GT5 in 3D, waste of time, yes or no?

  • Thread starter Thread starter GTRL_Junior
  • 124 comments
  • 14,862 views
3D requires little effort.. NVidia 3D shows this; it can literally be tacked on a decade after the game is released in theory. All it requires is for the game to be rendered from 2 angles, and even without optimisation (getting the HUD in 3D, tweaking the angles, depth, colour settings etc) this produces a reasonable 3D effect.

If you consider 3D from the start of development it should look great, although in the case of GT5 for some reason this doesn't seem to be the case; it looks good, but it just doesn't feel all that immersive sadly.
 
so wait, is the RSX 3D ready then? I don't remember seeing or reading anything 3D related on this gpu but I could be wrong. I know the gpu is supposed to make games look like movies but that's all. Can anybody confirm that for sure? Are they using the power of the cell processor maybe to generate this 3D effect or am I getting ahead of myself?
 
lift off
All "3D" efforts are a waste of time, if you ask me.

Hope this is a trend that goes away soon.
Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more. They tried this before, much more cheaply, in the 50's. it was a craze and then everyone realised that the emperor had no clothes and they looked complete dweebs in their 3D-Specs.

Hopefully, people will soon realise this this time round too.
 
Sometimes I think about going out for lunch, but then I remember it's sunny outside and I'd need to put on sunglasses, so I just resign myself to peanut butter & jelly. Better that than glasses! :nervous:


On topic: Not a waste of time because it didn't take much time. And to say "all 3D efforts are a waste of time" is pretty ridiculous. Go ask professional drivers to race with one eye shut and I think they'll agree.
 
Apollo33
Sometimes I think about going out for lunch, but then I remember it's sunny outside and I'd need to put on sunglasses, so I just resign myself to peanut butter & jelly. Better that than glasses! :nervous:


On topic: Not a waste of time because it didn't take much time. And to say "all 3D efforts are a waste of time" is pretty ridiculous. Go ask professional drivers to race with one eye shut and I think they'll agree.
Click to expand...

Going outside... While its sunny... Are you mad?!

And... well said for the bottom bit :)
 
I have zero interest in 3D (TV and movies) until they figure out a way to do it without glasses.
 
BKViper
I have zero interest in 3D (TV and movies) until they figure out a way to do it without glasses.
Click to expand...

Bingo.
 
I really have to wonder how many of the naysayers in here have tried this on a a PROPERLY SETUP 3D tv. First time I tried this in 3D I was annoyed with all of the crosstalk, especially in cockpit. Later, I spent some time on it. By adjusting the optimisation and viewpoints on my Samsung TV I was able to remove ALL of the crosstalk in cockpit view. I have since upgraded the firmware on the tv which seems to have improved this even more.

I then proceeded to spend 3 hours gaming in 3D mode. No headaches, dizzyness etc. just the most fun I have had in GT. It really does add to the experience. The setup of the TV really does make a difference though.
 
Yesterday I brought my PS3 to a friend of mine who owns a 3D TV. We tried GT5, Super Stardust HD, High Velocity Bowling and a 3D Blu-Ray (Monsters vs. Aliens). Everything that's close to camera looks pretty impressive, but you don't get an all to exciting depth perception for things further off in the distance. So as long as you don't hang on someones tail or race a narrow street circuit you don't get much out of 3D in GT5.

I sat about 1m (3,5 feet) away from his 40" TV and it showed to be the perfect distance. For my apartment where i sit about 4m (13 feet) away i would need a huge TV to get the most out of it. I guess the bigger the screen is and the further away you can sit, the better the effect gets. That's probably the reason why it works so well in cinemas.
 
Groove
Everything that's close to camera looks pretty impressive, but you don't get an all to exciting depth perception for things further off in the distance. So as long as you don't hang on someones tail or race a narrow street circuit you don't get much out of 3D in GT5.
Click to expand...

Which is EXACTLY like it is in real life. There is no depth effect in the distance. 3D films/photos that have 3D effect in far distances are shot with 2 cameras really FAR away from eachother which creates a stereo effect. This is nice looking but totally unrealistic because two human eyes aren't that far apart!

When you're into photography you also know that depth of field pretty much only applies to things that are at a close or medium distance. Everything that's further away than say 30 meters or so will be sharp when focusing on infinity. It's pretty much 'flattened out'.

