Wipeout HD in 3D in 2010!!

Well I've just got back from what I could only describe as a mixed bag of a demo with the new top of the line Sony LX9000 3D TV.

Naturally it takes a few moments for you eyes to adjust to 3D when it's turned on, and the majority of the first round of demos were shown first in 2D then in 3D.

Sony's polarized/LCD shutter glasses didn't seem to have as much light loss as has been reported, I kept slipping them on/off at the demos start to check this and it was minimal, they did give a slight bronze colour cast to the picture,[ I know you could fix this by adding more Blue/magenta in the TV's settings to get everything back to 6500k ] but unless you a stickler for truly correct colour it doesn't impede you enjoyment.
They seemed rather heavy in your hand [guessing about 60g] but felt fine once worn, even if you wear specs like me, they are the wrap around type, so light from anywhere other than ahead if filtered out.
I'm not so sure if sweat/fog build up if worn in a hot room might be a problem as I didn't have them on long enough,but I have a small feeling it might.

What the games looked like:
Well they showed Motostorm Pacific Rift 3D first , it was pretty cool for the majority of it, but in certain sections it was if the 3D effect lost tracking [hard to explain ] and your eyes received a confused jumble of partial 2D/3D at the same time.
The same effect happened when you changed seating positions while viewing 3D [Yes I tried that as well ;) ]
Overall it was a worthy advancement for that game, I still wouldn't buy it though .:)

Wipeout HD
Well the promised playable demo would of happened if they hadn't taken the only PS3 in the country with it installed to an in house Sony event, I was told to return at another date when this PS3 returns.:frown::-
They did have another PS3 with a none playable version so that's what I'm describing .
If you play Wipeout HD in close or far view your going to love the 3D version.
Strangely although HD was supposedly the only one made into a 3D version the demo showed some FURY tracks in 3D , go figure.
Watching craft BR in 3D is great , some tracks look better than others in 3D.
Generally the darker ones are the best, Vineta K F= good, Sebenco F= The best , Metropia F= good., the under-laying humps & bumps of the tracks really stand out and look good, for the most part.
Opposing craft were a revelation in 3D and put a whole new perspective on HD, they did sort of have a bit of a paper model look about them but I think that had more to do with the TV's set up [contrast set too high]more than anything else.
Mines sort of stuck out more, but they flashed by so quick I didn't get a real good look, and green has never been and easy colour to focus on.

I occasionally saw what I would describe as a concertina of planes/levels effect,[Metropia] where depth would suddenly disappear back into the flat front plane , then go back to 3D , it depended on the track and where you were on it.
It only happened briefly, usually when the crafts nose was pointing up after a jump or a weapon hit

But the jump/chicane on Ubermall F made me almost lose my breakfast.
Oh brother, it was a real close thing too.
I'm not sure what cause that, and it's making me queasy just thinking about it.

I could bore you senseless [if I haven't already :rolleyes: ] with more stuff .

But mainly
1] I really pressed the Sony guy, and he was adamant that the PS3 will do 3D at 1080p when the software update comes out.
2] The TV processing of 2D material into 3D "On the Fly" still needs work,the processed version is not as smooth, seems jerky [suspect different screen refresh rate the cause] and there are other focus abnormalities when in 3D.

YEE HAA!
I just got this message from my mate so I'm back into the city to PLAY HD 3D!!
Hay dude,
Sorry I wasnt around when you went in for your demo today. If you around the city come after the
demonstrations finish (4pm) and ask for me (Jonathan), if im not too flat out ill pop the actual playable level on for you.
I'm there normally Monday -Saturday, but hay everyone needs a few days off now and again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blackwiggle

but in certain sections it was if the 3D effect lost tracking [hard to explain ] and your eyes received a confused jumble of partial 2D/3D at the same time.
The same effect happened when you changed seating positions while viewing 3D [Yes I tried that as well ;)

---

I think I know what you mean. Did it seem to happen more with foreground objects?

It was if the race track foreground, other craft [middle ground] , and background were all on separate postcards tiered/lined up front to back momentarily.
Then went back to being a cohesive 3D whole.
It lasted maybe a second when it happened.

The more I think what might of been the cause, the more I think it might of been the LCD shutter of the glasses out of sync with the processing of the screen, I can't be sure.
It did it when I moved chairs as well, so maybe the glasses/screen must sync on the basis of distance from each other.

I had given some thought to what I wanted to test out at this demo, as in possible shortfalls of the technology that I've read about elsewhere, so I did give things a good workout :redface: :lol

I'm going back on Wednesday for round two, as there was a stuff up with communications ,I'd missed a further message from my mate saying he would have to defer till then :paperbag

Next question,

Do you have any photos, or recording when you went to the function?

No, as there didn't seem any point taking a picture of a 3D display , it would just look like a really badly taken photo.
Like a double exposure of whatever image was on the screen.

