PlayStation 3 in 3D impressions: almost, but not quite
There are plenty of opinions to be had on 3D, and while many of the staff at Engadget could take it or leave it, this particular writer is a pretty firm fan of the concept. Notice the word "concept." 3D is hard to pull off well. We've all had to come to grips with the dimming effect of most 3D tech, due to the fact that we're only seeing about half the potential brightness of a display, and 3D gaming presents a whole different ream of problems. Follow after the break as we walk through some of our experiences with the PlayStation 3 in 3D and see if it can measure up to our hopes and dreams for a world with one extra dimension.
The Killzone 3 gameplay demo we saw yesterday at Sony's presser was really the pinnacle of what we've seen for 3D gaming. Formula: take one of the best-looking games on any system ever and put it in 3D. We were thrilled to try it out on the show floor, but unfortunately we're not so sure it lives up to its self-produced hype. The big problem is that the game runs at a seriously reduced resolution in order to compensate for the doubled framerate of 3D. All the assists and art direction still shine, and the game still looks pretty good, but there are tons of "jaggies," and you notice the lost fidelity every time you get a glimpse of the game running in 2D.
There's also the problem dimming caused by the shutter glasses (possibly exacerbated by the show lights we were playing under), which makes some of the darker or more cluttered scenes seem muddy and difficult to discern. But, it's still great playing in 3D. The sense of space is really tangible, and we had none of the problems we anticipated of not knowing where to focus our eyes. Big scenes felt bigger, danger felt more immediate, and we really see the advantage of 3D for first-person shooters. Unfortunately, while the technical execution remains lacking, it's hard to see using 3D for anything but the most casual of sessions: for an extended playthrough or competitive multiplayer, 2D is a must. On a more positive note, Sony says that they're working on getting the resolution to match (or appear to match) to 2D gameplay in 3D mode, so perhaps this game will get better with time (it's in pre-alpha currently), but we'll have to wait and see.
MotorStorm Apocalypse had similar problems with jaggies caused by a low resolution: let's hope Sony is planning for similar resolution improvements here. With MotorStorm at least we know that MotorStorm: Pacific Rift uses the lower quality assets and effects from splitscreen mode during 3D, along with an upscaled low-res render, and it seems similar here. The graphics aren't bad, but they hardly seem competitive with what MotorStorm looks like in 2D. We also had trouble discerning obstacles at times due to the dimness of the display, and some of the reflections on the screen where we were playing caused even more confusion.
One of the much better looking games we saw was MLB 10 The Show. It looked to be playing at a much higher resolution, and with the higher quality graphics that the relative simplicity of baseball games have always enabled. Also, the cleanness of the field made the screen dimness not as much of an issue, and there really is a benefit to 3D during hitting... can you imagine that? An actual practical use for all these graphical shenanigans?
We also spotted Wipeout HD in all its smooth, high resolution 3D glory, along with a few other titles, but they're all a variation on the same theme: if a game is capable of being played in 1080p at a high frame rate in 2D, then the 3D version will do much better than a game that was already struggling to chug along at 720p (like MotorStorm, for instance). If developers can't manage to squeeze much more power out of the system, we might be waiting until the next generation of consoles for truly premiere 3D experiences, but hopefully games like Killzone and MotorStorm can bump up their resolution and redeem themselves before launch.
The Killzone 3 gameplay demo we saw yesterday at Sony's presser was really the pinnacle of what we've seen for 3D gaming. Formula: take one of the best-looking games on any system ever and put it in 3D. We were thrilled to try it out on the show floor, but unfortunately we're not so sure it lives up to its self-produced hype. The big problem is that the game runs at a seriously reduced resolution in order to compensate for the doubled framerate of 3D. All the assists and art direction still shine, and the game still looks pretty good, but there are tons of "jaggies," and you notice the lost fidelity every time you get a glimpse of the game running in 2D.
There's also the problem dimming caused by the shutter glasses (possibly exacerbated by the show lights we were playing under), which makes some of the darker or more cluttered scenes seem muddy and difficult to discern. But, it's still great playing in 3D. The sense of space is really tangible, and we had none of the problems we anticipated of not knowing where to focus our eyes. Big scenes felt bigger, danger felt more immediate, and we really see the advantage of 3D for first-person shooters. Unfortunately, while the technical execution remains lacking, it's hard to see using 3D for anything but the most casual of sessions: for an extended playthrough or competitive multiplayer, 2D is a must. On a more positive note, Sony says that they're working on getting the resolution to match (or appear to match) to 2D gameplay in 3D mode, so perhaps this game will get better with time (it's in pre-alpha currently), but we'll have to wait and see.

One of the much better looking games we saw was MLB 10 The Show. It looked to be playing at a much higher resolution, and with the higher quality graphics that the relative simplicity of baseball games have always enabled. Also, the cleanness of the field made the screen dimness not as much of an issue, and there really is a benefit to 3D during hitting... can you imagine that? An actual practical use for all these graphical shenanigans?
