I don't get it... If the game renders the dual images, why do we need a 3DTV? As far as I know, the job of the 3DTV is to convert images into 3D ones. But since KZ3's images are already 3D, why can't a regular TV show the dual images as needed? Batman: Arkham Asylum did it, and you didn't need a 3DTV.
Doesn't make sense that Killzone 3 needs a 3DTV
This topic is locked from further discussion.
I'm sorry, dude, but Yahoo Answers and some dude named David are not a credible source of such information. You may need it, but I know I didn't need one to play Avatar in 3D. Just saying.You do need it... If I just needed a 120Hz, my 250 tv could probably handle it...
Guaracy-
Your post makes less sense than the idea you're trying to convey.I don't get it... If the game renders the dual images, why do we need a 3DTV? As far as I know, the job of the 3DTV is to convert images into 3D ones. But since KZ3's images are already 3D, why can't a regular TV show the dual images as needed? Batman: Arkham Asylum did it, and you didn't need a 3DTV.
Guaracy-
[QUOTE="Guaracy-"]Your post makes less sense than the idea you're trying to convey. Everybody understood it.... Except, of course, you, the edgy individual.I don't get it... If the game renders the dual images, why do we need a 3DTV? As far as I know, the job of the 3DTV is to convert images into 3D ones. But since KZ3's images are already 3D, why can't a regular TV show the dual images as needed? Batman: Arkham Asylum did it, and you didn't need a 3DTV.
JKnaperek
well,
I would love to see a source outside of a dude on yahoo answers! to be honest, i have done some googling and cant find a damn thing to confirm or deny what equipment you will require.
But, maybe more importantly, Killzone 3 is completely optional in 3D. If they were ONLY giving it to you in 3D then you could moan about what equipment you would be FORCED to buy. But seeing as it is essentially an extra (no matter how great it may be) why shouldn't Sony be pushing you to buy a brand new SONY 3D TV? It's all about the money at the end of the day. I understand your issue, but i think your being naive about it!
I for one would love to be able to afford a 3D TV, but i can't. So, i will play KZ3 in High-def 2D. Shame on me!
I haven't found anything absolutely positive either, but this here seems rather explanatory: http://boardsus.playstation.com/t5/Killzone-3/The-possibility-of-playing-Killzone-3-without-a-3D-TV/td-p/45978525 (can't link it, dunno why) Also, I think you should slow down with the words you use... Might offend someone down the road. "Moan" is pretty heavy. And I'm not being naive, gamers (especially console ones) aren't the kind of people that are willing to spend 4000+ dollars on equipment, especially when it's something totally optional. All the fact that 3DTV's are required is gonna do is stop some people who are looking for a 3D gaming experience from buying the game. Some people will buy KZ3 just for the 3D, I assure you, but not if they have to pay an extra 3500 dollars for it. And us, normal-pocketed harcore gamers and Killzone fans, will not want to purchase a TV either, and will just play the game normally, which is gonna be badly received by critics. They'll say: "Oh why do you HAVE to buy another TV just for the 3D functionality... That'll stop people from buying the game, and that's a fault on GG's side...". But I do see your side as well. There's also obviously some dumb folks with way too much money on their hands who will want to spend that kind of money just for an 'extra' on the experience. So that decision, on Sony's part, is kind of a double-edged sword. Most critics won't even count 3D as a feature in KZ3, because it'll be so expensive, but on the other hand, it'll be yet another selling point on Sony's 3D wave; "Killzone 3: Represents what 3D gaming can be like". I hope what I said makes enough sense.well,
I would love to see a source outside of a dude on yahoo answers! to be honest, i have done some googling and cant find a damn thing to confirm or deny what equipment you will require.
But, maybe more importantly, Killzone 3 is completely optional in 3D. If they were ONLY giving it to you in 3D then you could moan about what equipment you would be FORCED to buy. But seeing as it is essentially an extra (no matter how great it may be) why shouldn't Sony be pushing you to buy a brand new SONY 3D TV? It's all about the money at the end of the day. I understand your issue, but i think your being naive about it!
I for one would love to be able to afford a 3D TV, but i can't. So, i will play KZ3 in High-def 2D. Shame on me!
