21 replies to this topic

[Naomi]

http://www.thegamers...-not-at-launch/

While it will not be at launch, this basically proves that it is capable of big things

And yeah, I know that this was confirmed like last July, but now we can see that it's not scaled down 3D, it's FULL 1080p 60 frames per second (Probably 120 fps for 3D?) which is extremely HARD for GPU's to handle

And yay my first topic post!

[Stephen]

this is good news, but are you sure about 120 fps for 3d? oh well I don't have a 3d TV anyway.

Edited by stephen, 29 July 2012 - 07:09 AM.

[Naomi]

this is good news, but are you sure about 120 fps for 3d? oh well I don't have a 3d TV anyway.

60 frames per second per eye

[Blake]

I don't have a 3D TV, but really cool anyway.

[3Dude]

Anonymous source is anonymous.

[Hinkik]

That would mean 1080p 120fps games or

1080p 30 fps with SUPER DUPER ULTRA IMPOSSIBRU GRAPHICS!

[Keviin]

That's pretty damn sick Nintendo!

[MorbidGod]

Since this actually hours with what we know, i am inclined to believe it. But we will wait and see!

[FreakAlchemist]

Not many people own a 3d tv so it's just a passing thought to me but for that 3% in the world that does own one good for them.

[Desert Punk]

The performance demands for generating 1080p in 3D at 60fps are absolutely huge. You are effectively talking about 2160p being rendered in 32 meg of embedded video memory. This is probably one of the most unrealistic and near impossible rumours the wii u has had so far. Chance of this being true is near zero. Chance of the next gen Xbox and Playstation being capable of this very low at least at 60 frames per second per eye view. This is more likely to happen in the next next gen.

[3Dude]

The performance demands for generating 1080p in 3D at 60fps are absolutely huge. You are effectively talking about 2160p being rendered in 32 meg of embedded video memory. This is probably one of the most unrealistic and near impossible rumours the wii u has had so far. Chance of this being true is near zero. Chance of the next gen Xbox and Playstation being capable of this very low at least at 60 frames per second per eye view. This is more likely to happen in the next next gen.

Well, im certainly not vouching for anonymous unnamed leak here, But typically, for stereoscopic displays the left and right images are interlaced, so you have two images of half the horizontal resolution, interlaced into one image with every other vertical line being directed to the respective eye.

So its 2 590p images for each eye.

[Varg]

Thats excellent if true. Not that im into the whole 3d thing, its just the power required to do that is high.

[3Dude]

Thats excellent if true. Not that im into the whole 3d thing, its just the power required to do that is high.

Not really.

1080p 60fps maybe. But this 'source' didnt specify 120fps for 60fps in 3d, and quite frankly, Im willing to bet he doesnt know thats whats needed.

As for the 3d utilizing camera offset and 2 half resolution images, Nintendos been using the same method since the cube.

[Joshua]

Seems like a Godsend of a console for that to happen. Having the Wii U support 1080p (native) on 60 fps AND running on 3D would probably turn this thing onto an electric iron. Which leads us to a new motto for the Wii U;

"FIGHT WRINKLES AS YOU FIGHT BOWSER!"

[Desert Punk]

Well, im certainly not vouching for anonymous unnamed leak here, But typically, for stereoscopic displays the left and right images are interlaced, so you have two images of half the horizontal resolution, interlaced into one image with every other vertical line being directed to the respective eye.

So its 2 590p images for each eye.

Thats really at the display stage. Some displays use active shutter and some use passive 3D. Passive is as you describe using a polarising filter. The original comment was 1080p 60fps 3D the P of the 1080P means progressive not interlace. 60 fps means frames not interlace fields.

The PS3 for example can do Wipeout HD in 1080p 60fps for normal 2D mode but instead of dropping frames under extreme load it drops resolution. Most of the time it operates at 1080p 60fps. In 3D mode it operates at 720p at only 30 fps and also has screen tearing issues not present in 1080p mode in order to keep to 30fps. On the PS3 at least you can say 1080p 60fps 2D equals 720p 30fps 3D there abouts both running with some issues. Clearly this indicates the increased load on the system of generating 3D.

