News: Will Developers Ditch 3DS 3D? Page 1

Will Developers Ditch 3DS 3D?

04.07.2010

Will Developers Ditch 3DS 3D? on Nintendo gaming news, videos and discussion

Some developers working on the new 3DS have revealed that games can look and perform much better when the 3D effect is scrapped.

According to a report on IGN (via Kotaku), some of those who are getting to grips with the new system have noted that without having to render two images for 3D, you can theoretically pump out twice the processing power for "additional texture passes and more complex object and environment geometry". Visually games can go up to 60fps instead of 30, for example.

Whether developers will go around Nintendo and create 3D-less games is uncertain, but we're sure one or two will take the risk at somepoint.

Would you trade the 3D effect for potentially better graphics and performance?

Comment on this article

Comments

«s previous12 next »

Squidboy 04.07.2010#1

Ugh, the spin Kotaku puts on anything Nintendo related is laughable.

The 3DS's power lies in it's processing ability, if you halve the output by cutting out 3D display, your naturally going to be able to push more on a solitary screen. It gives developers more options as to what type of games they can make, it doesn't give developers incentive to "ditch 3D" Smilie

When the 3DS was announced some months ago, I fully expected to see two lines, and I welcomed it wholeheartedly. I'll be very happy if they drop the bottom screen display and touch all together, in some games - I miss the Gameboy.

( Edited 04.07.2010 11:32 by Squidboy )

3DS Code 2578-3122-0744

Raff 04.07.2010#2

I'm surprised and glad that they are allowed to do this.

It's going to be shit and you jolly well know it.

Squidboy 04.07.2010#3

Raff said:
I'm surprised and glad that they are allowed to do this.

Why are you surprised?. Nintendo didn't force licensed developers into using touch, so why would they force them into using 3D? The 3D effect is controlled entirely by users and cannot be enforced by software.

Nintendo DS developers are free to use features as they please, Nintendo's only requirements concern the nature of the content being family safe and in line with their age old company ethics.

( Edited 04.07.2010 11:40 by Squidboy )

3DS Code 2578-3122-0744

Darkflame 04.07.2010#4

They could also render to half the resolution agaain and get even more polygons!
Or ditch realtime polygon 3d and render of huge numbers of advanced effects and polygons within just 2 or 3 minutes!

( Edited 04.07.2010 12:41 by Darkflame )

http://www.fanficmaker.com <-- Tells some truly terrible tales.
Last update; Mice,Plumbers,Animatronics and Airbenders. We also have the socials; Facebook & G+.

Marzeee 04.07.2010#5

Since 3D doesn't appeal to me, I'd rather developers ditch the 3D and make better looking games, along with making them run smoother.

( Edited 04.07.2010 12:44 by Marzy )

Satoshi 04.07.2010#6

This is just like saying making the N64 run in 2D makes the games run prettier.
Sure it probably does and having a combination of 3D and non 3D games will be cool, but surely the point is that with a new console we want a new experience?

Avoid Games Like the Plague, productivity++

Jimmy2000 04.07.2010#7

Theres no way they will ditch it, at least in the first year of release, 3D is a pretty powerful gimmick right now and it will sell your games just like people pay more to see 3D movies.

If your game doesn't have it, on a system ment to be all about 3D games then it will probably get overlooked.

I'm guessing later in the systems life cycle we will get more of this though with certain developers looking for ways to get more from the hardware and more ways to differentiate there titles when 3D has become the norm and is no longer a powerful gimmick (although by then they may work out certain gameplay mechanics that only work with 3D and may want to keep it, who knows).

But at release I would be surprised if 100% of the retail games where not 3D capable.

WP-Final 04.07.2010#8

The 3DS also has motion and gyro sensors. In order to use them, the 3D would have to be turned off as the 3D would mess up if you're tilting are twisting the handheld.

J4K 04.07.2010#9

Nintendo has, for the last few consoles, been great about giving developers a huge amount of options, without forcing them to pursue a certain course. You could almost argue its been a weakness at times (why aren't more online games supporting Wii speak? Because Nintendo doesn't mandate that they do).

But it is fairly obvious that if you are only creating one image vs two, you're going to have more processing power to go around. I'd definitely like to see a game or two that pushes the system all out like this, but I think most devs will use 3D. Its just too cool not to. And you lose a bit of 'wow' power if a game on the 3DS...doesn't have 3D visuals.

Lynk 04.07.2010#10

If Snake Eater can run like that in 3D, what the hell is this system capable of without it? It must outstrip the PS2 and even Gamecube by a fair stretch if it outputs one of the better looking PS2 games in 3D.

