Previous
Through the 3D stereoscopic looking glass Interview
Xbox 360 PlayStation 3 Interview by Robert Purchese
Page 1 of 3.
Page 2 
After HDTV comes 3DTV. At least, that's according to Andrew Oliver, whose company, Blitz Games, has a proprietary engine that produces 3D images on PS3 and Xbox 360. You need a 3DTV to display them, obviously, and without many of them around there's not a huge amount of excitement yet, but Blitz hopes to change that with its upcoming downloadable 3D game, Invincible Tiger: The Legend of Han Tao for PlayStation Network and Xbox Live Arcade.
It's a side-scrolling kung-fu game with the pace and punch of an old Hong Kong film. Your ninja hero can punch, kick, roll and jump, and how he navigates platforms and controls the crowd will determine his level of success. Visual detail may have been sacrificed to reach the crucial-for-3D 1080p/60fps benchmark, but the result still packs personality and means gameplay is as smooth and fluid as a Bruce Lee roundhouse.
Of the 15 arenas Invincible Tiger packs, I've seen a blossom-strewn level with bamboo-topped huts, and a cave level, and both transformed when the 3D option was selected and glasses donned. It's the box-within-the-screen effect, rather than images pouring out of the TV, and ledges are given convincing depth. Punch one off the screen and they fly out at you. Wait for another wave and they run from the bottom of a tunnel rather than a circle on a wall. The TV takes a while to warm to the two images that eventually made my head and eyes hurt, but the effect is one I'd be interested in going back to. Intrigued, I sat down with Oliver at the recent Develop Conference in Brighton to find out more.
Invincible Tiger: The Legend of Han Tao. Simple visually, but fast and fluid. Oh, and 3D.
Eurogamer: Can you explain this crazy concept of 3DTV and stereoscopic vision to our readers?
Andrew Oliver: Games are 3D but they're about to go more 3D. You've probably seen that movies - computer-generated movies - have started to go 3D. Live action is coming, albeit a bit slower. The TV companies have realised that we're going to be watching 3D movies and that really, in a year or so, they're going to come into the home. So they're all saying, "Right, we've been doing HDTVs for a while, so let's make sure they can run 3D movies." So Samsung and Mitsubishi particularly have started to put 3D functionality into their top-end TVs ready for the movies. The movies are taking a little bit of time to come because you need to work out formats - cable, satellite, Blu-ray - but these TVs are sitting there capable of 3D. So we had a play and saw consoles working and actually displaying 3D images, which last year people were saying was impossible to do. And we thought, "It's only graphics, it can't be that difficult," so we did some playing around and we got it working.
I took it round to various publishers, our demo, and people were really sceptical: sceptical that you could do a full game and sceptical that there was really a market. So we've gone ahead and written our own game and we're just about finished. It's called Invincible Tiger: The Legend of Han Tao for PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360.
Levels can be zoomed out to great effect.
Eurogamer: And that's for PSN and Xbox Live Arcade - a downloadable title?
Andrew Oliver: Yes it's downloadable, and that's because it is difficult doing 3D and we didn't get funding from any big publisher when we started it. Big games nowadays cost millions to make and we just thought, "Well, in a way this is a test and experiment, we've kind of got to get it working to prove it ourselves," so it was a smaller project that we thought we're going to put onto [the download services]. Although now it's been bought by Namco and will be published by Namco on Xbox Live Arcade and PSN. But we very much had to get it fully working before we got a publisher on board.
Eurogamer: So the actual 3D technology, is it just producing that two-colour image...
Andrew Oliver: EURGH! Two-colour image! I want to hit you! No! It's not the red/blue glasses. Have you seen a 3D movie?
Eurogamer: No, not a new one.
Andrew Oliver: Oh! Old movies: crap. We're in a new, digital age. We invented computers a few years ago...
Eurogamer: Oh!
Andrew Oliver: The red and blue glasses were invented in 1922, and they were s*** then and they're even worse now. They give you headaches and they're awful and they destroy the colours. We are not talking about that.
And then zoomed back in for some Kung-Fu acrobatics.
Eurogamer: Will you have to wear glasses?
Andrew Oliver: You will have... Yes and no. With the Mitsubishi and Samsung yes you do have to wear glasses. But if you come through to the other room we have a prototype [which later blew up] where you don't wear glasses.