TroubleMaker411
its optional
[QUOTE="TroubleMaker411"]I haven't found anything absolutely positive either, but this here seems rather explanatory: http://boardsus.playstation.com/t5/Killzone-3/The-possibility-of-playing-Killzone-3-without-a-3D-TV/td-p/45978525 (can't link it, dunno why) Also, I think you should slow down with the words you use... Might offend someone down the road. "Moan" is pretty heavy. And I'm not being naive, gamers (especially console ones) aren't the kind of people that are willing to spend 4000+ dollars on equipment, especially when it's something totally optional. All the fact that 3DTV's are required is gonna do is stop some people who are looking for a 3D gaming experience from buying the game. Some people will buy KZ3 just for the 3D, I assure you, but not if they have to pay an extra 3500 dollars for it. And us, normal-pocketed harcore gamers and Killzone fans, will not want to purchase a TV either, and will just play the game normally, which is gonna be badly received by critics. They'll say: "Oh why do you HAVE to buy another TV just for the 3D functionality... That'll stop people from buying the game, and that's a fault on GG's side...". But I do see your side as well. There's also obviously some dumb folks with way too much money on their hands who will want to spend that kind of money just for an 'extra' on the experience. So that decision, on Sony's part, is kind of a double-edged sword. Most critics won't even count 3D as a feature in KZ3, because it'll be so expensive, but on the other hand, it'll be yet another selling point on Sony's 3D wave; "Killzone 3: Represents what 3D gaming can be like". I hope what I said makes enough sense.well,
I would love to see a source outside of a dude on yahoo answers! to be honest, i have done some googling and cant find a damn thing to confirm or deny what equipment you will require.
But, maybe more importantly, Killzone 3 is completely optional in 3D. If they were ONLY giving it to you in 3D then you could moan about what equipment you would be FORCED to buy. But seeing as it is essentially an extra (no matter how great it may be) why shouldn't Sony be pushing you to buy a brand new SONY 3D TV? It's all about the money at the end of the day. I understand your issue, but i think your being naive about it!
I for one would love to be able to afford a 3D TV, but i can't. So, i will play KZ3 in High-def 2D. Shame on me!
Guaracy-
But if someone is going to buy KZ3 specifically for 3D, then they will hae to pay the price for that (if it's required)
If a person is so fed up of 2D gaming that they absolutely must play the game in 3D, then this is also (generally) the kind of person that has money to throw away on the technology. To be honest, your comments seemed a little daft. It's like complaining that KZ2 would play in 720p ONLY if you have an HDTV. I wanted to play it in HD, but at the time i bought it, i couldn't. Simple, i dealt with it and played it through again when i finally bought my HDTV. the same will be said for KZ3. If the game is truely excellent, and 3D will improve on my poorly HD2D, then when i buy a 3DTV, i will replay it.
I am sorry you feel like Sony and GG haven't thought about you for their 3D, but you can hardly be angry at the fact that Sony are updating their technology as it comes. It's like being angry that you cant play a VHS tape in a blu-ray player
Lastly, i apologise if you feel i was being harsh by saying you were moaning, but that is honestly how your original comment came across
EDIT:
I just read the link you gave, and i quote:
"So technically speaking, my assumption is that Killzone 3 is using polarisation. Based on that, any TV should theoretically work; we don't need a 3D TV to play in 3D.
Of course, this is just a guess, I could be wrong."
reading the rest of the article, i would say that anything outside of an official announcment from Sony or GG, should be ignored
I personally think this question is absurd. Why would they sell 3D tvs if every TV could display 3D? Think about it.
Do you know how 3D tvs work? Yes, they display the two different images every other frame. The glasses flicker either eye every other frame so that each eye only sees one of the two images.
The part you are ignoring is that the glasses need to interact wirelessly with the tv to synchronise the flickering of the tv exactly with the flickering of the glasses. Does your tv have a wireless interface with the glasses? No? Then you can't get 3D.
However, I have a theory.
