RockmanPM Forums
Other Things => Gaming => Topic started by: Phi on June 17, 2010, 04:33:01 AM
-
Check out the official website (http://www.konami.jp/kojima_pro/e3_2010/mgs3d/en/)
Hideo Kojima has been Tweeting about a "top secret project" over the past few months. Today, he revealed the identity the project.
"The Nintendo conference ended at the Nokia Theater. We'll be showing 3DS MGS in the Nintendo booth on the E3 show floor. Be sure and check it out running directly on the system. We've at last been able to reveal it. This is the "Secret Project" that I'm directing."
The 3DS Metal Gear Solid game is also the third and final game from the Kojima Productions E3 portal site, where it is referred to as "Metal Gear Solid Snake Eater 3D," suggesting that it may have a connection with the second PlayStation 2 Metal Gear Solid game.
Little info is know about this 3DS title right now, but one things for sure. It looks beautiful.
-
Check out the official website (http://www.konami.jp/kojima_pro/e3_2010/mgs3d/en/)
Little info is know about this 3DS title right now, but one things for sure. It looks beautiful.
I honestly hope the MGS3 tech demo is just that, a tech demo. And that we get a whole new game for the 3DS instead of a port with more features, as fantastic as the game was.
-
Why isn't there a video of Snake Eater in here yet?
-
Why isn't there a video of Snake Eater in here yet?
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9uf9UsGwj74[/youtube]
-
That's better! owob
-
Embedding disabled by request.
-
I don't care what anyone says. Climbing that extra long ladder in 3D? I'm all for it.
What a thrill~
Or [tornado fang], the Sorrow battle in 3D! God DAMN!
-
Lol, the Sorrow battle in 3D will give people nightmares.
-
Lol, the Sorrow battle in 3D will give people nightmares.
Can you imagine the crazy [parasitic bomb] Kojima will be able to pull out with 3D? Imagine a whole part of the game in 2D, and the suddenly, GIANT SORROW FACE JUMPS OUT
-
Just a few things I found over at ZFGC.
(http://www.gossipgamers.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/metal-gear-solid-3-snake-eater.jpg)(http://cache.kotaku.com/assets/images/9/2010/06/untitled-9_03.jpg)
L: PS2 | R: 3DS
(http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t275/Arnon_01/MetalGearPortableComparison.jpg)
Essentially it's a bit better than a PS2 if you put thought into it. 3DS doesn't have AA, sure, but AA takes up a lot of resources. 3DS also has Pixel Shaders and Bump mapping, something PS2 couldn't produce. Gamecube didn't have them either. Xbox 1 had Pixel Shader 1.0 if I recall.
3DS also uses resources to produce 3D. Now take away the 3D resources and it's even more powerful. These are also Tech Demos/Launch Titles basically. Every console started off a bit weak, then grew (PSX with FF7 -> FF9). Give it time, the 3DS will produce even better results.
And a quote from the guy who posted those.
-
- How did the MGS3-inspired "NAKED Sample" 3DS demo at E3 come to fruition?
"It was a top-secret project -- I had a non-disclosure agreement signed with Nintendo, so I couldn't even tell you [Hamamura] about it," Kojima revealed. "The demo was produced by the Peace Walker team, but outside of the group that developed it, nobody at Kojima Productions even knew about it. I got that group together and said 'Okay, we have to build this thing for E3' -- they work on a different floor from the rest of the studio, so most people thought they were on vacation after shipping off Peace Walker, I suppose."
"The thing is that it's hard to get a lot of feedback from players, because only so many of them could physically play the title at the event," he said. "I was hoping to shape our future direction for the game based on more of their opinions. Also, the maps and character models were all remade with a higher polygon count than before. The models are about the same quality as what we made for the PlayStation 3, but you really can't tell within the game. We could've made it look better if we had a little more time."
- Now that E3 is over, where is the 3DS MGS project headed?
"I did handle direction work on the E3 demo, but where I go from here hasn't been decided yet," Kojima said. "For now, what we wanted to do was advertise the fact that we are producing a 3DS game in the MGS franchise. Largely it was just a demonstration of what we're capable of with the 3DS. For a full-size game, just having things pop out at the player all the time will get old fast, so I think the emphasis will be on visual depth instead. We haven't settled on the details yet, but I'd like to get CO-OPS and some of the other things we did in Peace Walker into this game as well. We can't change MGS3's story, but we are thinking about CO-OPS and other things we can use the 3D technology for."
- So when'll it come out?
"Nothing's been decided at all yet. I don't think we'll be able to make it a launch title, but if we don't at least stick close to launch, we'll lose a lot of product value."
- So within a year or so of launch, then?
"Yeah, I think we need to get it out by then. That's why I want to get more people to try it out. Showing a trailer really just isn't enough -- it'd be nice if Nintendo organizes some kind of public demo event."
From 1up (http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3180278)
Honestly didn't expect the models to be about the same quality as MGS4. And CO-OP sounds pretty sweet.
-
From 1up (http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3180278)
Honestly didn't expect the models to be about the same quality as MGS4. And CO-OP sounds pretty sweet.
If they can seriously pull that off, I'll be both amused and awesomed.
Awesomed because it's awesome.
...amused because Nintendo's gonna have a portable console more powerful than its home console. 8D
-
Well, the programmable shaders (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shader#Programming_shaders) shpiel as stated at ThinQ (http://www.thinq.co.uk/2010/6/21/nintendo-3ds-gpu-revealed/) already shows that the 3DS has access to some visual tricks that the Wii can't do. Of course, system strength isn't exactly a single scale, so how it stands up overall, I guess we'll see.
-
So I guess the next Nintendo console will feature Motion Control, Wide Screen, HD and glassless 3D combined with PS3 power.
How is that not [tornado fang]ing cool?
-
Don't forget Wii backwards compatibility and upscaling Wii games.
-
Glassless 3D?
Yaaay, it will come with its own TV! =D
-
Glassless 3D?
Yaaay, it will come with its own TV! =D
Honestly, the company that comes out with Glassless 3D TV's will easily win the 3D TV market until other companies follow through.
-
Honestly, the company that comes out with Glassless 3D TV's will easily win the 3D TV market until other companies follow through.
"Remember, you gotta stand DIRECTLY in front of the TV, otherwise, it won't work!" =P
-
Oh god, I won't be able to do drugs and play games anymore. I already have to deal with Pac-Man trying to eat me when I'm on acid. (not to be confused with our lovely member, Acid)
-
Everyone wants to get high on me.
-
Well, Mr. Acid is really tall. I wouldn't be surprised if everyone wanted to climb on top of his shoulders!
-
Honestly, the company that comes out with Glassless 3D TV's will easily win the 3D TV market until other companies follow through.
The worst part about this (in an utterly hilarious kind of way) is that even if it's implemented badly, the sheer amount of marketing leverage that people will get just from saying "Glassesless 3D TV" would be [tornado fang]ing incredible.
That being said, I think 3D is going to be standardized and implemented faster in heavy electronics than HD was.
-
The worst part about this (in an utterly hilarious kind of way) is that even if it's implemented badly, the sheer amount of marketing leverage that people will get just from saying "Glassesless 3D TV" would be [tornado fang]ing incredible.
That being said, I think 3D is going to be standardized and implemented faster in heavy electronics than HD was.
I honestly hope it goes the way of Betamax. TRUE 3D in gaming should be something like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jd3-eiid-Uw&feature=player_embedded
In movies, I couldn't care the least. Every movie critic worth a damn has been bashing 3D left and right and I'm of the same opinion.
-
Every movie critic worth a damn has been bashing 3D left and right
Hmm? Why?
-
I honestly hope it goes the way of Betamax. TRUE 3D in gaming should be something like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jd3-eiid-Uw&feature=player_embedded
Holy wow!
-
I honestly hope it goes the way of Betamax. TRUE 3D in gaming should be something like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jd3-eiid-Uw&feature=player_embedded
In movies, I couldn't care the least. Every movie critic worth a damn has been bashing 3D left and right and I'm of the same opinion.
This is still the best damn thing ever to me. And yes, I agree totally that head tracking & that illusion of depth is a bigger thing for gaming than "COMES OUTTA MAH SCREEN" 3D.
-
Hmm? Why?
Because it's stupid.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08FK7WghHSc[/youtube]
The best explanation of what's wrong with 3D.
-
I can honestly say I don't think I've ever been to a 3D movie, but I don't see a reason to hate it o.o
-
What do you imagine 3D movies to be? Because they're not simply the image popping out of the screen. It's the image popping out in a 2D way, as if certain parts of the movie were projected in a small post-it right in front of your eyes. And the rest is blurry [parasitic bomb].
-
This is still the best damn thing ever to me. And yes, I agree totally that head tracking & that illusion of depth is a bigger thing for gaming than "COMES OUTTA MAH SCREEN" 3D.
That's only if you weave around while playing, though. Sooner or later, you'll stop caring, sit still, and the effect is negligible. There is no illusion of depth to the image itself, the illusion is created only by how the image responds to your movements. Further, if you're remaining seated at an appropriate distance from your TV, there's only so much extra sight you gain through such a method; it's not like, say, head-tracking on a computer monitor where the display is two or three feet from your face. The further the display is from you, the less of an effect you're getting (ie: if you want a wider view out a window, you need to stand close to the window). Plus it only works with a single person in the room.
Therein lies the problem with 3D televisions. Every viewer is sitting at a different perspective. Meaning you MUST either give every viewer their own adjustment to the display (glasses), or limit your number of viewers to one. I don't see that ever taking off. The "HEY, WE HAVE A GLASSESLESS 3D TV" marketing might get some respectable cash but it'll never catch any mass-market appeal if it doesn't actually work for more than one individual. Handhelds, phones, desktops, laptops, they could be cool. TVs in the living room? No.
Head-tracking 3D is an interesting concept, though, particularly in how it relates to the 3DS. Recall, if you will, the 3DS has a player-facing camera, and has already shown head-tracking tech demos in Nintendogs. So one would think such a 3D display method would be possible on the 3DS, and it would go a long ways into reconciling gyroscopic controls with 3D imagery (an issue which has been brought up on a few gaming websites). The stereoscopic effect is probably much easier to code for, though, and face recognition/tracking would have to be smooth enough that the image doesn't lag behind you (for all the bitching about the extra drain on resources that is in reality just a 2-player split-screen for your eyes, this would probably consume a lot more). Plus it depends on how well-lit the room you're playing in is. Note that the YouTube Wii demo doesn't go into what happens with IR interference or when your head goes off-camera; and if you hated these issues with your Wii pointer, just imagine the entire screen suffering for it. So there are downsides to that approach as well, but I do wonder if some devs will pursue it for the viewing angle benefits.
The best explanation of what's wrong with 3D.
XD Awesome.
In a way, he's giving 3D too much credit; you can still turn the smurfs to see their backs.
I see what you, and the critics, are saying with film: 3D visuals will only give a "pop-up book" effect, provided of course that the visuals are still being processed as 2D images + depth. This applies to all film (we don't have holo-recorders yet; you're always subject to the camera angle of the recording device) and sprite-based games (the NES/SNES 3D remakes demoed at E3). In an actual, polygonal 3D game, however, where the entire surface is rendered and you can thus freely change the camera angle, it's a bit better.
Still a gimmick, though. It's Nintendo's next handheld, I'd buy it if it was a brick with an etch-a-sketch embedded in it, so long as I retain the hope that I'll someday see a Yoshi on it. The 3D is just something for me to show off.
-
What do you imagine 3D movies to be? Because they're not simply the image popping out of the screen. It's the image popping out in a 2D way, as if certain parts of the movie were projected in a small post-it right in front of your eyes. And the rest is blurry [parasitic bomb].
I've seen 3D things before, jus not movies I think o.o But it jus doesn't really seem like anything that people should waste energy complaining about XD
-
I've seen 3D things before, jus not movies I think o.o But it jus doesn't really seem like anything that people should waste energy complaining about XD
People have to complain for things to change. Right now, in a few years, one in each three movies will be on 3D. And it will suck, because people with decent taste don't like the images popping out. It reduces immersion, produces eyestrain, and you end up with a headache, because 3D stereoscopic images aren't meant to be seen for so long. 3D is pure and simple bullshit. Right now, movie studios are seeing 3D as a way to stop movie piracy. But it's a stupid way, honestly. CAM and SCREENER versions are no replacement for a good movie with good quality, watched in theaters. The only pirated leaked versions come from the movie studios themselves.
Pure and simply, 3D is bullshit. Call me when there are stable holograms, REAL THREE-DIMENSIONS. Not just tricks with our depth perception.
-
That's only if you weave around while playing, though. Sooner or later, you'll stop caring, sit still, and the effect is negligible. There is no illusion of depth to the image itself, the illusion is created only by how the image responds to your movements. Further, if you're remaining seated at an appropriate distance from your TV, there's only so much extra sight you gain through such a method; it's not like, say, head-tracking on a computer monitor where the display is two or three feet from your face. The further the display is from you, the less of an effect you're getting (ie: if you want a wider view out a window, you need to stand close to the window). Plus it only works with a single person in the room.
Therein lies the problem with 3D televisions. Every viewer is sitting at a different perspective. Meaning you MUST either give every viewer their own adjustment to the display (glasses), or limit your number of viewers to one. I don't see that ever taking off. The "HEY, WE HAVE A GLASSESLESS 3D TV" marketing might get some respectable cash but it'll never catch any mass-market appeal if it doesn't actually work for more than one individual. Handhelds, phones, desktops, laptops, they could be cool. TVs in the living room? No.
Head-tracking 3D is an interesting concept, though, particularly in how it relates to the 3DS. Recall, if you will, the 3DS has a player-facing camera, and has already shown head-tracking tech demos in Nintendogs. So one would think such a 3D display method would be possible on the 3DS, and it would go a long ways into reconciling gyroscopic controls with 3D imagery (an issue which has been brought up on a few gaming websites). The stereoscopic effect is probably much easier to code for, though, and face recognition/tracking would have to be smooth enough that the image doesn't lag behind you (for all the bitching about the extra drain on resources that is in reality just a 2-player split-screen for your eyes, this would probably consume a lot more). Plus it depends on how well-lit the room you're playing in is. Note that the YouTube Wii demo doesn't go into what happens with IR interference or when your head goes off-camera; and if you hated these issues with your Wii pointer, just imagine the entire screen suffering for it. So there are downsides to that approach as well, but I do wonder if some devs will pursue it for the viewing angle benefits.
[tornado fang]ing awesome post. I'm half compelled to make an off topic thread on 3D and what its future holds thanks to this post.
-
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hJHX5ip68p4[/youtube]
Forgot this. How you can enjoy a 3D movie, in 2D.
-
Now even the film industry is ripping off Nintendo. They stole the "ability to turn 3D off" idea. 8)
Posted on: July 09, 2010, 08:16:57 PM
Oh, and I missed this:
Right now, movie studios are seeing 3D as a way to stop movie piracy. But it's a stupid way, honestly.
You know, even if I like 3D (I haven't watched it for more than a few minutes at a time, so I can't speak on the eye-strain issue yet), this is very incredibly true. Honestly, how many techno-junkies who are too cheap to pay for their own damn movies are going to be enticed by having to pay for a set of glasses on top of the movie?
If people want to stop piracy, they need to think about why people pirate. It's not always because they want to be crooks, often it's because they are taking matters into their own hands due to not wanting to put up with corporate bullshit. Every time I see the "Operation Not Permitted By Disc" message on my DVD player, I wonder how long I'll be able to keep myself from researching how to hack a DVD player.
-
Oh, and I missed this:
You know, even if I like 3D (I haven't watched it for more than a few minutes at a time, so I can't speak on the eye-strain issue yet), this is very incredibly true. Honestly, how many techno-junkies who are too cheap to pay for their own damn movies are going to be enticed by having to pay for a set of glasses on top of the movie?
If people want to stop piracy, they need to think about why people pirate. It's not always because they want to be crooks, often it's because they are taking matters into their own hands due to not wanting to put up with corporate bullshit. Every time I see the "Operation Not Permitted By Disc" message on my DVD player, I wonder how long I'll be able to keep myself from researching how to hack a DVD player.