We also spotted Wipeout HD in all its smooth, high resolution 3D glory, along with a few other titles, but they're all a variation on the same theme: if a game is capable of being played in 1080p at a high frame rate in 2D, then the 3D version will do much better than a game that was already struggling to chug along at 720p (like MotorStorm, for instance). If developers can't manage to squeeze much more power out of the system, we might be waiting until the next generation of consoles for truly premiere 3D experiences, but hopefully games like Killzone and MotorStorm can bump up their resolution and redeem themselves before launch.



























I knew it!
Its too good to be true...
@SolidSnake
still good on sony for trying it, for free as well
Mr. Miller - you need a new shirt buddy. The whole, check out my cool trendy shirt with my upturned collar - is old. Doesn't work so well on grown ups. Makes you look, not so intelligent.
Just a friendly heads up :)
@chansthename
Wont i need to upgrade to a 120hz screen though? And I'm sure those fancy specs there cost a pretty penny too.
@AbSoluTc The whole, criticizing someones fashion sense and expecting them to care what you think - is old. Doesn't work so well on grown ups. Makes you look, not so intelligent.
Just a friendly heads up :)
HOW THE HELL DO PEOPLE WHO WEAR GLASSES EXPERIENCE THIS TYPE OF 3D!???????
@chansthename
Killzone 3 is free?
Ok. I hope this article aims to be a constructive criticism than just rant about a technology that's just getting started. Let's get down with developmental stages of new technology. When we had standard resolutions before we all said that HD is not necessary and it's just a hyped up expensive technology. But all that changed as it developed and maximized its potential for the viewing experience of the consumer (as HD content/media, storage and devices developed). I'm not saying that 3D will experience success too but if developed properly through time, it may. For now, we can't exactly say that the PS3's hardware is already reaching its limit for a technology that is still in its early developmental stage. There will be optimizations on the software end. So all we can do now is wait and see if the technology will ripen up fast.
@AbSoluTc I'm actually just a dork who didn't notice he'd flipped up his collar when taking off his bag. No fashion pretensions here, I promise.
@SolidSnake
This is why I'm kinda pissed that NO ONE is yet talking about the next gen systems. It's been about five years for the xbox360 and it's time to move ON. The Wii is barely capable of doing what it does graphically and even the 360 and PS3 are not capable of 1080p120hz for 3d. Once again, consoles have lagged too far behind PC's and it's time for upgrades.
@Paul Miller You're nice for apologizing to a jerk. Question: Do you see it as likely that Sony will couple GoogleTV with their 3D line of HDTVs? Seems like it'd make sense.
I for one want to play some Virtua Tennis. And I cant wait to see GT5 in 3D. I wonder if we'll start seeing patch announcements from 3rd parties. SFIV, UFC, and Fight Night could look pretty sweet in 3D. Could Heavy Rain's experience be enhanced by 3D?
My only 3D experience has been with Avatar, so I can only be optimistic, and hope 3D becomes a standard feature for Move games.
@AbSoluTc
Funny you say that since its not even a collared shirt. It's a jacket with the top part unzipped. By default, it looks like that.
@SolidSnake: I hate Sony 3D.
Seriously though, the resolution problem sounds about right...
http://www.rgbfilter.com/?p=5366
Bright games that play in 1080p native, like Super Stardust HD, look amazing, but if the resolution is reduced, like it is in Motorstorm, then it gets murky and tons of aliasing on the polygons.
@SolidSnake
I gotta experience it myself to judge. But those shortcomings aren't dealbreakers for most people (millions are fine with Wii graphics so...). And things may improve in the future anyway.
@LazarusDark Also the PS3 and 360 need hdmi 1.4 spec to do true 3D.
@SolidSnake technically its not 3d. its 2d characters with their bodies popping out, but it does not have the effect where bullets are flying or materials flying at you.
@MrT get contacts fool
@SolidSnake I've been saying it for ages... the PS3 needs a serious hardware refresh in order to support smooth hi-def 3D gaming....
@Omen20
I think thats a great question--the better question though would be does Paul think Sony might plan on integrating googleTV into the PS3? Granted it won't be Android, but it'd be pretty freaking cool to get chrome on the PS3 as the browser...
@SolidSnake
Pretty impressive considering how new the tech is in terms of console gaming, especially considering we're talking about retrofitted titles. Still, it's good practice to let this technology mature before acting. If this is the alpha level performance, I cant wait to see what comes down the pipe in say 2 years.
@LazarusDark
THANK YOU! I was thinking the exact same thing...
@soypancho
I think we can expect for next-gen home entertainment:
60" TV with px1080p (double horizontal HD for 3D)
TV with altered polarized vision for polarized stereoscopic glasses
TV which is a computer / internet browser / socials (camera)
Consoles now fully integrate internet for multiplayer games/socials
Consoles that provide true 3D in HD
Consoles that provide 5.1 + surround sound in games
Games are played via movement (MS Natal), swings (Wiimote) and button mashing (DualShock3) or a mixture of them ... wait for it, the player decides on the form of input
So we haven't reached the top of the mountain, we've just passed the clouds and how long is anybody's guess!