The PS3 has bluetooth AND is generating the two flickering images. Therefore, why can they not make glasses that interact with the PS3 to get the synchronous of the two flickering images on a 120Hz tv?
no you can play it in 2D, they are arguing about what type of TV is needed for the 3D effect.wait, so do we have to play KZ3 in 3d? or can we play it in standard "2d" mode, just like KZ2 was.
almossbb
*sigh*......no, you don't haveto play KZ3 in 3D--it is optional. You can buy KZ3 (when it comes out) and still play it in 2D mode.wait, so do we have to play KZ3 in 3d? or can we play it in standard "2d" mode, just like KZ2 was.
almossbb
I haven't found anything absolutely positive either, but this here seems rather explanatory: http://boardsus.playstation.com/t5/Killzone-3/The-possibility-of-playing-Killzone-3-without-a-3D-TV/td-p/45978525 (can't link it, dunno why) Also, I think you should slow down with the words you use... Might offend someone down the road. "Moan" is pretty heavy. And I'm not being naive, gamers (especially console ones) aren't the kind of people that are willing to spend 4000+ dollars on equipment, especially when it's something totally optional. All the fact that 3DTV's are required is gonna do is stop some people who are looking for a 3D gaming experience from buying the game. Some people will buy KZ3 just for the 3D, I assure you, but not if they have to pay an extra 3500 dollars for it. And us, normal-pocketed harcore gamers and Killzone fans, will not want to purchase a TV either, and will just play the game normally, which is gonna be badly received by critics. They'll say: "Oh why do you HAVE to buy another TV just for the 3D functionality... That'll stop people from buying the game, and that's a fault on GG's side...". But I do see your side as well. There's also obviously some dumb folks with way too much money on their hands who will want to spend that kind of money just for an 'extra' on the experience. So that decision, on Sony's part, is kind of a double-edged sword. Most critics won't even count 3D as a feature in KZ3, because it'll be so expensive, but on the other hand, it'll be yet another selling point on Sony's 3D wave; "Killzone 3: Represents what 3D gaming can be like". I hope what I said makes enough sense.[QUOTE="Guaracy-"][QUOTE="TroubleMaker411"]
well,
I would love to see a source outside of a dude on yahoo answers! to be honest, i have done some googling and cant find a damn thing to confirm or deny what equipment you will require.
But, maybe more importantly, Killzone 3 is completely optional in 3D. If they were ONLY giving it to you in 3D then you could moan about what equipment you would be FORCED to buy. But seeing as it is essentially an extra (no matter how great it may be) why shouldn't Sony be pushing you to buy a brand new SONY 3D TV? It's all about the money at the end of the day. I understand your issue, but i think your being naive about it!
I for one would love to be able to afford a 3D TV, but i can't. So, i will play KZ3 in High-def 2D. Shame on me!
TroubleMaker411
But if someone is going to buy KZ3 specifically for 3D, then they will hae to pay the price for that (if it's required)
If a person is so fed up of 2D gaming that they absolutely must play the game in 3D, then this is also (generally) the kind of person that has money to throw away on the technology. To be honest, your comments seemed a little daft. It's like complaining that KZ2 would play in 720p ONLY if you have an HDTV. I wanted to play it in HD, but at the time i bought it, i couldn't. Simple, i dealt with it and played it through again when i finally bought my HDTV. the same will be said for KZ3. If the game is truely excellent, and 3D will improve on my poorly HD2D, then when i buy a 3DTV, i will replay it.
I am sorry you feel like Sony and GG haven't thought about you for their 3D, but you can hardly be angry at the fact that Sony are updating their technology as it comes. It's like being angry that you cant play a VHS tape in a blu-ray player
Lastly, i apologise if you feel i was being harsh by saying you were moaning, but that is honestly how your original comment came across
EDIT:
I just read the link you gave, and i quote:
"So technically speaking, my assumption is that Killzone 3 is using polarisation. Based on that, any TV should theoretically work; we don't need a 3D TV to play in 3D.