Gran Turismo provides a 3D effect very close to what we see when driving in real life, which is exactly what I was hoping for. It is indeed amazing when the TV is set up correctly. I personally ALWAYS play in 3D. For hours and hours at times without getting the slightest discomfort or fatigue.

I think PD did a stellar job with their 3D mode. It's 3D the way it's meant to be: as real as real life. It may not be as spectacular as some other 3D games but ... real life isn't all that spectacular ;)
 
personally i didnt like 3d i have the opportunity to use 3d every weekend but i dont.. however i do think 3d gaming is the way of the future but right now its not all that spectacular but you should experience gt5 3d atleast once if you can
 
TheMarco
Gran Turismo provides a 3D effect very close to what we see when driving in real life
Click to expand...

Exactly, its not gimmicky or tacky, its there to provide realistic feedback of distance to incoming cars and corners. I think it works quite well, and was definitely not a waste of time for anyone willing to invest in a 3D TV.
At first it is a challenge to get used to, but then it becomes something quite natural feeling.
 
Quite frankly I would rather have had proper head tracking and the ability to move about the cockpit naturally like we can in PC sims than any 3D attempt at all.
 
RC45
Quite frankly I would rather have had proper head tracking and the ability to move about the cockpit naturally like we can in PC sims than any 3D attempt at all.
Click to expand...

I find the head tracking a gimmick only. It makes no sense unless you're in an immersive cockpit (with 3 screens) and really close to the screens.

Also, I have yet to get it to work here at all. I set everything up but nothing happens when I move my head. (I know it's only supposed to work in Arcade)
 
I think 3D for gaming is like what HD was last generation. Technically it's doable, but it isn't ready for prime time yet due to the performance hits.

However, it is important to get interest started now so that it can really take off next generation. Towards that end, having such a high-profile game as GT support it is a good thing.
 
I always read everywhere that the graphics are 'degraded' in 3D mode in various games, including GT. However, to me the 3D adds so much extra that I tend to not see this 'degradation'. Look at it like it takes something away but adds more than it took away so the net result is a better experience. And actually in GT5's case it even almost eliminates an issue that's present when playing in 2D: screen tearing. The few times I played in 2D it was pretty apparent and distracting at times. In 3D I don't see it at all.
 
TheMarco
Which is EXACTLY like it is in real life. There is no depth effect in the distance. 3D films/photos that have 3D effect in far distances are shot with 2 cameras really FAR away from eachother which creates a stereo effect. This is nice looking but totally unrealistic because two human eyes aren't that far apart!

When you're into photography you also know that depth of field pretty much only applies to things that are at a close or medium distance. Everything that's further away than say 30 meters or so will be sharp when focusing on infinity. It's pretty much 'flattened out'.

Gran Turismo provides a 3D effect very close to what we see when driving in real life, which is exactly what I was hoping for. It is indeed amazing when the TV is set up correctly. I personally ALWAYS play in 3D. For hours and hours at times without getting the slightest discomfort or fatigue.

I think PD did a stellar job with their 3D mode. It's 3D the way it's meant to be: as real as real life. It may not be as spectacular as some other 3D games but ... real life isn't all that spectacular ;)
Click to expand...

I have a 3D tv and I love the way it looks! Now, I don't play it all the time but if you have one, why not? I'm for 3D!
 
TheMarco
I find the head tracking a gimmick only. It makes no sense unless you're in an immersive cockpit (with 3 screens) and really close to the screens.

Also, I have yet to get it to work here at all. I set everything up but nothing happens when I move my head. (I know it's only supposed to work in Arcade)
Click to expand...

Head tracking in a PC sim is fantastic - whether in a flight sim and you want to glance down at the instruments of in a driving simand want to glance to the left or right side mirror - no need for 3 screens - just a properly functioning head tracking system.

It so simple with the right setup even a child can use it ;)



BTW it does work in arcade mode and its fair, not as quick or responsive as the PC setups, but ok. Since I never race arcade its not really any use.
 
The funny thing is all of the people bashing 3D games gave probably never experienced any if the new stereoscopic 3D in HD. It's pretty amazing. Perfectly clear HD images that come out into your living room and in the case of GT5 literally put you in the game.

