Naughty Dog believe that Uncharted 3 is good enough to drive people to buy 3DTVs.
I don't doubt it at all ND, you guys have proven yourselves with every game.
Raising the bar for 3D Gaming =D (on consoles).
On consoles, most pc games are 3d and have been for a while.
@ IronFist "ND, you guys have proven yourselves with every game" So true!
I will buy the special/ limited edition uncharted 3, if it includes a very nice discount on a sony 3DTV! ;-)
nice edit :) And to the 3 who disagreed, pc 3d wipes the floor with anything a console can do in 3d, and that won't change until we have the next consoles.
You guys must not have played a pc game in 3d if you still disagree, both consoles just don't have the power to 3d well. Most games are already 720p (if your lucky) and would need to be rendered twice to play in 3d, that means seriously lowering the resolution or graphics detail (most likely both).
Nobody cares if PCs do 3D. Who buys a 3D MONITOR???
I wish Naughty Dog would stop talking about 3D already. It feels like all they care about is 3D, I really want Uncharted 3 to be amazing but I'm afraid that they're putting too much emphasis on 3D.
They don't really have a choice, they're part of Sony. It's kinda their job to promote everything Sony, and 3D is big for them.
Well you'd rrather have them talk about what ? they worked on 3D for their game of course they are gonna talk about it especially if they are proud of their work ...
well i bought a 3ds on release and the 3d gimmick entertained me for about a day. now I play it with 3d off all the time. i watched avatar in 3d and i prefered it the second time i watched it without 3d.
Someone needs to make it so 3D doesn't make you feel ill when you watch it. Then it would take off.
of course you will naughty dog you should everyone what you could in bringing a masterpiece to live Uncharted 1 uncharted 2 and of course uncharted 3 will.
Ya i think 3d is a gimmick, my tv can do it but i never use it.
As long as they don't compromise the quality of the game.
Well 3D tv is now kinda of cheap. And ND what about Jak Collection HD and Jak4
*runs to buy a 3DTV because naughty dog said so* asAp
I didnt know that ND is able to improve THE 3D option in TV's, lol. COme on guys.. 3D TVs are flop.. the 3D effect is really boring. Its not what was told to the PPL worldwirde, that they will get the 3D from imax to their home. Its just crap....
Say the man without 3D tv.. don't talk about things you don't know desperate xtrollooser.
Tested out Killzone 3 and GT5 and all I can say is WOW! Having that extra depth kinda makes it more immersive. The only downside is that it is a bit choppy (I guess that's what happens when your game isn't 60FPS in 2D). I really hope Uncharted 3 doesn't fall in such a wayside manner. Which really begs the question, how are they managing to get Stereoscopic 3D when their game ISN'T 60FPS? I understand tricks like the one Crysis 2 uses but.. hmmm.. I guess I'll wait for E3 to find out. -End statement
The FPS doesn't have anything to do with 3D, it's the Hz. This is all to my understanding, it's a tricky situation to say the least. The TV has to refresh the image at 120Hz so each eye has a fluid 60Hz and that's why we need new TV's. So basically they take the game and split it into 2 different images. KZ3 supposedly takes a 30FPS game and what it does is it splits it into 2 frames @60HZ so it still looks fluid to our eyes, than uses the PS3's hardware scaler to bump it up to 30FPS at 720P, possibly slightly lower. It's really confusing because everyone is using different techniques. Crysis 2 supposedly just changes the planes to make it look 3D, which makes sense since the game on my PC runs at the same FPS with it on. Basically by my understanding the 3D makes everything run slightly lower to achieve the effect fluidly but it makes things look slightly blurry. GT5 in 3D runs lower than 720P at 30FPS and it is why it looks slightly worse and more blocky than in 2D, still looks great though. edit:: actually found it. http://www.eurogamer.net/ar... "Despite outputting HDMI 1.4's typical 1280x1470 framebuffer, resolution is effectively halved compared to the 2D version of the game. Two images of 640x716 are created and then the RSX's bilinear horizontal scaler is invoked to expand the framebuffer outwards. With traditional, 2D sub-HD titles it is usually the case that the image is scaled in software, allowing full resolution HUD/text to be overlaid. With Killzone 3, we can see that RSX is called in to do the job once every part of the frame is rendered - the HUD is clearly being scaled along with everything else. Bilinear is a fairly rough scaling technique, but it gets the job done. The downsides to the 3D support go beyond the addition of slightly blocky HUD elements, however. There are clearly more aggressive LODs at play, resulting in more noticeable pop-in, which is virtually invisible in 2D mode. There are significant issues with some visual effects too. In 2D mode, Killzone 3 processes alpha effects (particles, smoke and the like) using a lower resolution buffer: 640x360 specifically. Once smoothed and scaled, the look is usually very good. However, in stereo 3D mode, these buffers are halved in size too, down to 320x360 per eye. The result is some rather unsightly effects cropping up throughout the game."
3D is not for me, unless of course we are referring to cup size. I do not want to wear glasses at the movie theater, let alone at my home.
If the 360 had it for the upcoming Halo, you'd be all for it.
Nope, I refuse to watch any more 3d movies, and certainly do not want to play games in 3d. Thx for trying to make it seem like I was deciding that based on fanboy glasses; however, you are completely in error.
Sorry dude. I just can't believe that. You obviously had fanboy glasses before. Why are you in a PS3 thready anyway?
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.