Solid_Snake4RD said:
please read the topic before commenting |
Man your biased! I've never commented but I couldn't help it. I think You are one of the most biased people on VGC.
YOur article's stink of favoritism. NO one can say a word with you getting all bent out of shape. Sorry thats just what I think.
I love how you prove stuff off of nothing. IF it supports your favorite console then the evidence doesn't need to be there. This is what I call shenanigans.
| Solid_Snake4RD said:
http://playfront.de/call-of-duty-black-ops-optimales-3d-erlebnis-nur-auf-der-ps3/ |
What a freken load of crap!
OoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoO
As long as they both have glasses to be worn while gaming, they are both fail in my book.
| Solid_Snake4RD said:
but it isn't always that you just put 2d into 2 frames and start working they have to consider what all can be carried onto the 3d version
and i think the 360 version is 640p(i don't know the exact thing) but they can't just double the frames as at |
Thats the thing... Unless 3D is being implemented since the start of the development, all devs can do is double the 2D frame to make it 3D. Call of Duty black ops is not optimized in 3d on the PC, and is doubling the 2D frame to become 3D...so why would the PS3 version be the only one where the engine was optimized since early development? Makes no sense... Also, if the engine was 3D optimized, 360 version would see a performance boost as well.
According to the DF article, 360 version runs at 1040x608 or something like that in 2D...but in 3D it runs at 720p overall...which is 1280x360 *2 per eye. This is why frame rate drops for 3D on the 360 compared to 2D...its running in higher resolution in 3D vs 2D.
PS3 version runs 960x544 in 2D...but in 3D no one can tell at what res it runs as the scaling happens before image is displayed on the TV. My guess is that it also is running at 1280x360 X2 which is then scaled to 1280x1440 frame.
So the PS3 takes a bigger performance hit in 3D because it is optimized for 960x544 vs 1040x608 in 2D and is forced to display 1280x720 in 3D. Its simple logic an math really.
| Rawnchie14 said: As long as they both have glasses to be worn while gaming, they are both fail in my book. |
its not the game's fault but the TV tech which is behind
I don't think 3D will be good until next gen period. I also agree that with glasses it is a fail. Glasses free 3D is the way to go.
disolitude said:
Thats the thing... Unless 3D is being implemented since the start of the development, all devs can do is double the 2D frame to make it 3D. Call of Duty black ops is not optimized in 3d on the PC, and is doubling the 2D frame to become 3D...so why would the PS3 version be the only one where the engine was optimized since early development? thats what i am asking you how do you know they didn't do the thing from the start
Makes no sense... Also, if the engine was 3D optimized, 360 version would see a performance boost as well. performance boost for what
what if even after the optimization,they weren't able to get where they wanted to According to the DF article, 360 version runs at 1040x608 or something like that in 2D...but in 3D it runs at 720p overall...which is 1280x360 *2 per eye. This is why frame rate drops for 3D on the 360 compared to 2D...its running in higher resolution in 3D vs 2D. agree PS3 version runs 960x544 in 2D...but in 3D no one can tell at what res it runs as the scaling happens before image is displayed on the TV. My guess is that it also is running at 1280x360 X2 which is then scaled to 1280x1440 frame. this is where i am not agreeing in 360 the resolution in 3D takes a hit cause of the data limitation and the video is showed you but the PS3 can have the same resolution as it can carry that much data plus the video i showd you So the PS3 takes a bigger performance hit in 3D because it is optimized for 960x544 vs 1040x608 in 2D and is forced to display 1280x720 in 3D. Its simple logic an math really. yeah the 360 versin is better in 2d but has to take a hit in 3d but why does ps3 have to take a hit as they should be able to carry 3D at the same 2D resolution |
Sounds to me from the reviews I've read that neither console is that great in 3D for this game. 3D seems to have been grafted onto the title and everything I've read seems to indicate it adds nothing really but drops the frame rate.
I'm not convinced that anything other than games developed from the ground up for 3D (and by that I mean engine and level design) will result in 3D as more of an added gimmick that doesn't improve the game.
Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...
| Solid_Snake4RD said: |
I just saw that video in full and Im sorry I fail to see how that test applies to 3D.
Also his test is flawed. The 360 dashboard is set to be upscaled to 1080p, but games are able to push true 1080p if optimized. Perfect Dark remake and Virtua Tennis 3 do so...
Both consoles can push higher resolutions than 720p...but in COD Black ops, they are unable to do 720p in 2D. Why do you think PS3 is able to push >720p resolutions in 3D and can't keep up in 2d?
| Reasonable said: Sounds to me from the reviews I've read that neither console is that great in 3D for this game. 3D seems to have been grafted onto the title and everything I've read seems to indicate it adds nothing really but drops the frame rate. I'm not convinced that anything other than games developed from the ground up for 3D (and by that I mean engine and level design) will result in 3D as more of an added gimmick that doesn't improve the game. |
Even on Nvidia forums the initial reaction has been that the 3D effect is not great at all on PC.
1080p per eye and 120 frames per second...and still apaprently sucks. Shows that tech stuf is meaningless, its the game that matters...
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2025 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
