This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

How come there aren't many 3D games out there?

#1levyjl1988Posted 1/17/2013 7:15:15 PM
3D is amazing!

Seeing 3D games like Sonic Generations, Halo CEA are amazing. Why won't game developers jump on board with 3D.

It seems like most of the people who don't care to have 3D as an option are the ones who cannot afford 3D or it hurts their eyes.

I would love to see Skyrim, Far Cry 3, Tomb Raider to have 3D support.
Check out Canada's only Comics and Gaming Magazine!
#2bluehat94Posted 1/17/2013 7:18:18 PM
I'm pretty sure Far Cry 3 can be played in 3D on PC, but the reason most games can't is because it's more of a fad than anything else.
"So my lunch today involved both a noodle packet and a sauce yeah, things are going pretty well for me."
#3blablablax17Posted 1/17/2013 7:18:22 PM
Skyrim has 3D support on PC, and it was pretty good, as was Sonic Generations.
Those are the only 2 3D games ive played though.
Stalking the GameFaqs boards since '06.
#4Splice_Posted 1/17/2013 7:18:36 PM
Probably because 3d is terrible. Halo and Crysis were alright with it, but they hurt my eyes and things still looked flat like a pop up book. Not to mention that games take a graphical hit too.
#5NejiHyuga900Posted 1/17/2013 7:34:41 PM
Call of Duty: Black Ops I and II supports 3D too.
Xbox 360 Gamertag & Nintendo Network ID: TDPNeji
Steam ID: NejiHyuga900
#6SheepinatorPosted 1/17/2013 7:37:10 PM
Performance issues having to draw two screens. Extra programming for special effects like coming out of the screen. Probably small install base too.
My mad face and my happy face are the same.
#7BilliePilgrimPosted 1/17/2013 7:42:32 PM(edited)
The reason you don't is that in order for it to work, twice as many frames need to be generated, one for your left eye and one for your right, in order for a game to appear to run at a certain framerate. So if you want a game to look like it runs at 30fps, you need to actually render 60, 30 for the left and 30 for the right. This wouldn't be an issue if you could simply double the number of frames a console can put out, but that's not how it works. Functionally what happens is that the effective framerate (what you see) gets cut in half. So FC3 in 3D on an xbox would run at 12 fps with dips down to 6 or 7 fps. Halo 4 would run at 15 fps. Call of duty can manage it since those games run at 60 fps.

tl;dr the xbox is old and weak in the knees and the hardware isn't up to the task.
i5 2500k @ 4.2| Corsair H60 | EVGA GTX 670 | MSI P67A-GD55 | 8GB DDR3 1600 | Fractal Design Define XL | 750W PSU
#8levyjl1988(Topic Creator)Posted 1/17/2013 9:47:28 PM
So if next gen is as powerful as we come to expect it to be then handling 3D for every single game wouldn't be a problem right?
Check out Canada's only Comics and Gaming Magazine!
#9crynryanPosted 1/17/2013 9:52:27 PM
The 2 latest Assassin's Creed games have it, as does Gears of War 3 (and I'm sure Judgment as well).

Chances are that a lot of Unreal Engine games might support it later on, since TriOviz is built in to the engine.
Got any ideas to make a game with? Hit me up with them if you do.
#10SolisPosted 1/17/2013 10:01:45 PM(edited)
levyjl1988 posted...
So if next gen is as powerful as we come to expect it to be then handling 3D for every single game wouldn't be a problem right?

No. It's never a question of "how powerful" a system is, it's all about whether developers are willing to make the concessions required for 3D to be enabled on a game. True stereoscopic rendering is nearly as demanding as actual splitscreen is, so if

That said, something like Trioviz 3d is extremely low-cost to implement (both in actual effort required and in performance hit), so I wouldn't be surprised to see that become commonplace if it's an often demanded feature.

Oh, and yes, as previously mentioned:

And just for the fun of it, Tomb Raider 2 in 3D back in 1999:
"Walking tanks must exist somewhere for there to be such attention to detail like this in mech sim." - IGN Steel Battalion review