I've had my suspicions with this Sony LX9000,and after reading a press release just now, and with what happened today, they have pretty much been confirmed

When it was first released at CES 2010 it never had 2D to 3D processing, 3 months later now it does, but this hasn't been advertised ,and I didn't know it had it either till today.
I just asked to see it working at the demo after assuming that it now had it.

The thing is that the Samsung sets are made at the same factory as the Sony's.
The Samsung just got this 2D to 3D processing as well, but at least they have been promoting it.
I'm starting to wonder exactly what the difference between the two will be and just how much of a premium Sony will inevitably ask over the Samsung.

They are basically the same TV.
And Sony must know that the consumer knows, even they can't be that dumb in misreading the buying public by trying to charge a premium for what is a re-badged TV.
On second thoughts after the PSP GO! & Sony music online ...maybe they are that dumb.

This will be interesting.

I had a my first hands on experience with a playable demo of HD 3D a few hours ago.
Both the special de-bit [whatever that is] PS3 & Sony LX9000 3D TV had been bought over Japan.
I found out that the special PS3 had system software 3.21, not the new 3.30 that came out yesterday that is for playing 3D games.
If this had any bearing on how HD 3D played or looked would be a guess by me.

The playable demo only had Racebox usable, with Venom & Flash speeds of Vineta K.
This looked quite a bit different than the none playable 3D demo I saw earlier in the week.
It seemed far less refined and there were numerous strange artifacts plus a few strange handling problems happening while racing.
I wouldn't be surprised if this was the same playable demo seen at E3 almost 2 years ago.
Well I hope that's the case because I was a bit disappointed TBH.:|

I was playing in Cockpit view and the HUD zoom effect was switched on.
Having the HUD effect on might of been the overriding factor on what made playing the 3D demo a bit of a disappointment in retrospect, stuff happens.

So that being the case I think it would be unfair to comment on HD 3D until a few things change.
1]It's a known release version.
2] It's installed on a normal PS3 that has the optimized for 3D gaming, 3.30 or later system software.
3] It's shown on a production model 3D screen.

If it's any consolation Super Stardust HD 3D left me feeling the same.:paperbag

Interesting article on DigitalFoundry about making the PS3 go 3D:
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/di...ps3-3d-article

Talking specifically about Wipeout HD, 1080p at 60fps just isn't gonna happen :(

"The 3D version of WipEout HD is locked to 720p, but due to geometry issues, frame-rate is halved to 30FPS."

Lazy port then :(
Looks like we'll have to wait for the PS4 to enjoy a wipeout 3D at 60fps.

I knew the game would not retain 1080p, but i hoped that it could still be played at 60fps.
Useless ...

I think it was a bad combination of factors that lead to me being underwhelmed.

As has been reported elsewhere in the Xpand league thread by z1r0rEi
http://www.wipeoutzone.com/forum/sho...t=7144&page=10
he has found playing the standard version of wipeout HD or other games on his newly acquired LED TV unbearable, to such an extent that he has given up playing all together.

Yesterday was my first trial of playing wipeout of any kind on a LED TV.
So maybe I would find myself agreeing with z1r0ri even if it was a normal version of wipeout HD, I just don't know.

When you also factor in it was in 3D, it's frame rate had been dropped because of that, the PS3 wasn't running the 3.30 software [difference ?], the demo itself could of been anything up to 2years old and the 3D LED TV was a preproduction model.
You have to give the benefit of the doubt.
I don't know exactly what to comment on as any 1 of 4 variables could of made a major difference to how the game played & looked.

That might be why Sony are not allowing people to try these playable demos.
It was only because I knew somebody at Sony that I got a try , and that was after hours.
I was told to expect things to look and play better when all this stuff is in it's final release ready state.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Golgofier

Interesting article on DigitalFoundry about making the PS3 go 3D:
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/di...ps3-3d-article

Talking specifically about Wipeout HD, 1080p at 60fps just isn't gonna happen :(

"The 3D version of WipEout HD is locked to 720p, but due to geometry issues, frame-rate is halved to 30FPS."

---

720p@30fps in 3-D is a major reduction in quality for WipEout HD. I would
expect 720p@60fps for 3-D, at least. Btw; 1080p@60fps in 3-D isn't possible
via HDMI 1.4 due to bandwidth limitation.

What bothers me quite a bit is that the PS3 really lacks performance in the
graphics department. If Sony knew that they would go 3-D then why had
they decided to go with such a weak graphics accelerator, i.e. the RSX? Cost
is a major factor, of course, but up to my point of view Sony has made a bad
decision the day they decided to buy an off-the-shelf graphics accelerator
from Nvidia back in 2006.

Sony promised 1080p@60fps at E3 2005 as the standard for PS3. I think
they really wanted to go for it, but something bad happened along the way.

