Top
220°

CVG - Skyrim: 'I couldn't care less about 3D. It ruins the image for me'

CVG - With only a few months left until the long-awaited, long-requested release of Elder Scroll V: Skyrim we checked in with game director Skyrim Todd Howard and had a chat about everything from working on Sony's platforms and 3D to developing modern RPGs and the state of the gaming industry.

Read Full Story >>
computerandvideogames.com
Oculus Quest Giveaway! Click Here to Enter
The story is too old to be commented.
JoGam3086d ago (Edited 3086d ago )

As for me I will be enjoying UC3 in 3D and surround with the volume up day one.

buddymagoo3085d ago (Edited 3085d ago )

At the moment with 3D it seems to be hate it or love it. I think it's best to have it because options are good!

garos823085d ago

i think its mostly hate because most people dont have it. once somebody gets it they normally say its the best thing since sliced bread. me personally am looking forward to picking a 3d tv up soon and experience it first hand to give my opinion on it.

ive only seen wipeout, GT5 and motorstorm pacific drift in 3d so far and they will brilliant

ReservoirDog3163085d ago

@ garos

Nope. I don't like 3d cause it ruins the integrity of the movie/game. It makes everything blurry and dark and it feels like nothing on screen is worth anything cause they're using a gimmick to try to show off. And if feels like an insult to my intelligence that they feel like they have to get my attention using gimmicks. Also the "trying too hard" 3d cinematography is a joke.

Nothing to do with if I have it or not. I just don't like it or want it.

BigBoss073085d ago

I have a 3D TV and I really like the effects and immersion it brings. However, I think movies don't do 3d right because its mostly just stuff flying at the screen and gimmicks to make it seem like true 3D. It gives me motion sickness.

Games are the best though. I've played GT5, Killzone 3, Socom 4, and Crysis 2 in 3D and they look awesome, espcially Killzone 3. It adds a depth perception that I've never seen before like your truly lookin down a sight into the distance. Its some pretty cool stuff.

My 3D verdict: Games: heck yes Movie: not really

Gray-Fox-Type03085d ago

3D is just some tacked on crap.

buddymagoo3085d ago (Edited 3085d ago )

I bet you thought the same about HD. Well Uncharted 3 and Gear of War 3 will be supporting it! I'm sure those devs wouldn't support it if they thought it was "just some tacked on crap".

Ducky3085d ago (Edited 3085d ago )

^ You can't throw all technological advances into the same pile.

HD was just an increase in resolution, there weren't any real downsides.

The current 3D-with-glasses model has problems, and the technology hasn't matured to the point of being a big difference maker.
It might improve in the future (3D is relatively old tech), but currently it's not offering much.

buddymagoo3085d ago (Edited 3085d ago )

Fatoldman

3D adds a real sense of depth. Something that really increases the realism of a fake image. I would say 3D is a bigger leap than HD! More like the leap from black and white to colour, going from a 2d image to a 3d image is huge!

JsonHenry3085d ago

I think that 3D will be always be a 2nd rate perk to any game until glasses-less 3D hits mainstream at an affordable price point.

Tony P3085d ago

Until games make use of it in a meaningful way, it's just unnecessary eye candy tbh.

JoGam3085d ago

Then the same can be said about HD. Why don't you play UC3 or Skyrim for that matter in standard definition. Oh thats right because you like the "EYE CANDY" that's HD. The same can be said about 3D.

Tony P3085d ago

You really think you've got me pigeonholed there, dontcha?

As a matter of fact, HD too does almost nothing to improve the core strengths of a game. It's just eye candy.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 3085d ago
MysticStrummer3085d ago

Translation - Our new engine wasn't designed to support 3D and it's too late to do anything about it.

BlackKnight3085d ago (Edited 3085d ago )

LOL engine needing to be designed for it?....It is two cameras instead of one, that's it, hardly complex at all.

On console, all you need to do is see what graphics you have to turn off or lower, resolution drop, all that "fun" stuff.

Nerdmaster3085d ago

Of course it involves more than simply putting two cameras. Most of the time developers make various effects like dust or smoke at screen depth to save resources for other things. So by just putting 2 cameras, you would see fire in the distance, but the smoke would be at screen depth.