I was a fan of Star Wars and we've all seen that holographic Princess Leia, and people think that would be a really difficult thing to do, that you'd need holographic technology. But you don't, because you've only got two eyes, and both of them see flat images. So if you close one eye, you see a flat image. So all you've got to do is get two flat images to your eyes and your brain will put it together in 3D. Now they tried to do that with colour filters, but obviously that destroys colour. Completely. But nowadays you can use 120Hz TV - so a TV running at twice the refresh rate - and put glasses on that effectively shut out your eyes alternately, and you look at the TV your left eye will see one image, your right eye will see the other, and if you can get the graphics printed right the illusion works in your brain. That's the trick.
Eurogamer: Won't this be useless without the appropriate TV?
Andrew Oliver: Yes. Yes. The game [Invincible Tiger] will work on regular TVs: old-style 1080p HDTVs. You know, one of the old ones. And it will work and look beautiful and it's a great game, and for 99 per cent of the market that's how they will see that game. But for some, who have started to buy these new TVs, they'll be able to see it in 3D with real depth, and it starts to look holographic, which is so cool - it's really, really cool.
Are you excited about Invincible Tiger: The Legend of Han Tao on PlayStation 3?
View Eurogamer readers most anticipated games
Related Games
Invincible Tiger: The Legend of Han Tao
Invincible Tiger: The Legend of Han Tao
Latest Features
No features found.
Latest Videos
Invincible Tiger: The Legend of Han Tao - Trailer [0] 25 March, 2009
Latest News
-
Blitz "convinced" the future is 3DTV [62]
-
Blitz dates stereoscopic Kung-Fu game [20]
-
Namco doing downloadable kung fu game [3]
Latest Screenshots
26 March, 2009 [0]
Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!
|
+5
"It's like giving someone a colour TV and going, "You can watch it in black and white if you like."
That’s a good analogy actually. After i saw Coraline in 3D, if I had the option I would opt for 3D every time. It really does add a new dimension to a film - makes it even more involving, even if the film isn't very good (Not true for Coraline thankfully :). Seeing as i have yet to buy a HDTV (still on standard def :P) i would seriously consider jumping on the bandwagon and skipping a HD only tv. As long as it wasn't overly expensive for a 3d one ofc! :P I would love to be able to watch the 3D version of Coraline (or any other subsequent 3D release) at home as well. |
|
ChrisPilote
30/07/09 @ 11:50
+2
@CallousB That's true with polarized glasses. But you don't get any ghosting with shutter glasses, 'cause it really doesn't work the same.
|
|
+4
I think the console manufacturers are missing a trick here that could boost the uptake of 3D tech, I`m not suggesting that this is an ideal implementation of the tech, but it would at least get them a more substantial foot in the door. If the console can render a 60FPS game now, then it already has the grunt to render a 30FPS game in 3D, which opens up the possibility of shutter glasses. As I say, it's not an ideal implementation, but the start-up costs for the punter will be substantially lower thus boosting uptake, and it has the advantage that it gets the general public thinking about 3D tech as being something they can afford for the home without investing in a new television. All the current consoles have USB ports, so adding shutter glasses support shouldn`t be beyond the capability of man.
Back in the day I had the old shutter glasses for the Master System, they were far from perfect, but they did the job and they were fun. I can`t remember exactly how much they cost (and I got mine cheap from the computer shop I used to work in as they had cosmetic damage) but I don`t recall them being overly expensive even back in the 80s, which would suggest that cheaper, and more importantly, better shutter glasses could be released to the market now. As a guess, I would imagine that you could get mass produced shutter glasses down 50 quid or so. They could even be a loss leader, with some costs recouped through game sales. As I say, I`m not suggesting this is a perfect implementation of the tech, but it really does feel to me as though manufacturers are attempting to jump straight to the end point, whereas a more gradual shift in tech would probably get them in to the mass market a lot more quickly. |
|
+1
@ChrisPilote I've seen a good couple dozen or so 3D films using shutter glasses (at a variety of cinemas and at home) and I 've seen some ghosting in a large chunk of the films (to varying degrees). It's certainly not perfect (although I'm sure that can come down to the quality of the glasses used).