Whatever.

The only thing I can see, while looking at all the 3-D stuff, is, that all this
will lead us to a possible PS4 much faster. Not only that the RSX isn't able
to deliver 1080p@60fps for most games, it now also hinters progress into
3-D which will become a big market this time around, I guess.

Instead of pushing new standards like for example QuadHD (3840 x 2160)
or even UHDV (7680 x 4320), they (Sony et. al.) should consider utilizing
the current technology at hand much better for the next-gen consoles. For
example, for a possibe PS4 I would be very please if we could have
1080p@60fps in 3-D, 16xMSAA, and 1GB of video memory. Put two
bandwidth-enhanced Cell processors into the mix and 4GB of main memory
and everything is fine.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ProblemSolver

I would expect 720p@60fps for 3-D, at least.

---

Really? It still has to render everything twice; the lower resolution wouldn't change that.

Sure.

Rendering isn't teh problem for WipEout HD. You have to note that we go
down from 1080p to 720p. Btw; 1080p > 2x720p, pixelwise. It seems like that
the problem lies within the geometry, i.e. memory bandwidth. Doubling the
frame rate cuts the bandwidth in halve with respect to a frame. That means
that the current code isn't able to deliver the same amount of geometry
within halve the time of a single frame displayed at 60fps. Possibly WipEout
HD has maxed out the (aggregative) bandwidth of the PS3. In this case only a
reduction in geometry can solve the problem. I think the game can be
optimized a little bit further, but I don't believe that they will be able to
optimize the code such that the same amount of geometry can be transfered in
halve the time, i.e. 1/120ms. If this would be possible, then one can argue
why they have wasted so many resources prior to the 3-D version, leaving as
with a game that shutters a bit on the Fury tracks. Personally, I don't
think that SL has wasted any bandwidth. The guys at SL know (knew) their
stuff and that's why we can enjoy the game in 1080p@60fps in all its glory.

SSHD does run in 720p@60fps in 3-D, but SSHD has almost no geometry when
compared to WipEout HD.

And if you ask me, I would vote for a reduction in geometry (possibly realized
as an in-game option) to be able to play WipEout HD at 720p@60fps in 3-D.

30fps? No thx.

ProblemSolver, you're wrong about HDMI 1.3/1.4 bandwidth limitation.
I don't know why everyone is saying this without using facts:

1) Both HDMI 1.3 and 1.4 are limited to 8.16Gbps (for video)

2) HDMI 1.3 can do 2560×1600p75 in 24bit, which is 23% more than
a 1920x1080p120 in 24bit would need.

PS never said anything about HDMI

The PS3 has memory bandwidth issues, and that's the bottleneck being referred to I believe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Connavar

Lazy port then :(

---

Maybe, but that's not what I am interpreting from these articles-- sounds like they can only squeeze so much out of the PS3.

Too bad that WOHD needs the 60 FPS for gameplay. It's fun to have the game playable in 3D but for now, it seems mostly to be a tech-demo :frown:

I saw the 3D showcase thingy a couple days ago...guessing it's the really old one that everyone has seen but it was interesting nonetheless.

@bw: I now know what you mean about the motorstorm temporary non 3D-ness, dead annoying.
Saw LBP, SSHD, KZ2 and WOHD as well: all very intriguing but not exactly breathtaking. Actually I found SSHD made me go cross-eyed during the "Stage Clear" but where the ship pops out of the screen at you. Normally this would be fine but all I got as a result was the rims of the glasses blocking my view :brickwall
KZ2 was just following a bullet (obs not real time) so it was a bit pointless.
LBP seemed pretty much the same to me, just a bit more juddery.
WOHD was the same old bullshit autopilot venom vineta k no barrel rolls thingy never mind. I quite liked how the HUD worked, but it was following External Close which is what I reckon it was tailored to. Overall it all looks very 'paper model in front of a blue screen' to me.

I know this demo reel is very old (which would explain why everything looked sub SD) so it's a little (massively) rough around the edges. This still leaves me wondering why Sony are showing this particular set of clips in their stores - It makes it look like a half-arsed attempt at converting games to 3D in order to generate a bit of hype and excitement...which is exactly what it is.

Personally I think they should stick to showing 3D TV clips instead, those were much more enjoyable to watch. 3D footie was lovely :rock

@Connavar: What you are referring to is a specification written on paper
but says nothing about whether this bandwidth can actually be attained, which
was part of my thinking in saying that 1080p@60fps in 3-D isn't possible due
to bandwidth limitation, because you have to ask yourself whether the PS3's
HDMI 1.3 chip is capable of delivering such a (physical) bandwidth. And up
to its specification, it isn't. The HDMI chip inside the PS3 does support
1080p@60Hz and 720p/1080i@120Hz at best. If the chip would be capable of
outputting 1080p@120Hz (or be able to deliver the bandwidth needed to
transmit a 2x1080p data stream at 60Hz) there would be no need to hide such
a feature from its specification. That is to say, the HDMI 1.3 chip inside
the PS3 can't support the bandwidth needed for 1080p@120Hz.

