they have built-in support for 3d games.

the other bench is leaving it up to the devs.

i would rather have 3d at 720p than no 3d.... if i had a 3d display. which i dont.

[daf22]

Most of the PS3 games are 720P anyway, doesn't suprise me.

Going to be a while before it really takes off anyway, big upgrade that most people couldn't justify at the moment, the TV that is.

Seeing Good Game a few weeks back from E3, sounds like a few developers are going to wait & see how 3D pans out before they dip their toes in the water. Which could potentially make this latest 3D fad die off before it really gets started.

[stanna]

all this 3d **** is just a fad anyway. bring back the blue and red glasses!!

[Ooshp]

It's about as immersive as 5.1 surround sound. Give me high resolution and a very good pair of headphones anyday.

Avatar has alot to answer for. On top of being a terrible movie that is.

[frosty-theaussie]

Vast majority of PS3 games render natively at 720p, so it's not so much a case of downscaling to 720p as it is just not upscaling to 1080p. I think Wipeout HD runs at 1080p, as does Katamari Forever and a few PSN games (such as the glorious PixelJunk series). Besides, 1080p24 isn't so bad... that's how I played Crysis

It's about as immersive as 5.1 surround sound

Hey now, 5.1 shouldn't be lumped in with 3D. At least you don't need to buy additional expensive peripherals so that more people can enjoy the movie/game.

[heapsgood]

Most of the PS3 games are 720P anyway, doesn't suprise me.

Right, theres not many 1080 games and far fewer 60Hz games (even at 720), the bare minimum required for 3d. Even 60Hz isn't all that great with the left/right interleaved format (each eye sees flashing light 1/60 on 1/60 off, half your frame rate 60Hz = 30Hz) Real-D looks terrible compared to twin projectors and gives me and others a headache during extended viewing. This is why nvidia requires a 120Hz monitor and a decent card for its 3d setup. 60fps doesn't really cut it. This generation of consoles simply is not designed to provide a good 3D experience, at least not with the level of visuals we've come to expect.

In a world where games are created to run either at 30 or 60 frames per second, dropping down to 24FPS means a jerkier image and a more muted response from the controls.

As for the HDMI spec - this is a half truth.

From HDMI 1.4 press anouncement:

Code: Select all

3D Mandatory Formats

For movie content:
Frame Packing
1080p @ 23.98/24Hz //Hardware renders 48fps

For game content:
Frame Packing
720p @ 50 or 59.94/60Hz //Hardware renders 100 or 120fps  good luck


The frame packing referred to here means this frame rate factors in frames for the left and right eye i.e. TWO frames rendered for every Hz. 24Fps is actually 48fps that are rendered. Blaming the HDMI spec is all good and well Sony but how many of your games run at 1080p and above 48fps? Rachet and Clank... GT5... some PSN titles with simpler graphics... and.... um...... nothing else (will gladly edit if you find another, but dont believe whats on the box). The HDMI spec is no more a bottleneck than the PS3 GPU (much less so as Im very doubtful we'll ever see a 60Hz (120 rendered fps) game at 720p).

That anyone is surprised by this announcement is beyond me.

[InAUGral]

fairly sure it was in their original announcement of 3D "we will support 3D gaming but only 720P is possible" well not exactly like that but something along those lines.

[Mekon]

As for the HDMI spec - this is a half truth.

Not really. Super Stardust HD in 3D allegedly runs at 120Hz (in 720p). Admittedly, both Wipeout 3D and Motorstorm: Pacific Rift 3D both run at 30fps (ie. rendering at 60Hz) - both quite playable, though, form personal experience (especially given that Motorstorm was 720p @ 30 fps in 2D).

Sony but how many of your games run at 1080p and above 48fps? Rachet and Clank... GT5... and ......... um...... nothing else (will gladly edit if you find another, but dont believe whats on the box).

Wipeout HD. Super Stardust HD. Super Rub a Dub (lol). Pixeljunk Eden.

Yup, they're all PSN titles... go figure.

Most 1080p titles are upscaled (horizontally and/or vertically) anyway, true 1080p is uncommon... so looking for 1080p and 60Hz is limited to simpler titles (as above).

Im very doubtful we'll ever see a 60Hz (120 rendered fps) game at 720p

See above (Super Stardust HD).

[heapsgood]

Wipeout HD. Super Stardust HD. Super Rub a Dub (lol). Pixeljunk Eden.

Yup, they're all PSN titles... go figure.

Most 1080p titles are upscaled (horizontally and/or vertically) anyway, true 1080p is uncommon... so looking for 1080p and 60Hz is limited to simpler titles (as above).

at least not with the level of visuals we've come to expect.

Not that those titles arn't pretty but they're hardly taxing the GPU, I was really referring to AAA releases rather than PSN titles. Good call though. As for motorstorm, it is impressive theyve managed to double the framerate and get 3d working, but if its still 720 then HDMI isnt a bottleneck. I still think Sony are bending the truth, HDMI isnt the issue for the vast majority of their games, it's their GPU.

[diamondd]

It's about as immersive as 5.1 surround sound. Give me high resolution and a very good pair of headphones anyday.

Avatar has alot to answer for. On top of being a terrible movie that is.

agreed, the whole wearing glasses thing is such a joke. Kinda cool at times but definitely not something I want for everyday viewing.

I'm holding out on 3D until they come up with some sort of consumer holographic projection setup, or I'd even put up with the glasses for more convincing 3D like this

[widetube]Jd3-eiid-Uw[/widetube]

[Auld]

3D at 720p is fine on the PS3. There is so much going on that you don't notice the jaggies or flashes as much.

I have played all of the current titles out for PS3 in 3D, Stardust is the best gimmicky as it is the gameplay lends itself to 3D very well. Wipeout HD becomes a whole heap more interesting in 3D as well. Motorstorm doesnt look very good at all, but its more fun than 2D and makes cornering a lot easier when you can see it coming up. Lastly PAIN is ok in 3D but I'm not sure why they bothered, you don't lose much/anything switching back to 2D.

I'd suggest not complaining about it till you've tried it out.

Also I've only played for 30 minutes straight so far (got to fight over the glasses as our extras are in the mail) and not had any problems headache wise etc.

In summary 3D for gaming is not a gimiicky as you might think, adds a whole new level to immersion. Racing benefits from it the most as I've seen so far but I'm yet to play 1st/3rd person games. I really like it and along with 3D sports and movies I am looking forward to getting my own 3D TV instead of having to go to work after hours.

[TheD]

You have 2 main ways of sending a 3d image, one is 2 frames at once (side by side, interlaced, odd and even pixels ect.) or one after the other.

For 3d to look right you need at least 25 frames per an eye a second.
But having shutter glasses flash 25 times a sec per an eye would hurt your eyes, that is why you need at least a 100hz output from a TV (each frame shown twice, 50hz per an eye).

It is too hard to render 50 1080p frames a sec for most games on a PS3.

Then again, one frame less than 25 is not going to kill you and it is only 6 fps under what most PS3 games max out at.

Nothing stops the PS3 from outputting 1920x1080P at 60HZ, which is enough to output 30hz per an eye at 1080P.

And I don't get what sony is on about, most PS3 games are 720p at 30fps, not 60fps.

[MangAnimE]

Once again showing the PCs superiority over consoles, I've been playing all types of games in 3D for nearly 10 years (on & off). Would be interesting though to see what specs a PC, with HDMI output, could produce on a 3D TV (though it can used on a standard TV in 3D if it's up to spec).

[Tucky]

No offense but, 3D movies are **** so why would 3D games be any better?