I play GT5 and Black Ops in 3D and they're both great. Those that hope this dies off as a fad haven't really experienced just how amazing it is. It's here now and it is for Hardcore gamers who want more out of their experience.

Everybody that's tried GT5 in my cockpit in 3D from a 73" TV has just been blown away. Alot of your experience depends on the quality of your hardware. I'm using Crystal Eyes 5 glasses from RealD which have a 5000:1 contrast ratio which is way above almost all of the TV manufacturers glasses. It's totally flicker free and perfect.
 
I've watched Avatar in 3D and I hated it. It gave me a headache, strained my eyes and I had to wear those uncomfortable glasses. Never again. They need to refine it further and eliminate these downsides and then I might try it again. At the moment I'd rather play in nice, relaxing, comfortable 2D. 3D is just not advanced enough at the moment to be worth it for me.

Disclaimer: The above is purely my personal opinion so don't flame me for it. This was just my personal experience with 3D and it may be different for others.
 
greekbull
The funny thing is all of the people bashing 3D games gave probably never experienced any if the new stereoscopic 3D in HD. It's pretty amazing. Perfectly clear HD images that come out into your living room and in the case of GT5 literally put you in the game.

I play GT5 and Black Ops in 3D and they're both great. Those that hope this dies off as a fad haven't really experienced just how amazing it is. It's here now and it is for Hardcore gamers who want more out of their experience.

Everybody that's tried GT5 in my cockpit in 3D from a 73" TV has just been blown away. Alot of your experience depends on the quality of your hardware. I'm using Crystal Eyes 5 glasses from RealD which have a 5000:1 contrast ratio which is way above almost all of the TV manufacturers glasses. It's totally flicker free and perfect.
Click to expand...

So everyone watching your TV needs a pair then... say of you have 10 peopel over, or have a family of 7 - thats 7 pair of 3D shades to keep in tip top shape.

That is the point really, its like "virtual reality - it works great for those "emersed" but the rest of the audience is left out.

Thats why HD TV works, you just sit down and watch it, HD signal or not, no special head gear and no "calibration".

Now if 3D TV was setup so that the viewer with the 3D specs sees the 3D image and the rets of the audience see the 2D image then great - but I I dont believe we are there yet, are we? (at least when seeing yet another demo at the Hoem Theatre store earlier today I didnt see a 2D/3D simultaneous display.)
 
RC45
So everyone watching your TV needs a pair then... say of you have 10 peopel over, or have a family of 7 - thats 7 pair of 3D shades to keep in tip top shape.

That is the point really, its like "virtual reality - it works great for those "emersed" but the rest of the audience is left out.

Thats why HD TV works, you just sit down and watch it, HD signal or not, no special head gear and no "calibration".

Now if 3D TV was setup so that the viewer with the 3D specs sees the 3D image and the rets of the audience see the 2D image then great - but I I dont believe we are there yet, are we? (at least when seeing yet another demo at the Hoem Theatre store earlier today I didnt see a 2D/3D simultaneous display.)
Click to expand...

Well your right and wrong. Yes everybody does need the glasses but for gaming I don't gave 10 people sitting here while I play. I have 4 sets of glasses. And all of my glasses let you turn off the 3D and watch the program in 2D while everyone else views 3D.

As far as eye strain that's dye to the equipment not the programming. If you view the programming through cheaper glasses then es you will see flicker and eye strain. Right now only the really high end glasses don't have that issue. But this is a brand new technology. Very few products, adopters, and programming is out there. But when you have the right stuff it's awesome.
 
greekbull
Well your right and wrong. Yes everybody does need the glasses but for gaming I don't gave 10 people sitting here while I play. I have 4 sets of glasses. And all of my glasses let you turn off the 3D and watch the program in 2D while everyone else views 3D.

As far as eye strain that's dye to the equipment not the programming. If you view the programming through cheaper glasses then es you will see flicker and eye strain. Right now only the really high end glasses don't have that issue. But this is a brand new technology. Very few products, adopters, and programming is out there. But when you have the right stuff it's awesome.
Click to expand...