Of course, this is just a guess, I could be wrong."
reading the rest of the article, i would say that anything outside of an official announcment from Sony or GG, should be ignored
I'm not angry... I don't care about 3D as much as I probably should. However, I'd obviously like to get that feature for free. Some friendly criticisim though, this: "If a person is so fed up of 2D gaming that they absolutely must play the game in 3D, then this is also (generally) the kind of person that has money to throw away on the technology." makes absolutely no sense. Why is it that one thing consequently leads to another? People can just fall in love with 3D by going at a 3D movie and not necessarily have anything to do with the amount of money they have. After seeing football in 3D for the first time, for example, I did get fed up with the regular transmission, but that won't make me buy a 3DTV just for that. I barely even watch football now because it's kinda boring if it's not in 3D. Also, the comment about complaining that a regular TV can't play in 720p was very childish. Resolition is a completely different matter, the game does display the 720p graphics, the TV is the one that can't translate that. It receives the HD signal from the console, but it doesn't have enough "horsepower" to show the image in 720p, it doesn't have enough horizontal lines (assuming you know how resolution in TVs works). But the 3D is just an image. Nothing more. A double, flickering image. Any TV can transmit that, unless the technology goes far beyond my knowledge, which seems to be the case with Killzone 3.You do need it... If I just needed a 120Hz, my 250 tv could probably handle it...
I'm sorry, dude, but Yahoo Answers and some dude named David are not a credible source of such information. You may need it, but I know I didn't need one to play Avatar in 3D. Just saying. i like how you kept it real lmaoif you do need it then sony is going to have to buy me one because i don't know about you guys but i'm not blowing 2000 bucks on a new tv to play 1 game
Arkham Asylum used an older, inferior 3D display mode that is compatible with any standard display. That 3D mode is known as anaglyph 3D, and it uses color tinting to create the illusion of 3D. The left and right views are separately tinted, and then merged back into a single frame before ever being sent to your display. The eyewear worn to complete the effect are color tinted, "passive" eyeglasses.
The PS3 is capable of sending out the individual left and right views for the new 3D in a sequential or "packed" format (two separate views in one frame, either stacked or side-by-side). No color tinting is used, but a 3D TV is required to display the packed frames correctly. Electronically shuttered, or "active", eyeglasses are also required.
There is another technique used in theaters that doesn't require electronic, active shuttered eyeglasses. RealD 3D and Digital Imax project packed frames using polarized light, and the eyewear used are passive, polarized eyeglasses. But this technique is not used in home displays yet, and it still requires a source of frame-packed 3D, not merged anaglyph.
This article explains why older TVs can't display the new sequential 3D correctly: http://www.bigpicturebigsound.com/Can-My-120-Hz-HDTV-Be-Upgraded-to-a-3D-TV.shtml .
Now in theory, they could program Killzone 3 to be viewed in the cheap anaglyph format compatible with any TV and colored cardboard and cellophane eyeglasses. But this is unlikely, Sony wants to impress people with their 3D capability, not just rehash an older, failed technique.
More info about 3D here:
http://www.ehow.com/about_6538615_anaglyph-vs_-shutter-glasses.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anaglyph_image
I'm not angry... I don't care about 3D as much as I probably should. However, I'd obviously like to get that feature for free. Some friendly criticisim though, this: "If a person is so fed up of 2D gaming that they absolutely must play the game in 3D, then this is also (generally) the kind of person that has money to throw away on the technology." makes absolutely no sense. Why is it that one thing consequently leads to another? People can just fall in love with 3D by going at a 3D movie and not necessarily have anything to do with the amount of money they have. After seeing football in 3D for the first time, for example, I did get fed up with the regular transmission, but that won't make me buy a 3DTV just for that. I barely even watch football now because it's kinda boring if it's not in 3D. Also, the comment about complaining that a regular TV can't play in 720p was very childish. Resolition is a completely different matter, the game does display the 720p graphics, the TV is the one that can't translate that. It receives the HD signal from the console, but it doesn't have enough "horsepower" to show the image in 720p, it doesn't have enough horizontal lines (assuming you know how resolution in TVs works). But the 3D is just an image. Nothing more. A double, flickering image. Any TV can transmit that, unless the technology goes far beyond my knowledge, which seems to be the case with Killzone 3.Guaracy-
1. Falling in love with 3D is different from insisting on playing in it. I LOVE 3D, as much as it's a dumb-ass way to watch movies, i thoroughly enjoy watching movies in it. what i said basically came down to the type of person that insists on playing in 3D because HD simply isn't good enough generally is the kind of person that can throw money away on upping their tehnology. The fact that you cant watch 2D football is just laughable. If this was really such a big deal to you, you would have found a way to get a 3DTV
2. I understand that "resolution is a completely different matter" what i was trying to do is show you just how daft your argument was. Complaining that you needed new hardware for an optional feature is no different to my argument about 720p on a standard tv. It's a technological advancement that not everybody can afford. which is why you can play it in 480 if you have to.