The best 3d still comes from having two constant images shown for each eye (as in vr headsets/good old viewmasters). |
|
+1
Very interesting read. Especially the bit where he found out you can't use flat images in the background anymore, hadn't thought of that.
However, I'm not very enthusiastic about wearing glasses. I thought Philips made 3dtvs that didn't require them, was that the one that blew up? Edit- I see that the Philips WOWvx business plan apparently blew up, they closed down their 3d division due to the worldwide recession just a month ago. Oh well.
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 30/07/09 @ 13:31
|
|
JohnnyWashnGo
30/07/09 @ 12:30
-1
Not sold on the idea of 3D displays to be honest. 3D game interest me even less.
When you think about it - we have up to 7.1 surround sound these days, which is fantastic given the right set up. I still listen to films and games through the crappy speakers on my HDTV. Some things are just not worth spending too much time on, lots of speakers is one of them,I imagine 3D TV will be another. |
|
Ronan_Crawford
30/07/09 @ 12:36
0
Well due to my lack of sterovision I wouldn't be able to see the 3d image through the glasses. So I just hope they figure someway of allowing us to see the 3d stuff without wearing them.
|
|
ChrisPilote
30/07/09 @ 12:38
0
@CallousB My bad. It indeed seems you can experience ghosting when the image is too bright, as it goes through the darkened glass...I didn't think about it, as I never had this problem yet (though I haven't seen a lot of 3D movies).
|
|
+2
I;m pretty excited about this for next gen consoles, Imagine if it were somehow integrated with NATAL or other motion technology, the hologram that appears infront of ur eyes that you 'imagine' can be grabbed, could actually be grabbed and moved around! If the porn industry got involved, you could actually shake a womans tits around in real time!!
|
|
jefranklin18
30/07/09 @ 12:45
0
Personally, I think they should just get this (http://www.edimensional.com/product_info... working with LCDs rather than just CRTs. I had it for my old CRT and watching the Matrix in 3D was a blast.
*Edit* forgot the link :)
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 30/07/09 @ 13:46
|
|
ChrisPilote
30/07/09 @ 12:55
0
@ MORZTAN It's still a 2D in some theaters (well, most theaters here). I saw it yesterday in 3D and it was pretty nice. They didn't try to force the effect too much, so I found it refreshingly subtle.
|
|
jefranklin18
30/07/09 @ 13:17
0
@BobsUncle
it's not 100% perfect because it is sourced from a 2D image, but it does work pretty well. Matrix was cool (especially the scene in the lobby), Star Wars wasn't too bad either. Lord of the Rings went on for too long for comfort. It also works on general programmes or sporting events as well. They have (or had, not checked in ages) some trial software that allowed you to run a photo or video file through it and then output it in various formats. I rendered it in red/blue anaglyph before I convinced the wife to buy it for me. She thought we looked a pair of geeks though. |
|
+1
Glasses are a barrier in more ways than one. I went to see my first 3D movie ( Ice Age 3 ) a couple of weeks ago and being a spectacle wearer I found the 3D glasses to be cumbersome and irritating after a while.
Even though the effect was fairly impressve at times, I'm pretty sure I and many other glasses wearers are missing out on the full effect because of a lack of good stereoscopic vision in the first place. I certainly started to get eyestrain towards the end of the movie and wouldn't necessarily choose to see a movie in 3D again. That right there is a fairly large chunk of the market that would get left behind.
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 30/07/09 @ 14:25
|
|
jefranklin18
30/07/09 @ 13:29
0
The problem with "made for 3D" movies is that they always have a clichéd moment, where (for example) somebody points at the camera. I reckon that is partially responsible for eyestrain, because you're simultaneously focussing on something that is close and in the middle distance.
