Request PS4: Better physics and/or graphics vs 3D capability.

Hello everyone. Farsight plans to eventually give us 3d capability. This means the game will be rendered at 120 frames per second (fps) in order to present the game in 3d at 60 fps. We can glean from this that the PS4 has more headroom and is indeed capable of pushing more, graphically speaking, than it currently does in TPA. Why not use that additional processing power to give us things like better physics, improved textures, better anti-aliasing, or perhaps even more polygons? Any or all of those things will benefit everyone, whereas 3D capability is something very few of us would take advantage of. Moreover, the 3d tv market isn't doing well, and most people would probably prefer to have long play sessions without the glasses. In other words, why not give us a meaningful upgrade and not something that is little more than a gimmick. 3d should be an afterthought; better physics and graphics, a priority.

PS Despite the complaint (above), I'll state for the record that I LOVE this sim and in my opinion, it's the best game on the PS4 (and yes, I've played and finished Tomb Raider, Infamous, ACIV, and others). I sincerely hope TPA continues to evolve for the better.

legendaryaxe said:

Hello everyone. Farsight plans to eventually give us 3d capability. This means the game will be rendered at 120 frames per second (fps) in order to present the game in 3d at 60 fps. We can glean from this that the PS4 has more headroom and is indeed capable of pushing more, graphically speaking, than it currently does in TPA. Why not use that additional processing power to give us things like better physics, improved textures, better anti-aliasing, or perhaps even more polygons? Any or all of those things will benefit everyone, whereas 3D capability is something very few of us would take advantage of. Moreover, the 3d tv market isn't doing well, and most people would probably prefer to have long play sessions without the glasses. In other words, why not give us a meaningful upgrade and not something that is little more than a gimmick. 3d should be an afterthought; better physics and graphics, a priority.

PS Despite the complaint (above), I'll state for the record that I LOVE this sim and in my opinion, it's the best game on the PS4 (and yes, I've played and finished Tomb Raider, Infamous, ACIV, and others). I sincerely hope TPA continues to evolve for the better.

Click to expand...

Its not one or the other and 3D isn't dead. Lots of new TVs being sold with 3D and still many games and movies are being made in 3D. What died was the thought that everyone would want to have 3D and every animated and action movie would be made in 3D. Some people quickly develop eye fatigue when watching 3D while others, roughly 5 percent of the population, do not experience a 3D image when viewing 3D content. When done well, like in TPA for the PS3, it is not a gimmick but rather as close of a visual experience as we can get without actually stepping up to a real machine.

It's not really much work for FarSight to develop because the tables are already created in a virtual 3D space. There is still plenty of FarSight's resources left to provide us with higher resolution tables as well. I'm hoping that the upcoming new Microsoft sales will provide FarSight with the means to improve some of these things for consoles and PC versions.

Have they said it'll be 1080p/60 fps in 3D? Anyway, they already seem pretty committed to 3D.

Zen pinball is if im not mistaken. So if wont be 1080p/60fps it would be a bit no skill from FS side :/

It won't be 1080p on passive screens

It's really a no brainer to add or include 3D when you're already coding in a 3D space. 3D gets you into categories in the stores that there are fewer games. It is much easier to stand out when you're one of just a few games. 3D = added sales for this reason.

superballs said:

It won't be 1080p on passive screens

Click to expand...

Unfortunately true, but I prefer that over having to turn all the lights off to avoid a visible flicker when I have the glasses on. Also, cheap glasses and not having to remember to charge them up.

Alex Atkin UK said:

Unfortunately true, but I prefer that over having to turn all the lights off to avoid a visible flicker when I have the glasses on. Also, cheap glasses and not having to remember to charge them up.

Click to expand...

I agree I would never buy an active screen. As an owner of the Sega 3 glasses and former owner of an Elsa razor graphics card (was playing the original half life in shutter 3d back in 2000) I'm not that enthralled with the tech, regardless of how much faster the refresh is.

I have a passive 3D TV and preferred that over the first generation of active 3D TVs. I just bought a new TV this year with active 3D and a lot has changed! My new active glasses are just slightly heavier, maybe 10% more, than the passive, only cost about $20 and use cheap, easy to replace button batteries that last for several movies or gaming sessions. There's much less cross talk on the active 3D and the active TV doesn't suffer from the jaggies that you get from the interlaced video of the passive 3D.

I made a thread about polish in general discussion.

http://digitalpinballfans.com/showthread.php/7780-General-Game-Polish

I want that type of stuff addressed wayyyy before features like 3D or a physics engine overhaul, both are a ton of work, and the percentage of 3D TV owners is very small.

That said, I think it'll happen since ps3 has it, and it's a cool feature but. Yeah. Priorities.

PinballLizard said:

I made a thread about polish in general discussion.

http://digitalpinballfans.com/showthread.php/7780-General-Game-Polish

I want that type of stuff addressed wayyyy before features like 3D or a physics engine overhaul, both are a ton of work, and the percentage of 3D TV owners is very small.