Pity they dont put the 3D tech in the glasses and leave the big screan 2D. That would solve all the issues ;)
 
I don't have a 3D TV neither am I going to get one unless all channels are in 3D and they find a way to refine technology so that my eyes don't hurt and water as soon as I put the damned glasses on. I'm proud of not having glasses in real life and I don't want to put on funky mickey mouse certified glasses. So I'd say it was a waste of time.

IMO, (and this might go a bit off topic) the bigger waste of time was the unnecessary modeling of bolts/rivets/brake pedals/hidden engines etc. If modeling these things was necessary to infuse real time wear and performance stats which adds to the physics then fine. However, if those bolts and engines and hidden things are not really deforming and affecting the physics of the game then they are quite simply a waste of memory.

As an analogy think of the tracks and the trees in them. Especially autumn ring. It's like they put up 2d models of trees and whole straight pictures of backgrounds. And they can be forgiven because those trees are not very important to the race. In contrast, the roads, barriers and tunnels are very highly detailed.

In the same way, manage time and resources properly so they are not wasted on insignificant nuts and bolts and focus on the larger picture. What if time was focused on streamlining the online, either proper or no damage, adding time/weather on all tracks etc. and a lot of the things mentioned in the other thread (things you want changed in GT5).

As director/producer these things fall on Kaz's shoulders and good project managers know where to assign resources and to prioritize things. Though it doesn't help having a boss like Sony butting in with requests for GTPSP and 3D.
 
I've yet to try gaming in 3D (aside from on PC with red/cyan glasses, but anaglyph 3D obviously completely screws up color reproduction, and causes severe eye strain for me even when there's minimal crosstalk), but I was extremely impressed with Avatar in 3D at the cinema a year ago, and even more so with Resident Evil: Afterlife.
I'm really looking forward to Tron Legacy next week.

I've also demoed a variety of 3D TVs in stores (though unfortunately even a Sony store didn't have any game demos available when I was there several months ago, only a couple of animation movies), and was very impressed by those as well.
A Panasonic plasma I tried arguably had the best 3D image, but I hated the glasses as they felt like they were constantly on the verge of slipping off my nose. The Samsung and Sony glasses were much more comfortable.

I'm definitely planning on buying a 3D ready HDTV in 2011, and I can see that the prices are now starting to come down a bit on the 46" and 50" models. I can get a 50" Samsung plasma 3D TV - which I read an extremely positive review of at avforums.com the other day - for less than I paid for my 40" Samsung 1080p HDTV in the same online store a little under three years ago.
And no doubt those prices will drop further over the coming months.

I'm still curious to see how long it will be before the first glasses free 3D TVs arrive though. Weren't there a couple of manufacturers that claimed earlier this year that they would have them out by Christmas this year?
If they arrive reasonably soon it's obviously going to make me rather hesitant to buy one of the current 3D TV models that requires glasses, but I have a suspicion that glasses free 3D TVs might initially be a lot more expensive than the first models of 3D TVs with glasses were.
I seem to remember reading articles earlier this year suggesting that the screen filters need for glasses free 3D are currently very expensive to produce for large screen sizes?
 
Totally and overwhelmingly YES.

Another wasteful example of resources IMO, and a clear indicator of Soonys negative influence over PD.

Should have been shelved, until after the game itself is whole and complete.
 
Arent they already working on new technology that will alow 3D to be seen without glasses?

The new nintendo handheld will be the first exame of this. Lets see what nintendo can do, yes i know its off topic but they will push once again. I gotta google to see which companies already announced to be working on the new 3D without glasses.
 
GTRL_Junior
Yes And Toshiba is the first one to do it. There are two versions. Here is the link to see more info.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13506_3-20018421-17.html
Click to expand...

Thanks for the article link. Aside from the Nintendo 3DS, it's been several months since the last time I read anything about glasses free 3D, and back then I sort of got the impression that the technology was very close (ie. months or a year at most) to being ready for large screens, albeit probably with an initial very high price tag.
Apparently that time frame is somewhat longer:

"The new LCDs are "first step into the 3D future in the consumer home cinema market," Toshiba European marketing chief Sascha Lange said in a statement. "But it will take several years to develop larger 3D TVs without glasses with screen sizes of 40 inches and more at a yet reasonable price point.""

I guess there's no reason for me not to buy a regular 3D TV some time next year then, when I feel the prices for 46" or 50" models have reached a level I can accept - and they are already very close.
 
Back