As far as I know the first wii u games will be in 720p and there is no information that these will be at a silky smooth 60 frames per second. Less ambitious titles like 2D platformers will be in 1080p which is much the same for PS3 and 360. Its possible that the wii u later on will have 1080p versions of games that are 720p on 360 and PS3 but there is also the possibility that, that won't happen. Launch games should give a general indication of power at the lower end of performance. It really depends on the hardware though. Halo on xbox was an incredibly impressive launch game as was Mario 64 on the N64. Developers are saying the wii u is very easy to develop for so launch games could be fairly close to maximum performance.

I'm still sticking with my upto 2x performance for wii u with the possibility of it being more level with 360 and PS3 and possibly even below for certain parts of its specification.

[3Dude]

Thats really at the display stage. Some displays use active shutter and some use passive 3D. Passive is as you describe using a polarising filter. The original comment was 1080p 60fps 3D the P of the 1080P means progressive not interlace. 60 fps means frames not interlace fields.

The PS3 for example can do Wipeout HD in 1080p 60fps for normal 2D mode but instead of dropping frames under extreme load it drops resolution. Most of the time it operates at 1080p 60fps. In 3D mode it operates at 720p at only 30 fps and also has screen tearing issues not present in 1080p mode in order to keep to 30fps. On the PS3 at least you can say 1080p 60fps 2D equals 720p 30fps 3D there abouts both running with some issues. Clearly this indicates the increased load on the system of generating 3D.

As far as I know the first wii u games will be in 720p and there is no information that these will be at a silky smooth 60 frames per second. Less ambitious titles like 2D platformers will be in 1080p which is much the same for PS3 and 360. Its possible that the wii u later on will have 1080p versions of games that are 720p on 360 and PS3 but there is also the possibility that, that won't happen. Launch games should give a general indication of power at the lower end of performance. It really depends on the hardware though. Halo on xbox was an incredibly impressive launch game as was Mario 64 on the N64. Developers are saying the wii u is very easy to develop for so launch games could be fairly close to maximum performance.

I'm still sticking with my upto 2x performance for wii u with the possibility of it being more level with 360 and PS3 and possibly even below for certain parts of its specification.

Shutterglass technology is not really an option for Nintendo.

Theyve been designing around passive 3d since the gamecube, made a commercial product using it with the 3ds, and arent likely to change with the wii u, ASSUMING they really have any plans at all, it will be passive 3d.

It works just as well with glasses on the wearer, or becoming a parralax barrier by applying it to the screen itself.

They already have experience with it, and it saves a LOT of resources, which nintendo is all about.

And the interlaced imave for 3D is still a 1080p image.

Its interlaced as in the definition of the verb interlace, and not the definition in the context of say, interlaced video vs progressive scan. A full 1080p image is filled, but it is composed of 2 590 images interlaced together via the VERTICAL lines (as opposed to horizontal) so that even lines contain the image for the left eye and odd for the right. The l/r interlaced image is sent to the fb and is drawn to the screen as a 1080p image.

[Desert Punk]

@3dude

1080p isn't interlace in any shape or form and most modern panels can't display interlace even if given an interlace signal like 1080i then simply de-interlace it before showing in progressive mode.

The wii u will have to support active shutter 3D sets which are sets which show a progressive image at 120hz for example and shutters in the glasses time the display sequentially so only one frame is seen by each eye at a time (horrible 3D system).

The wii u will create a standard 3D format signal and the display will use that data to display 3D as suits it be it passive 3D, active shutter or even some other 3D standard in the future like a parallex barrier panel.

[3Dude]

@3dude

1080p isn't interlace in any shape or form and most modern panels can't display interlace even if given an interlace signal like 1080i then simply de-interlace it before showing in progressive mode.