@Paul Miller
as a person with experience and more knowledge in this area than me, the games are playable in 2d AND 3d, with an option to turn 3d off/on, right?
i mean, i love 3D and nvidia has made me see its amazingness when it comes to gaming , but my eyes couldnt stand the glasses for large periods of time (poor eyes :()
thanks for any replies :)
@WickedEast no, but the price tag of a 3D TV is a deal breaker. This is a tech that isn't ready for market yet. What developer is going to put any real effort into the 3D part of a 3D game, when only a fraction of the already smaller PS3 user base has a 3D capable TV? And of those, how many will end up not liking the 3D and just playing in 2D? Given all that, why would you put any effort into 3D game development at all?
@MrT Lasik
@SolidSnake
I'm just wondering if this 3D stuff is going to make those of us that keep playing 2D games look worse than if they left off the 3D stuff?
ANyone else thought of this? A game like killzone 2, which was around 25 Gigs or whatever, and they say that adding 3D only uses about 50% more of the disc if I read that right... Then basically you're limiting the amount of the Bluray for 3d, and the majority of us aren't jumping on this bandwagon i don't think anyway..
I still haven't figured out if you have to have a Sony Bravia for the ps3 3D to work. Bravia's are wayyyyyyyyyyy over priced compared to Samsungs and I love Samsung tv's. Not to mention that the Bravia's you have to buy the freaking IR transmitter when Samsung's are included in the tv, and they're still like $500 cheaper. Not to mention the freaking $150 glasses (not included). And my Dad just bought a Samsung LED, he said the 3D version was only a few hundred dollars more but when watching 2D stuff it didn't seem as clear as the regular LED tv.. I haven't went and checked into this, anyone else noticed this?
And one more thing, if you look at the Sony Bravia's 3D tv's. It says they have HDMI 1.3 ports. what's up with that?
3D hurts my eyes, couldn't even sit through avatar with the glasses on.. I'll stick to 2d for the time being.
@ruby i like you man i love your pic! THIZZ!!!! HELL YA!
@ruby Didnt Sony patent some sort of virtual reality or something like that a few years ago? I'm guessing something like that would not cause alot of headaches and would be really cool.
@ruby The shutter technique is different from what is used in theaters. If you bebop to a best buy or similar store, they may have a shutter 3D TV setup for you to test run. It may be easier on your eyes/brain.
WILL SOMEONE PLEASE TELL ME HOW PEOPLE WHO WEAR GLASSES CAN SEE 3D?
@MrT
THE EXACT SAME WAY AS EVERYONE ELSE PEOPLE WITH GLASSES HAVE EYES TOO
@Brad BUT THEY CANT SEE PROPERLY WITHOUT THEM!! WHY THE HELL DO YOU THINK THEY WEAR GLASSES?
@MrT They are abandoned! :'(
@MrT The 3D glasses fit over your regular glasses in most cases. They fit just fine over mine. Still, though, the Sony glasses were heavier than I would like. Someone will make some nice, lightweight ones.
@MrT ACTUALLY, THE 3D GLASSES ARE BIG ENOUGH TO FIT ON OVER THE TOP OF YOUR REGULAR GLASSES, THAT'S A LARGE PART OF WHY THEY LOOK DORKY ow, all this is making my ears hurt somehow.
@MrT
I just take off my glasses. Then, the jaggy resolution problem doesn't bother me at all. There, 2 birds with 1 stone.
@MrT - It's called You put the 3D glasses on in front of your glasses, fool.
Sony+3D=Amazing ! (Soon)
@kiwi32 3D is cool...but you don't need Sony to make it cool.
@Carnival i have nvidia 3d vision, and 3D is AMAZING, it's like looking into a window of the game, it's incredibly immersive... but to be honest, i don't always use it, i don't use it anywhere as much as i thought i would, the technology is there, it's just not practical
@The Geek It's not gentle to my eyes or the head.. With 2D I can play for hours, with 3D i get tired after a while. Sad :/
@Carnival
I am sure sony can improve it tough ...
sony = all hype
little substance...
3D is just another fad from the movie industry.
And hopefully by the next generation of consoles, 3D TVs won't cost an arm and a leg, not to mention the shutter glasses required to view them. Who wants to spend upwards of $2000 on a 3DTV and then have to pay something like $50 per set of glasses?
@Moo
Me.
This is disappointing, but not at all surprising. Kind of expected, in fact. Hopefully the focus on preparing Killzone 3 for 3D doesn't take away from the 2D experience that the VAST majority will have (and prefer).
I played motorstorm in 3D at a Sony style store and I thought it was cool, a but weird because it seemed more like I was racing an RC car instead of a full blown car.
I've never enjoyed any 3D movie I went to until I take the glasses off. 3D just makes the screen darker and muddies up fine lines and details; it's like watching standard def television on a large screen. The technology is simply not there and is a gimmic at this point in the gaming and especially in the movie industry. The faster we can ditch this 3d gimmic fad the better movies and games we'll get.
3D hurts my eyes. I swore Avatar would be the last thing I viewed in 3D until they get the kinks fixed with this technology