Of course, I have not seen a 3D movie for 20 odd years, so the recent crop may be different. I dread to imagine how George Lucas will remix the Star Wars movies when he releases them in 3D, though. |
|
Alfred_Chicken
30/07/09 @ 14:18
+1
It amuses me that every marketing department witters on about this great 'new' technology when in fact it's been around for the best part of 140 years. The Victorians were very keen on buying stereoscopic photographs of almost everything to use in hand held viewers. I have a stereoscopic card of some soldiers returning from the Crimean War. I love 3D things but it would be nice if the actual inventors got a bit of recognition!
|
|
Chazmeister
30/07/09 @ 15:36
0
Whilst you still have to wear some form of eyewear, 3DTV will remain the domain of a small percentage of hobbyists and wealthy gadget freaks.
|
|
0
@jefranklin18
I assume the way your gadget works on motion picture is by taking two seperate frames and combining them to form a single frame making a kind of hybrid two viewpoint image, i.e. you kind of get two views of one object but it's not real 3D as they're seperated by time. Whereas proper 3D footage is created by filming using two seperate cameras from two different viewpoints, usually next to eachother in a rig. Which also means that you are safe from a shitty re-release of Star Wars as it was only filmed on one camera. There's no way they can use the orginal footage to generate the additional camera angle needed for proper 3D. Unless they use your gadget and produce what I imagine is some pseudo-3D blurry mess. :-) Also, film makers have grown up a bit from the 'pointing a spear at the screen' scene which you probably remember from Jaws. |
|
0
http://www.nvidia.co.uk/object/GeForce_3...
Nvidia are already doing quite a bit with 3D. Bought one of the kits but not had chance to set it up yet as I'm away from my main PC. |
|
justanotherdave
30/07/09 @ 18:42
-1
I'd rather have a virual reality headset with a miniture 1080p screen for each eye + surround sound speakers built into the head support.. get some head & movement tracking in there as well & you could have yourself a really nice new gaming device..
Basically that virtual reality thing we all thought the Nintendo revolution was going to be before they reveled it was just a gamecube with a stupid name & a crap controller. |
|
FireMonkey
30/07/09 @ 20:19
+1
Moggsy: "With 50% of gamers still using SDTV's I really can't see the point of spending time on a 3D option at this moment in time."
Well if 50% still have SDTV's, thats probably as there current TV's either have not broken or HDTV's are too costly. When these people look to upgrade, what is stopping them going straight to 3DTV's if the pricing is right? In fact I'd have thought these are going to be the people who get 3DTV's first as the people who own a HDTV already are going to be more reluctant to upgrade again so soon. |
|
+2
"With 50% of gamers still using SDTV's I really can't see the point of spending time on a 3D option at this moment in time. "
I think you'll find it's probably more like 70%.. But regardless, if they DID upgrade and they bought a tv capable - then surely it's worth it? Or maybe those late adopters will leapfrog hd altogether and buy proper 3d displays in a year or 2. EDIT: Damn must read entire thread before posting.. firemonkey was there first.. doh! PS, displays which do 3d already exist.. check out: http://www.holografika.com
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 31/07/09 @ 05:08
|
|
sarcasmoidosis
31/07/09 @ 07:16
0
"When these people look to upgrade, what is stopping them going straight to 3DTV's if the pricing is right?"
If I'm not mistaken, the biggests 3dTV is 22" right now. For the same price, you can get a 24" LCD or a 27" TV. So for "geeks" it's not the logical choice. And non-geeks will find it too expensive for the size.
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 31/07/09 @ 08:17
|
|
sarcasmoidosis
31/07/09 @ 08:43
-1
Ok, I admit the mistake, I only looked up "smaller" screens. But still, in the 20"-30" range, the biggest is a 22" right now, right? Which means a downgrade for people that own a 27", for instance and don't want a 1 meter TV.
|
|
0
Up was fantastic in 3D, but as it's the first of the recent spate of 3d films I've seen, I can draw no interesting comparisons.
Strongly recommend anyone to try it though. As a glasses wearer it was a bit weird to put them on over the top, but I ignored it after a while and just got into the film. Pain in the ass if you're watching something that brings a tear to the eye though..... |
|
-1
@ FireMonkey
So these CRT owners will all of a sudden pony up a grand or more for a top of the range HDTV? Methinks not. It's going to be 5 or more years away before you start seeing reasonable amounts of gamers with the right equipment hence my point about it not being the right time for the developers to be bothering.
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 31/07/09 @ 15:10
|
|
+2
"It's going to be 5 or more years away before you start seeing reasonable amounts of gamers with the right equipment hence my point about it not being the right time for the developers to be bothering."
Its funny.. before the 360/ps3 were launched - i was saying the EXACT same thing about hdtv. I'm personally very certain the by the next generation - screens which do 3d without glasses will be the norm, sony and microsoft will support them.. and everyone will upgrade. |
Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!