Add me on anything. I'm always looking for new friends/opponents/town visitors/chances to appear more popular than I actually am.

crackedthesky 04.07.2010#11

I'm no expert, but this little theory makes no sense to me.
Yeah, the system is loading two images, so it's rendering two of everything... but not at the same time. It goes one after the other, alternating more rapidly than the eye can detect. To me, that sounds less like it's actually loading everything at a slightly different angle, and more like it would just need a shift in the camera or point of view. But even if not; again, it isn't loading two of everything simultaneously.
And even if it was, it wouldn't effect the voerall graphics, just the framerate. Think back to that glitch from the original Majora's Mask, where you could duplicate every item in Southern Swamp over and over again. The N64 essentially loaded the entire region and everything in it over five times, and the framerate barely dropped (though crashing became much more likely.) And that's when everything in the area is duplicated multiple times at the same time. The 3DS, for all we know, doesn't work that way at all.

But anyway, I don't think Nintendo will force 3D upon developers. I think there is probably a game or two out there which just simply isn't going to work in 3D.

NNID: crackedthesky
My blog, mostly about writing: http://www.davidjlovato.com

erv 04.07.2010#12

What bothers me more about stories like this, is how developers respond with incredible technicality with no regard to playing experience or enjoyment whatsoever.

J4K 04.07.2010#13

Yeah, the system is loading two images, so it's rendering two of everything... but not at the same time.

Why wouldn't it be rendering two images the same time? Its trying to create a 3D effect, so surely it would show each eye an image simultaneously?

darkflame (guest) 04.07.2010#14

Yeah, the system is loading two images, so it's rendering two of everything... but not at the same time. It goes one after the other,

Nope , your thinking of shutter glass's based 3d.
This form of 3d technique is both at once, directed to each eye.
-------

Anyway, as others have said, one of Nintendos strongest points is they have been increaseing developers options, not replaceing or restricting them.

Microsoft (imho) have taken a massive wrong step by demanding all their first Kinect games cant use a controller at the same time. So, thats no controlled character movement then. If your game using Kinect, your not going to have analogue stick based movement.

john doe (guest) 05.07.2010#15

Why would I buy a non 3d game for a 3d system? If I want that, I would have bought a dsi a long time ago. Should developers scrap 3d yeah but, but it would make sense to make 3d games for a 3d system. Its like saying, I bought a Wii for non motion ctrl games. I don't care how awesome the game is, if it has no motion ctrl then I'll buy a different console. Common sense people, common sense.

jesusraz 05.07.2010#16

john doe (guest) said:
Why would I buy a non 3d game for a 3d system?

That's like saying 'Who would buy a non-touchscreen enabled DS game?'

...

Adam Riley [ Director :: Cubed3 ]

UNITE714: Weekly Prayers | Bible Verses

RudyC3 05.07.2010#17

Some Nintendo DS games that make very little use of touch screen or dual screen altogether sell millions

See the Dragon Quest remakes on Nintendo DS :

-No touch controls
-Aside from the dual display that enlarges the view, the gameplay isn't based on the dual screen setup
-No microphone use either

And they sold over the million bar in Japan, even though they were just (very good) remakes.

People won't just buy the 3DS for the 3D, but mostly for all the awesome games it'll get. Just the same way not all people who buy a DS want it for the touch screen controls, but for all the awesome exclusive titles it has in its catalog.

( Edited 04.07.2010 20:24 by Kafei2006 )

Cubed3 Limited Staff :: Review and Feature Writer

Mush 05.07.2010#18

Ditching 3D on some games would be no loss.. like others have said, not all DS games use the touch screen/microphone. Just like the DSi-enhanced games, not all of them use the camera... so ditching 3D for making a better looking, smoother running game would be great.

I know 3D is one of the main selling points for the 3DS, but it doesn't mean it has to incorporate it into every game. Some games won't even suit a 3D perspective (Such as 2D animated games)

knighty 05.07.2010#19

sQUIDBOY,

darkflame (guest) said:
Yeah, the system is loading two images, so it's rendering two of everything... but not at the same time. It goes one after the other,
Nope , your thinking of shutter glass's based 3d.
This form of 3d technique is both at once, directed to each eye.
-------

Anyway, as others have said, one of Nintendos strongest points is they have been increaseing developers options, not replaceing or restricting them.
Microsoft (imho) have taken a massive wrong step by demanding all their first Kinect games cant use a controller at the same time. So, thats no controlled character movement then. If your game using Kinect, your not going to have analogue stick based movement.