3. The technology requires that, not only does your TV display the dual image (@120hz minimum if i remember rightly) but you need the glasses that work with it. Using the old school 3D method blurs the image. on a 3DTV, two different sets of images are shown, essentially running at 60hz per eye. you then need the glasses to be synched to the TV. if you have cheap or badly sinched glasses, you won't get the 3D effect, instread the screen will just look blurry. The point of 3d IN kz3 is emmersion, you should feel like you are within the game. you are not going to get a 3D game, on an exclusive platform, from a manufacturer that's trying to push it's 3DTV products, that is using a technology that has been around since 1950.
[QUOTE="Guaracy-"]I'm not angry... I don't care about 3D as much as I probably should. However, I'd obviously like to get that feature for free. Some friendly criticisim though, this: "If a person is so fed up of 2D gaming that they absolutely must play the game in 3D, then this is also (generally) the kind of person that has money to throw away on the technology." makes absolutely no sense. Why is it that one thing consequently leads to another? People can just fall in love with 3D by going at a 3D movie and not necessarily have anything to do with the amount of money they have. After seeing football in 3D for the first time, for example, I did get fed up with the regular transmission, but that won't make me buy a 3DTV just for that. I barely even watch football now because it's kinda boring if it's not in 3D. Also, the comment about complaining that a regular TV can't play in 720p was very childish. Resolition is a completely different matter, the game does display the 720p graphics, the TV is the one that can't translate that. It receives the HD signal from the console, but it doesn't have enough "horsepower" to show the image in 720p, it doesn't have enough horizontal lines (assuming you know how resolution in TVs works). But the 3D is just an image. Nothing more. A double, flickering image. Any TV can transmit that, unless the technology goes far beyond my knowledge, which seems to be the case with Killzone 3.TroubleMaker411
1. Falling in love with 3D is different from insisting on playing in it. I LOVE 3D, as much as it's a dumb-ass way to watch movies, i thoroughly enjoy watching movies in it. what i said basically came down to the type of person that insists on playing in 3D because HD simply isn't good enough generally is the kind of person that can throw money away on upping their tehnology. The fact that you cant watch 2D football is just laughable. If this was really such a big deal to you, you would have found a way to get a 3DTV
2. I understand that "resolution is a completely different matter" what i was trying to do is show you just how daft your argument was. Complaining that you needed new hardware for an optional feature is no different to my argument about 720p on a standard tv. It's a technological advancement that not everybody can afford. which is why you can play it in 480 if you have to.
3. The technology requires that, not only does your TV display the dual image (@120hz minimum if i remember rightly) but you need the glasses that work with it. Using the old school 3D method blurs the image. on a 3DTV, two different sets of images are shown, essentially running at 60hz per eye. you then need the glasses to be synched to the TV. if you have cheap or badly sinched glasses, you won't get the 3D effect, instread the screen will just look blurry. The point of 3d IN kz3 is emmersion, you should feel like you are within the game. you are not going to get a 3D game, on an exclusive platform, from a manufacturer that's trying to push it's 3DTV products, that is using a technology that has been around since 1950.
1. It's not as simple as "finding a way" to get a 3DTV. What am I gonna do, steal it? I just got an HDTV, 7 months ago. Not ready to move on to a 3DTV. And as laughable as it may be, it's true. I didn't say I "can't" watch football in 2D anymore, it just got boring, because I know I could be watching it the other way. I don't cheer for any FB team, if that's why you think it's laughable... I just watch it because I like it.2. It's not daft to complain about a feature that for some, is free (Batman AA buyers) and for others, it's not. If I'd ever seen someone play a game in HD on a SDTV, I'd obviously complain as well... Note that I'm not complaining to the manufacturer, just a random post on a gaming website to get some thoughts. I know this won't get anywhere lol
3. Now that I know how the tech works, it's kinda pointless to continue arguing... The initial point of the topic, actually, was to find out from someone who knew, only it came out kinda arrogant, I guess. That's why you and that other guy with the phoenix wright avatar felt like arguing. Sorry about that :P
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment