Bethesda has made every ES games top notch graphics-wise when they came out, I see no reason to expect es5 to be any different, including 3d graphics.

That being said, 3D WON'T BE MANDATORY. Even if they advance beyond the need for those spiffy shades, you can use a monitor with less than 120hz framerate. Hell I dunno if I'll even upgrade my current (which isn't 3d ready).

This. This right here is exactly how I feel about the 3D fad going on right now. Damn you James Cameron.

Also, all the 3D-phobic folk, say they go with my idea and make/remake a TES spinoff game on the 3DS, on the handheld there is a slider to reduce or even completely remove the 3D entirely. Trust me, even if this 3D thing winds up being a permanent thing it won't be mandatory all the time, at least until it becomes easily usable for everyone (think when DVDs first came out, for years things were still released on VHS as well).

You can use an eye patch! That will remove the 3D. Hehe.

One thing I'm wondering is why people assume 3D is a fad. Oh sure it could be that in the end, but there have been plenty of atrocious 3D movies and it still seems to be on everyone's lips (usually the opposite trend occurs in a fad), and an entire handheld generation seems to be based on it (because however Sony and Micrososft might like to think otherwise, their entire existence as game companies is one big copy of Nintendo, PSmove and Kinect! So when Sony makes the PSP3D(S?) there'll be an even larger setup of systems devoted to playing 3D games. So I say instead of being crusty old fogeys we all sit down and give this new idea a good long look because I don't think any of us want to be that guy who refused to buy a DVD player calling it a useless fad and then got a massive egg on his face.

It has everything to do with designers working on the aesthetics of the game.

Look through your collection of games. Pretty much every one of them can be boiled down to "You have a weapon. Kill everyone."

Why is that? Is it because game studios hire monkeys?

No. It's because we, as gamers, DEMAND (!!) something new and shiny with every video game. It's because we go bananas if the graphics of a game aren't as good as every other game that's out currently. This, naturally, diverts resources and attention away from the story department. When a big gaming development wants to make a game, they don't say "Hey you! Write a story for this game!" and call it a day.

Look at E3. How many presentations focused on story and plot and character development versus how many focused on graphics and gimmicks? (Hint: It's split 100/0)
Look at Psychonauts: An independent game lacking in graphics, but was universally praised for it's characters and story by critics. How'd it do in sales? It shipped less than 100 000 copies, caused the CEO to resign, and made Majesco drop out of the big budget game marketplace.

Rofl. Yes it may be that awful MMORPG shorthand but I it fits. Thanks for the laugh


You are right in that games with the bells and whistles get the coveted media attention, but story and a top graphics game are not necessarily mutually exclusive.

Seeing as how I hated that movie, I would want TES to be nothing like it. Including 3D. Besides, 3D makes things awkward. Video games are fantasy. No need for this kind of thing. Also, 3D technology is said to increase chances of seizures and is just about always going to disorient/make you feel sick if you look at it long enough. So, IMO 3D should NEVER be implemented with games.

If most cool games only come out with 3D (supported 3D specialist companies), all those fat gamers (Lol, I hope you're not fat :3) would have to lose weight or their gaming career is on the line...

No offence........

I agree. It almost seems pointless to me. I felt like the development of 3D movies was just something to 'wow' old people with In Terms of technology.

I have to warn though, you have to wear the glasses on the eye patch or it won't work.



I like to go "wow" with new technological innovations. Is it a bad thing? Besides, S3D is older than me and my father.



This. Writers don't cost too much, relatively. Games need technical expertise. Even the simplest one. Crytek hired a writer for Crysis 2. GTA 4 has a cinematic story and beautiful graphics. RDR is like a movie and has the best graphics on consoles. Morrowind and Mafia both have a good story and represented best graphics of their time. Metro 2033 was developed closer with book's author and it has the best graphics to date.

I want graphics as a "standard". A good story is not that easy, I can't find in movies usually and not even with books sometimes. But when I found one I treasure it.

If they had the 3D option i wouldn't use it.

Nintendo has recently made a new DS (yes another one) that is 3d WITHOUT the glasses unfortunatly i saw this news from home and not at the stands so i couldnt see it first hand but they had it its only a matter of time now ....

I can tell by many of the posts that many people here have not even tried gaming in stereo 3d.

Then listen to me, because I ACTUALLY use 3d vision;.......... and because I type in red.

Quite simply put, it is better than 2d...... by far.

Also, s3d is nothing like what it was in the past... The two cannot be compared.

3d gaming is also not to be compared with "avatar 3d"..... which was a highly watered down version with perhaps 15% depth max. I use 100% for complete immersion.

