By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - would you prefer HD or 3D in games?

 

hd or 3d in games?

hd 95 60.90%
 
3d 10 6.41%
 
hd3d 51 32.69%
 
Total:156
d21lewis on 29 November 2013

3DS > Vita :P

Everywhere else, HD wins! Playing a game like Super Mario 3D Land or Link Between Worlds on 3DS really makes you appreciate when 3D is done right, though.



Around the Network
dahuman on 29 November 2013

I like both about the same, especially HD3D at high FPS. You guys need to look up castAR and not just look at Oculus, there are other good options incoming.



aikohualda on 29 November 2013

both! i want an imax experience on my games



 

Netyaroze on 29 November 2013
SvennoJ said:
Netyaroze said:
SvennoJ said:
I can play HD for hours and hours, 3D gets tiring with its fixed focus.
I'm very interested in a HD oculus rift though, just not sure how a 5 hour Skyrim session is going to feel.


I would not recommend it in its current form. And even HD Rift is still not good enough. I hope for 1440p Rift once it hits the consumer market. There are suitable displays for phones in the 5-6 inch range on their way with that resolution and the rift would massively profit from that.

They have also reduced the lag to astounding 20ms and less in several prototypes. Which will help alot in reducing nausea same with positional tracking which will help alot to cure the disconnect between your senses.

Skyrim is not optimized for the Rift and its visible all the proportions are off you move too fast etc etc. Its undeniable that its an inferior VR experience right now still impressive but 5 hour sessions are too much.

But the potential of a consumer rift combined with optimized software is sky high and lets any 3D technology look like a joke in comparison.

 

Edit: On the tiring issue your eyes will not tire as they are in a relaxed natural state focused on infinity while using the rift. The problem with the rift is the nausea and the resolution not the eye strain.

The tiring comes from the disparity between stereo cues and focal cues. I imagine it will be the same with Occulus rift, everything is in focus at the same distance while the stereo cues try to convince you they're at different depths. Yeah low resolution (spread out over 100 degrees, 1440p is probably still low) and a slight delay when turning your head are probably worse.

Skyrim was just an example, a space sim or racer seem better suited to the tech. I'll risk nauseea and fatigue for that. I just hope I won't be amongst the ones that get a migraine headache after use.

 

I can tell you from my personal experience that the oculus rift had no tiring effect on my eyes at all.It was not even a little bit exhausting unlike cinema 3D. 

 

Well try it out for yourself but everyone who tried it with me was amazed by how natural the 3d perception felt.

 

Headaches well no. I got slightly ill at the beginnig mainly due to the disparity what I saw and what I sensed. Characters in games run insanly fast and stop suddenly unlike in real life they also accelerate from 0 to 30 mph in no time. Migraines are less common than motion sickness actually I hear people always complain about motion sickness but very few get a headache it seems.

 

1440p is still low but thats the most optimistic option in a 2014 device and definetly way better than 1080p or 720p. Right now you get a pixelated mess just a few meters ahead of you. Far objects are unrecognizable. Its all a blur. The Screendoor effect is massive. You get used to it though. But with 1440p we would get 4 million pixels 2 million for each eye thats not that bad.

 8k or 16k would be ideal but I doubt we will see 8k Phone displays I think 4k will be the max. Which should be good enough for now.



Netyaroze on 29 November 2013
dahuman said:
I like both about the same, especially HD3D at high FPS. You guys need to look up castAR and not just look at Oculus, there are other good options incoming.


I want to be immersed in a 3D world completly I want it to fill my vision and I want to feel like I am there not just see a tiny pixelated screen overlay. AR is like 90s VR not there yet and needs way more advanced display technologies. We will not have a usable device for a long time.



Around the Network
dahuman on 29 November 2013
Netyaroze said:
dahuman said:
I like both about the same, especially HD3D at high FPS. You guys need to look up castAR and not just look at Oculus, there are other good options incoming.


I want to be immersed in a 3D world completly I want it to fill my vision and I want to feel like I am there not just see a tiny pixelated screen overlay. AR is like 90s VR not there yet and needs way more advanced display technologies. We will not have a usable device for a long time.


The problem is the texture work has to be much better and games have to be designed differently from the get go, games look fine that way even at 720p 120Hz with proper AA and AF, but if you don't design your game based off these things then you will see obvious problems.



EricFabian on 29 November 2013

why not both?



torok on 29 November 2013

Well, I play using both. But is a nonsense question. 3D would look terrible without HD.



Bet with jetforcejiminy: PS4 will pass the Wii lifetime numbers.

thewayofthepath on 29 November 2013

Netyaroze said:

Well try it out for yourself but everyone who tried it with me was amazed by how natural the 3d perception felt.

???

There's nothing natural about stereoscopic 3D.



ChristianTheAtheist on 29 November 2013
thewayofthepath said:

Netyaroze said:

Well try it out for yourself but everyone who tried it with me was amazed by how natural the 3d perception felt.

???

There's nothing natural about stereoscopic 3D.


Everything you see in the natural world is a stereoscopic 3D image (unless you have one of your eyes closed all the time). But I guess that you mean in stereoscopic technologies.