Other effects, like water, can change drastically from one view to another. So developers have to think of a way to make reflections and refractions that stay consistent on both eyes.

Even the cursor and 2D stuff like the names above characters need to be reworked to be in the 3D space.

Those are the things I remember now that developers need to consider when making a 3D game. I know all that because those are some of the problems I see when trying to play in 3D mode a game that wasn't made to be played that way. There's probably more problems that I do not know.

BlackKnight3085d ago (Edited 3085d ago )

You are talking about optimization with the depth buffer, that isn't hard at all as far as taking in a consideration to the design of the engine. Hell, usually there is one already being used. It is implemented easily. Of course there is work to be done with the cursor and menus, but as far as the graphics engine needing to be designed from the beginning with that in mind, that just simply isn't true. It is never too late, in the sense that it wouldn't need the engine to be drastically changed.

I would argue going from LDR artwork and implementing HDR into a game would be WAY worse because all artwork and content would need to be re-examined and make sure it looked correct with various exposure amounts (IE Farcry 1).

Not sure what you are talking about with water. The two cameras would be rendering two different screens and buffers, so the water would easily just reflect what that camera sees from that point of view.

Now, if you are referring to the water reflection itself actually being 3D such as it is in real life ( like looking into a mirror and focus on objects that are at different depths in the mirror) I have yet to see a 3D game do that. Hell, most games don't even do real time reflection so the point is moot.

So my main point is 3D isn't something you have to be thinking of from the beginning or work it into the architecture of the engine. Sure, it helps if you did since you could make sure when working the HUD and menus and such that you don't break anything, but 3D is more of a check box feature that doesn't impact the rest of the game's graphics pipeline like HDR or deferred lighting would.

Nerdmaster3085d ago (Edited 3085d ago )

My point wasn't that developers need to change their engine to make 3D games. I just strongly disagreed that just putting another camera, as you said in your first comment, would be enough.

About the water problems, I'll show you an example. I don't know if I can post links here, but just search for 'World of Wacraft Cataclysm water', preferably see some videos. See how the water reflects, refracts, and how they get affected by ondulations. I think it's very nice. I don't know how they do that, but what I do know is that in 3D it sucks. Because of the way they calculate the water effects, each eye receives an image that's very different from the other, so it's impossible to keep it turned on. To make it great for 3D, Blizzard would have to redo the water effects, and I really don't think it would be easy. And it's not only in WoW that it happens, many games make me turn water effects to low (what usually disables reflection and refraction) to play in 3D comfortably.

And about the first example in my previous post, the developer would need to ditch the easy way to make many effects like smoke and dust, and make them volumetric.

If you really think HUD and menus are the only worries when turning a game to 3D, well... you don't really understand much about 3D rendering.

Oh, and I didn't even begin talking about shadows. In half of the "not ready for 3D" games I play, I have to turn them off because they just don't work in 3D. The slight distance of the two cameras make them be rendered in small differences that make us see two shadows and such. Another think developers need to worry about when making 3D games.

Jocosta3085d ago

I have the same opinion, 3D hasn't really done anything to enhance gameplay for me. And before conclusions are jumped to yes I have played Motorstorm: Pacific Rift in 3D as well as KZ3, didn't do anything for me, so off came the 3D glasses.

IQUITN4G3085d ago (Edited 3085d ago )

I saw a film a little while back demoed in store at some place here in the UK. The 3d effect was very evident but i still came away thinking so what. 3d works but it's not a huge draw for me and i would guess plenty others

Maybe in time it will gain larger acceptance and we'll likely not be able to do without it eventually. It's going to be a hard sell though right now

CaptainMarvelQ83085d ago (Edited 3085d ago )

Who would even want 3D in such a huge environment game like skyrim??
3D is best used when in adventure/action-fast paced games

I don't want to even imagine looking at the dialogue or trying to pick my lines with objects/characters in 3D form popping out of the screen.That is beside the fact that this is an RPG with dozens of hours that your eyes can't handle looking at the screen for such a long time with 3D that would only shorten your daily gaming-hours.

Show all comments (27)
The story is too old to be commented.