The wii u will have to support active shutter 3D sets which are sets which show a progressive image at 120hz for example and shutters in the glasses time the display sequentially so only one frame is seen by each eye at a time (horrible 3D system).

The wii u will create a standard 3D format signal and the display will use that data to display 3D as suits it be it passive 3D, active shutter or even some other 3D standard in the future like a parallex barrier panel.

Shutterglass 3d methods will NOT work on autostereoscopic displays, as they rely on persistance of vision, alternating between showing left eye and right eye images, while parralax barrier autostereoscopic 3d shows both left and right images simultaneously.

Interlace is a word. It doesnt just apply to interlaced video. It was a word before there WAS video.

I said it before, Ill say it again.

IM NOT TALKING ABOUT INTERLACED VIDEO.

Since interlaced is a very strong buzzword for you, I will use a different word.

Like they did for their 3d experiments on the gamecube, and like they are doing right now on the 3ds, 2 images are rendered at an offset. These images are each HALF the screen size, if you were to draw a line down the screen perpindicular to the ground.

After being rasterized, BUT BEFORE BEING DRAWN TO THE SCREEN, the two images are SPLICED TOGETHER, so that even lines belong to one image for one eye, and odd lines contain the other image for the other eye.

Then, the WHOLE image, is drawn at once.

On the 3ds this is a 240x800 image composed of 2 240x400 images spliced together. On a 1080p screen it would be 2 590 images spliced together. THOS IS STILL A 1080P IMAGE.

Nintendo will NOT use shutterglass technology, because shutterglass technology is not good, obsolete, expensive, resource demanding, and rapidly heading to a dead end. And you have to WEAR GLASSES.

If Nintendo DOES go 3d, which they probably wont. They will put a parralax barrier ON THE CONTROLLER WITH A SCREEN that comes with every console.

[Socalmuscle]

Shutterglass 3d methods will NOT work on autostereoscopic displays, as they rely on persistance of vision, alternating between showing left eye and right eye images, while parralax barrier autostereoscopic 3d shows both left and right images simultaneously.

Interlace is a word. It doesnt just apply to interlaced video. It was a word before there WAS video.

I said it before, Ill say it again.

IM NOT TALKING ABOUT INTERLACED VIDEO.

Since interlaced is a very strong buzzword for you, I will use a different word.

Like they did for their 3d experiments on the gamecube, and like they are doing right now on the 3ds, 2 images are rendered at an offset. These images are each HALF the screen size, if you were to draw a line down the screen perpindicular to the ground.

After being rasterized, BUT BEFORE BEING DRAWN TO THE SCREEN, the two images are SPLICED TOGETHER, so that even lines belong to one image for one eye, and odd lines contain the other image for the other eye.

Then, the WHOLE image, is drawn at once.

On the 3ds this is a 240x800 image composed of 2 240x400 images spliced together. On a 1080p screen it would be 2 590 images spliced together. THOS IS STILL A 1080P IMAGE.

Nintendo will NOT use shutterglass technology, because shutterglass technology is not good, obsolete, expensive, resource demanding, and rapidly heading to a dead end. And you have to WEAR GLASSES.

If Nintendo DOES go 3d, which they probably wont. They will put a parralax barrier ON THE CONTROLLER WITH A SCREEN that comes with every console.

Nice!

Dang. Forgot the popcorn.

Edited by Socalmuscle, 01 August 2012 - 09:43 PM.

[uh20]

i, uhhh
thats quite a lot of power

now lets look at this stupidly
3d 1080p vs 1080p is probably around 1.5 times more demanding
and if you have a single standing model as a videogame, even the wii could do it

but the question is, how much power does this drain, and how much is left for actual rendering
because when you get resolutions that high, your going to enter the realm of highly detailed plastic people

Edited by uh20, 01 August 2012 - 10:00 PM.