It is also very, very easy to implement 3d in programming..... Oblivion for instance works nicely without developers even thinking about 3d.

No, it does not look like card board cut outs and different depths. It looks just like how things look in real-life...surprise surprise.

Oblivion is like a new game in s3d, and Fallout 3 is mind blowing. Things become frighteningly realistic.

Nowhere in forums have I ever seen someone mention they had seizures with s3d.

No it does not hurt your eyes, or make headaches, you do not get sick, and your eyes do not pop out, or explode.

I have in fact heard more than one person claim to have improved eyesight after gaming in s3d.

Gaming in s3d automatically cuts your framerate in two. And this means that you need more processing power.

3d lowers the effective brightness of a monitor or screen by a small amount. A necessary trade-off for shutter glass systems such as 3d vision.

s3d is not a fad... because 3d solutions have been around for decades...

It is also a big boys toy for now, and is only for those who can afford it.

In 3d, you stop to smell the roses, appreciate the painstakingly crafted architecture, and marvel at the beauty to a degree the developers would be humbled to see you play in.... There is simply no comparison...There it is, straight from the horses mouth, And I use 3d for every game.

As for the 3d hate out there... I can understand that if s3d is out of your reach and budget, I would be upset too.

3d for life. :mohawk:

Is Oblivion only playable in 3D on PCs?

I am not wearing some stupid looking glasses or buying a modified screen just for a "3d" implication. Sound a hell lot of like gimmick stuff to me and something that shouldn't be consider into the series.

You say "Sounds" like... I'm saying "IS" like. :tops: ......and thats the difference.


If you feel stupid wearing the glasses, thats up to you....

Naw. Considering that it would use up a crap load of resource just to make some image 3D, while making it a format for PC and any of the console, not to mention the requirement of special tools and equipment just to make it work, it ain't cost efficient and it is just gimmickish.

Better resource spend on something the Dev really need, Debugging.

I agree, and it hurts my eyes to

Nobody says 3d vision hurts their eyes.... What have you been using?



@Qawsed asap.... Yes, it uses precisely twice the graphics power. For Oblivion for instance, something a PC can easily do.
And as for effort to program in a game..... Thats quite simply wrong. The technology works by itself, through D3D.


Edit: This popped up on nvidia forums just today,
http://forums.nvidia.com/index.php?showtopic=174697

Its about eye-sight and 3d... These threads surface from time to time.

Except when Oblivion was release, the graphic scream bloody murder for anyone with the lack of requirement for the PC (which is anyone back than), not to mention it was riddle with bugs that thrived within the game itself. Of course, Oblivion can be run with any PC nowadays (well almost) but considering each step up in the series usually up the graphic a bit, I think its better off the dev stay away from these gimmick and focus on something else that everyone can benefit rather than the few.

As for the D3D, which I assume its Direct3D, I assume that just make the graphic and the bitmap within the game more 3dish, not making it pop out the screen.

I compare it to 5.1 sound. Sure you need additional equipment and it's not necessary but it is immersive. I have 5.1 sound system and I will look for support in games. It is pretty much standard right now. Why can't S3D be a standard too? Where is it written that says a game can't have story and graphics at the same time? Prices fall down eventually. I was about to buy a 3D laptop last year. My next system will have this.

Debugging is as important as optimization. S3D would need development time only from one department: Optimization. Crysis 2 goes 3D with only %15 correction %1.5 extra performance hit!

5.1 sound is great. I was playing Bad Company 2 last night and a rocket flew past my head and I could hear it whiz past my ear.

Surround sounds? Phuh. That a given to any type of media that anyone can get their hands on. It is much easier to implicate and been in common use for a long time (and when I mean common use, I mean it use ALOT more compared to S3D). S3D isn't "standard" as it is still extra stuff that would otherwise still be unnecessary in adding into the game with other stuff in mind taht is important to the game itself.

As for optimization, this is Bethesda Softworks we're talking about. These guys are notorious for their bugs. Literally. I would like it to if they could at least make it playable from the start to the finish of the game without the need for them to release a heck load of patches along with player-made patches.

I think by the time we see another TES, (2 years perhaps), there will be alot of people with 3d TV's who will want to use them. There are also many TV's, 3d monitors and projectors already out... Future proofing is important for any developer.

On that note, one cannot dispute, that it's in Bethesda's very nature and history to have taken the newest, biggest and baddest technologies out there, and stay on the cutting edge of the industry.....
When you can actually "see into" the world, and have things "reach out" to your face, there is nothing like it...




No, what I meant was, that the info your screen needs to make 2 images (for your 2 eyes), is all handled by Direct3D. Not by the game itself. This is why most games work even if they aren't "3D Ready".