Further, no HDMI chip in existence, whether used as a transmitter or receiver,
supports 1080p@120Hz, at the moment. The clock-frequency of current HDMI
chips is about 225MHz. Remember; bandwidth does depend on time, on the
clock-frequency. About 300MHz are needed (given the HDMI chip inside the PS3)
to get the necessary bandwidth to output 1080p@120Hz.

225MHz is the current standard for most HDMI chips implementing HDMI 1.3 or
1.4. Well, I think there was / is a reason why 1080p@60Hz in 3-D isn't a
mentadory format for HDMI 1.4.

If the PS3 would be able to output a 1080p@120Hz signal, then I would assume
that Sony's PR machinery would have used that for advertising 3-D, in saying
that some games can also run in 1080p@60fps in 3-D.

I bet $10 that the PS3 isn't capable of outputting 1080p@60fps in 3-D. Well,
I hope to be wrong on all of this, but I currently can't see how the PS3 would
be able to do so. Hopefully someone can prove me wrong.

Frances_Penfold: reading the article, it felt like they just lowered some details
and halved the resolution and framerate and voila! The guy said himself
that porting Wipeout to 3D was relatively easy and straightforward.

I'm sure Wipeout could run at 120fps in 720p, apparently the geometry is the
only bottleneck preventing it from happening ... guess what needs to be done
then? Using the SPUs, those chips are perfectly capable of handling geometries.
However it's super hard to program for, but Naughty Dog (for exampled)
managed to put a lot of geometries calculations on the SPUs.

And EVEN if the PS3 was maximized (but I don't believe it 1 second), then
how about reducing the geometry, in order to achive the 720p@120fps, which
would look a lot better ... so it boils down to the amount of work necessary
to have a proper WO3D, and apparently they didn't want to invest enough
resources on it => lazy port.

PS: Okay, damn normally they were supposed to use 340MHz, but only use
225 then ... but I'd like to see the official frequency for the PS3 transmitter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Connavar

... I'm sure Wipeout could run at 120fps in 720p, apparently the geometry is the
only bottleneck preventing it from happening ... guess what needs to be done
then? Using the SPUs, those chips are perfectly capable of handling geometries.
However it's super hard to program for, but Naughty Dog (for exampled)
managed to put a lot of geometries calculations on the SPUs. ...

---

The SPEs are capable of handling geometries just fine but this serves nothing
if WipEout HD is already IO bounded, which seems to be the case after reading
the article.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Connavar

PS: Okay, damn normally they were supposed to use 340MHz, but only use
225 then ... but I'd like to see the official frequency for the PS3 transmitter.

---

All the fat PS3s are using an Silicon Image VastLane SiI9132 transmitter
(SiI9132CBU) which isn't able to decode DTS-HD MA. Initially, Sony wanted
to go with a dual HDMI ported SiI9133 transmitter, but decided against it.
The interesting fact here is that the SiI9134, which was available at the
same time, supports DTS-HD MA unlike the SiI9132. [Ref]

I've found no official specification of the SiI9132 transmitter. This chip was
specifically built for game consoles and as such might be under NDA by Sony.

However, Silicon Image says that the SiI9132 is equal to the SiI9134 in terms
of video processing, that is to say; both have the same maximal resolution
of 1080p, the same maximal color depth of 36 bits/pixel, and the same
maximum bandwidth of 6.75 Gbps. [Ref]

From Silicon Image website we can read off the specification of the SiI9134
transmitter, which is just an DTS-HD MA enhanced version of the Sil9132.

Let us consider the bandwidth again.
For a 24bit RGB signal, the required HDMI bandwidth computes as follows;
Bandwidth in Gbps = (resH+blankH)*(resV+blankV)*24bit*Hz*10/8.

The HDMI 1.4 specification provides specific timing requirements for the
horizontal blanking interval and vertical blanking interval which amounts to
280 pixel for the horizontal blanking interval and 50 pixels for the vertical
blanking interval for a resolution of 1920x1080@60Hz. The factor 10/8
amounts for the conversion of an 8bit color value to 10bit.

We have,

(1920[resH]+280[blankH])*(1080[resV]+50[blankV])*24[bit]*60[Hz]*10/8

~= 4.47 Gbps.

Hence, a 1080p@120fps signal would require a bandwidth of ~ 8.94 Gbps.

And since the bandwidth of the PS3's HDMI transmitter is limited to 6.75 Gbps,
it is rather unlikely that we will see 1080p@60fps in 3-D coming out of a PS3.