Not just that. It's amazing how the industries always end up taking it out on consumers themselves. Either with incredible stupid DRM, or with bullshit like having to watch that same damn "YOU WOULDN'T DOWNLOAD A CAR" unskippable commercial over and over again, whenever we insert our brand new DVD into the player. That [parasitic bomb] was on my sister's Dora the Explorer DVD. She started crying when the damn thing started. And DVDs are more and more expensive everytime.
I just don't get it... people are never gonna enjoy a movie if it's on screener/cam quality. They just need to worry about leaks, which are easily traceable. So what is the damn problem? Do they really need to put a movie on 3D so we both lose? It's stupid. It's honestly stupid, since movie theater tickets are already expensive, and it seriously makes me wish there was a way I could download the damn thing, or just wait for the movie to come out in a proper format instead of exposing my eyes to that [parasitic bomb].
-
What people fail to realize is that there's a difference between movies like Avatar in 3D and everything else. Avatar was specifically filmed to look the way it did, and it was meant to be seen on an true IMAX screen, and it looked incredible. However, with other movies, it just doesn't look that good and it's just a gimmick to make people shell out $4-$5 extra bucks for the 3D experience.
-
What people fail to realize is that there's a difference between movies like Avatar in 3D and everything else. Avatar was specifically filmed to look the way it did, and it was meant to be seen on an true IMAX screen, and it looked incredible. However, with other movies, it just doesn't look that good and it's just a gimmick to make people shell out $4-$5 extra bucks for the 3D experience.
Honestly, I thought it still looked like a damn pop-up book, and found the 2D version much more enjoyable.
-
Honestly, I thought it still looked like a damn pop-up book, and found the 2D version much more enjoyable.
Did you see it in IMAX?
-
Did you see it in IMAX?
No IMAX available over here. But my problem is with the stereoscopic 3D itself. They won't manage to produce an actual 3D image, simply one that pops up in 2D on a different plane.
-
No IMAX available over here. But my problem is with the stereoscopic 3D itself. They won't manage to produce an actual 3D image, simply one that pops up in 2D on a different plane.
Fair enough. What I will say is that on the IMAX screen, the true IMAX screen and not the BS they peddle off as IMAX in some theaters, Avatar really did look incredible.
-
Fair enough. What I will say is that on the IMAX screen, the true IMAX screen and not the BS they peddle off as IMAX in some theaters, Avatar really did look incredible.
I do agree that the movie itself, on 2D, looked absolutely amazing, although the story was bullshit. But the 3D effects really were derivative.
-
I do agree that the movie itself, on 2D, looked absolutely amazing, although the story was bullshit. But the 3D effects really were derivative.
On IMAX, the effects were really incredible.
Which is also the greatest flaw of the movie, even more than it's overdone story. It will never look that good again.
-
On IMAX, the effects were really incredible.
Which is also the greatest flaw of the movie, even more than it's overdone story. It will never look that good again.
How did they look? Because I think it's impossible to not make stereoscopic 3D NOT look like 2D coming out of the screen, just coming closer to our faces. Stereoscopic 3D is still not 3D, it's just a small trick to our eyes.
-
How did they look? Because I think it's impossible to not make stereoscopic 3D NOT look like 2D coming out of the screen, just coming closer to our faces. Stereoscopic 3D is still not 3D, it's just a small trick to our eyes.
Honestly, it damn near looked like holograms were on the screen at times.
-
Honestly, it damn near looked like holograms were on the screen at times.
I actually wish I could see that. No IMAX in my area, though.
-
I actually wish I could see that. No IMAX in my area, though.
Like I said, therein lies the problem. Cameron filmed it specifically for that format, so anything less will automatically not look as good. I mean, I don't even want it on Blu Ray.
-
In all fairness, 2D happens to look really freaking amazing in IMAX as well. But I haven't seen a 3D IMAX film.
-
In all fairness, 2D happens to look really freaking amazing in IMAX as well. But I haven't seen a 3D IMAX film.
Oh, it certainly does. I'm sure going to enjoy watching Inception on the IMAX screen. #2 most anticipated movie of the year.
-
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whimpfcqpTg&feature=channel[/youtube]