That said, I think it'll happen since ps3 has it, and it's a cool feature but. Yeah. Priorities.

Click to expand...

3D isn't really much work compared to most of the fixes that the game needs and it pays off in added sales. 3D will probably come first.

PinballLizard said:

the percentage of 3D TV owners is very small.

Click to expand...

I think you mean the percentage of 3D TV owners who are bothered about playing the game in 3D is small. I doubt very much that the percentage of 3D TV owners is small, almost every TV over 32" sold in the last 4 years or so has 3D support.

Prevailing opinion

brakel said:

Its not one or the other and 3D isn't dead. Lots of new TVs being sold with 3D and still many games and movies are being made in 3D. What died was the thought that everyone would want to have 3D and every animated and action movie would be made in 3D. Some people quickly develop eye fatigue when watching 3D while others, roughly 5 percent of the population, do not experience a 3D image when viewing 3D content. When done well, like in TPA for the PS3, it is not a gimmick but rather as close of a visual experience as we can get without actually stepping up to a real machine.

It's not really much work for FarSight to develop because the tables are already created in a virtual 3D space. There is still plenty of FarSight's resources left to provide us with higher resolution tables as well. I'm hoping that the upcoming new Microsoft sales will provide FarSight with the means to improve some of these things for consoles and PC versions.

Click to expand...

This (above) seems to be the prevailing opinion -- ultimately, that 3d is a desirable option. What I was trying to get at is that 3d takes a significant hit on performance and will definitely use up significant available processing power (effectively doubling the frame rate to give us 3d at 60 fps on the PS4), which could be put to better (in my opinion, anyway) use. Sure, 3d is much easier to implement, but do you really prefer 3d to better physics and/or higher resolution textures, for example? Who knows though...maybe the PS4 will be capable of giving us better physics and graphics, AND 3d...frankly, I'm hopeful but doubtful of that.

brakel said:

3D isn't really much work compared to most of the fixes that the game needs and it pays off in added sales. 3D will probably come first.

Click to expand...

Maybe true but the one most asked-for - improved sound - isn't any work at all. Just replace the sample files from the PS4 with ones from the PC. Boom, done.

legendaryaxe said:

This (above) seems to be the prevailing opinion -- ultimately, that 3d is a desirable option. What I was trying to get at is that 3d takes a significant hit on performance and will definitely use up significant available processing power (effectively doubling the frame rate to give us 3d at 60 fps on the PS4), which could be put to better (in my opinion, anyway) use. Sure, 3d is much easier to implement, but do you really prefer 3d to better physics and/or higher resolution textures, for example? Who knows though...maybe the PS4 will be capable of giving us better physics and graphics, AND 3d...frankly, I'm hopeful but doubtful of that.

Click to expand...

The PS4 can do up to 1080p @ 120fps. When you run in 3D then games would drop to 1080p @ 60fps. There would be no degradation in the textures or physics. The implementation of 3D would not change how much the textures and physics can be improved. The only difference is that the 3D viewer would have half as many frames being sent. They don't dumb down the 2D in games in order to be able to run 3D. On the PS3 they cut the 3D visuals down to 720p so that they can keep the frame rate at 60fps, but the 2D game can still run at 1080p. On the PS4 it is actually capable of running at 1080p @ 60fps in 3D. We all know that the textures that are being used in TPA on the PS4 are not pixel matched at full HD. The textures are much lower resolution. So the PS4 can already handle everything that FarSight could throw at it in both 2D and 3D.

So bring on the texture upgrades and physics advances. I'm fine if they do all of that before they do 3D. I don't think they will but I'd like to see all of that and more. Then I want 3D, dammit!

The graphics engine and physics engine is already good. But what the game desperately needs on ps4 is a high res textures pack.

The backglasses in particular are very low res and very bad looking. Scared Stiff, for instance, is not only missing elements, there's a Key in the backglass that made it into the texture. That kind of stuff just brings the entire product down.

So. High res textures. Redone backglasses in particular, and some added lighting (strobe multiball is missing, Elvira is missing a flasher, here and there) and bug fixes (it's all listed here in this forum) fix this stuff, and the game becomes top tier IMO.

This stuff should take priority over 3D which the majority of people out there can't use (3D TV is relatively a small market segment).

Tabe said:

Maybe true but the one most asked-for - improved sound - isn't any work at all. Just replace the sample files from the PS4 with ones from the PC. Boom, done.

Click to expand...

Probably already done and will likely be in the next PS4 update. Would be mighty disappointing if not.

PinballLizard said:

The graphics engine and physics engine is already good. But what the game desperately needs on ps4 is a high res textures pack.

The backglasses in particular are very low res and very bad looking. Scared Stiff, for instance, is not only missing elements, there's a Key in the backglass that made it into the texture. That kind of stuff just brings the entire product down.