That makes no difference to the processing power required. The "shutter glasses" version just means your game will run effectively at half the effective frame rate. ie, a 60fps game will run at 30fps, so to get 60fps you have to run at 120fps.

Anyway, with the 3DS, it's definitely true that you'll get roughly double the power by not using the 3D. Of course that is purely from a visual point of view though, you don't get more CPU time or anything, because that should largely be unaffected by the double rendering (that's not quite true, but it's near enough true).

For consoles though, there's a few tricks you can do to make 3d cheaper, and many effects done on the gpu are independent of view direction (any gpu physics for example) and you can do things like interlacing the 2 frames to make pixel costs cheaper. Still being absolutely blown away by Crysis 2 being 3d though....

EdEN 05.07.2010#20

I believe that developers cannot ditch the 3D because the system is designed to display in both parallax screens even if the 3D is turned off by the slider.

GuyB (guest) 06.07.2010#21

Not sure really, it depends whether you need 3D with the game to make it awesome, or if you need better graphics and performance to make it awesome, say rockstar realesed a version of GTA 4 for the nintendo 3DS, then I would prefer better graphics, performance and game play over 3D, however on smaller games, say for instance, even though I hate this game, pokemon diamond and pearl, 3D would be more important than performance and graphics

Saying that, if developers were torn between whether to go with performance, game play and graphics or 3D, they could release two versions of the game,although with half the resources it would probably mean two average games instead of one excellent game, I don't know, we will just have too wait ans see what the developers and game people do.

darkflame (guest) 06.07.2010#22

knighty said:
sQUIDBOY,
darkflame (guest) said:
Yeah, the system is loading two images, so it's rendering two of everything... but not at the same time. It goes one after the other,
Nope , your thinking of shutter glass's based 3d.
This form of 3d technique is both at once, directed to each eye.
-------

Anyway, as others have said, one of Nintendos strongest points is they have been increaseing developers options, not replaceing or restricting them.
Microsoft (imho) have taken a massive wrong step by demanding all their first Kinect games cant use a controller at the same time. So, thats no controlled character movement then. If your game using Kinect, your not going to have analogue stick based movement.
That makes no difference to the processing power required. The "shutter glasses" version just means your game will run effectively at half the effective frame rate. ie, a 60fps game will run at 30fps, so to get 60fps you have to run at 120fps.

I think you miss read my post.
I was arguing that the 3DS doesn't use the shutter glass method like knightly said, and thus his point doesn't apply.

That said, rendering to double the resolution isn't exactly going to take double the power. It gets a lot more messy then that.

crackedthesky 06.07.2010#23

john doe (guest) said:
Why would I buy a non 3d game for a 3d system? If I want that, I would have bought a dsi a long time ago. Should developers scrap 3d yeah but, but it would make sense to make 3d games for a 3d system. Its like saying, I bought a Wii for non motion ctrl games. I don't care how awesome the game is, if it has no motion ctrl then I'll buy a different console. Common sense people, common sense.

So you aren't going to buy any games for PS3 either, once they convert to 3D? You'll just, not ever buy the games that came out before that?
That wasn't common sense. That was stupidity. You wouldn't buy the game because it's 3D (unless you're a buffoon,) you'd buy it based on what the game is...
By the way, I'm not sure if you'v ever heard of a little Wii game called Super Smash Brothers Brawl, but it has no motion control, and a shit ton of people bought it, so I guess that's case closed on your "common sense" argument.

To the others: My bad on getting the technology wrong.
It's still a dumb point by the magazine, though. The 3DS already outputs graphics somewhere between the Wii and the Xbox 360. Cutting out 3D just to make it look a little bit better is a waste of time. I could see doing it for something graphically equivalent to the Wii maybe, but the games really look good in comparison to everything on the market. Cutting out a main feature to make them look better is just impractical.

( Edited 06.07.2010 00:51 by justonesp00lturn )

NNID: crackedthesky
My blog, mostly about writing: http://www.davidjlovato.com

Mush 06.07.2010#24

crackedthesky 06.07.2010#25

Mush123 said:

Yes, because two on-topic posts right next to each other is FAR less productive than posting a picture having nothing to do with anything in the world, much less this thread.

My computer wouldn't let me quote more than one person, so I just posted my second point (since it was in response to at least three different people) as a different post. But if it bugs you that badly, I'll edit it.

NNID: crackedthesky
My blog, mostly about writing: http://www.davidjlovato.com

«s previous12 next »