So. High res textures. Redone backglasses in particular, and some added lighting (strobe multiball is missing, Elvira is missing a flasher, here and there) and bug fixes (it's all listed here in this forum) fix this stuff, and the game becomes top tier IMO.

This stuff should take priority over 3D which the majority of people out there can't use (3D TV is relatively a small market segment).

Click to expand...

Backglasses could stand to be better but it's a pretty contentious claim that it brings the whole product down. There are two tables where the backglass plays any role whatsoever, Circus Voltaire and Scared Stiff, otherwise they are almost never on screen except for in fly-bys.

As said, TVs with 3D support are becoming dime a dozen, for instance, my TV doesn't support it, but my next one will more than likely have support for it. My next monitor will likely have support for it (not that it will work in portrait anyway). The engine is in 3D and the gain to effort ratio is going to be better for Farsight, likely. It's also something that is going to affect gameplay entirely where the backglass is 90% of the time completely aesthetic in nature.

Here's the thing, people come on here and say Farsight should do this and that and this and that. This is fine, we all have ideas of what farsight should do. However, some seem to think that they represent a majority, even if there is a number of people here that share said opinion. But for every person here there is possibly 1000 people not represented. The other thing is that quite often, the same few people will repeat the same thing over and over, which can make some opinions vastly overrepresented. Frankly, Farsight should do whatever they deem in the best interests of the product. If it sells to 1000 people and 3 people decide not to buy it because of any decision, well then Farsight did the right thing, whether those people like the decision or not.

A lot of people seem to completely ignore any bugfixes that aren't on their personal laundry list, then say that they should spend more time on bugfixes as if they had done none at all.

Should backglasses be improved where they are weak? Of course, is it of utmost importance? Not really as they aren't really a part of the gameplay and really don't make the game worse. SS ROM emulation where it is missing, major gamebreaking bugs where they can be isolated, the PS4 sound issue (if it hasn't been done already), instances of the ball flying through solid objects, lack of randomness/variance in kickouts, ramps that are too easy to hit even with bad shots....well that may be my personal laundry list, and I could probably claim that it's a popular one, but these things actually effect gameplay and should be prioritized. Art assets are one of those things that would be very very nice to have improved, that I do agree with you on, but it's hard to justify prioritizing that kind of thing.

Personally, I'd like to see better lighting on the 360 and PS3, i simply cannot understand how these systems don't have it, when they can handle real time lighting.

PinballLizard said:

The graphics engine and physics engine is already good. But what the game desperately needs on ps4 is a high res textures pack.

The backglasses in particular are very low res and very bad looking. Scared Stiff, for instance, is not only missing elements, there's a Key in the backglass that made it into the texture. That kind of stuff just brings the entire product down.

So. High res textures. Redone backglasses in particular, and some added lighting (strobe multiball is missing, Elvira is missing a flasher, here and there) and bug fixes (it's all listed here in this forum) fix this stuff, and the game becomes top tier IMO.

This stuff should take priority over 3D which the majority of people out there can't use (3D TV is relatively a small market segment).

Click to expand...

I agree that there are many things that should be done before 3D because they should have been done before release. I disagree about the market segment of 3D TVs. I don't consider 75 million to be a small US market share. I do think that FarSight should fix these things before they do 3D but I'm not sure that they will. How long have we been asking for texture resolution upgrades on the PS3?

brakel said:

So the PS4 can already handle everything that FarSight could throw at it in both 2D and 3D.

Click to expand...

CV stutters during multiball at low camera angles.

smbhax said:

CV stutters during multiball at low camera angles.

Click to expand...

+ 1 there and I've seen some very minor slowdown on MM during multiball, as well. Of course it's almost impossible to believe the PS4 is at fault for that...

Brakel said "The PS4 can do up to 1080p @ 120fps. When you run in 3D then games would drop to 1080p @ 60fps. There would be no degradation in the textures or physics. The implementation of 3D would not change how much the textures and physics can be improved. The only difference is that the 3D viewer would have half as many frames being sent. They don't dumb down the 2D in games in order to be able to run 3D. On the PS3 they cut the 3D visuals down to 720p so that they can keep the frame rate at 60fps, but the 2D game can still run at 1080p. On the PS4 it is actually capable of running at 1080p @ 60fps in 3D. We all know that the textures that are being used in TPA on the PS4 are not pixel matched at full HD. The textures are much lower resolution. So the PS4 can already handle everything that FarSight could throw at it in both 2D and 3D."

Well, my brother's gaming rig has a R9 290 gfx card and an i7 4770 quad-core cpu, and it easily outperforms the PS4; however, it takes a hit when running 3d...so why wouldn't the PS4? Just because PS4 is capable of 3d at 1080, 60 fps, doesn't mean it wouldn't tax the system at all -- of course it will -- and that processing power could have been using for better anti-aliasing, lighting, textures, etc. Anyway, I realize it's a moot point as they're almost certainly going to make 3d available before any major gameplay or graphics tweaks...I just wish it were the other way around.