I'm looking forward to this.
<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="640" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/yHZ-zz5LFk8" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Solving the issues of jumping into the distance and gauging where you are going to land is a great use for 3D. Up until now, you had to use other cues to figure it out, such as a spot shadow under your character or simply reusing the same jump distance to a block you're already familiar with the size of.
That tail... Raccoon powers return?
Yeah, 3d in 3d platformers does sound like it'd be a great idea... I don't know, before the 3DS have there been any 3d platformers with 3d visuals? The old 3d systems (Vectrex, SMS, Famicom, Virtual Boy) don't have any. There are some 3d PS3 games, though, right? Any platformers? Or is it Rayman 3D (Rayman 2's 3DS port)?
Anyway, it certainly does seem like something that would help a lot in the genre. While many 3d platformers did figure out ways of making things mostly work (as far as figuring out jumps goes), it'd be great if it was easier... now just re-release some of those earlier ones where jumping was hard on the 3DS, like the Croc games. :) (I know, Argonaut's gone, not going to happen. Wish it would though.)
I don't see what the big deal is.. Hitting blocks wasn't hard at all in Mario 64.. The system they had worked pretty well.. The blocks cast a shadow.. Stand on the shadow and jump and hit the block.. It's not exactly rocket science.
How is this supposed to work on the 3DS any way? The 3DS's 3D is a optical illusion.. As far as I know StarTrek voyager holograms haven't been invented yet, so how are you supposed to be able to see where to jump? The 3D images of today are only optical illusions that appear to have 3 dimensions it's not like you can really see the back of the block.
You can't see the back of 3D objects in the real world either without a mirror.
Yes it's an optical illusion, but it's based on how we see in 3D to begin with. The entire way we see in 3D is an optical illusion. It combines two 2D images together to artificially create a 3D image. All our 3D seeing is an optical illusion. So what? If it appears identical to viewing real 3D objects (which it does), then you'll be able to use that information to judge distances. It should work so well that the "optical illusions" in rooms like the "big small" portrait room in SM64 probably won't work on the 3DS.
Your argument is like arguing that since motion on display screens is an optical illusion (remember, all screens simply show still frames in rapid succession to give the illusion of movement) then you can't judge where something is going to be based on where it was before in games where you need to predict the patterns of bosses or bullet bills or whatever. That's clearly silly. Further, colors other than red green and blue are optical illusions, so arguing that any color puzzles in a game that don't use those specific 3 colors won't work. Of course that's ridiculous. So long as the 3D on the 3DS uses the exact same mechanism our eyes use to see any kind of 3D (it does) then it works just as well.
Truth time, there is one important distinction. The "difference" between the two images your eyes see is determined by how far apart your eyes are from each other. This is simulated in any 3D imaging system, but unless you're very lucky, the positioning of the two images in 3D movie or game isn't going to be the same distance apart as your actual eyes are, and this is going to force your brain to adapt to that new distance and "re-learn" how to gauge distances. Typically, I did this pretty quickly on the Virtual Boy. It is something to be aware of though. I conjectured that the 3D camera could be made to work in tandem with games by determining the exact positional relation between your eyes in a photo, making a profile based on it, and all 3D games could be designed to use that profile to determine the placement of the in-game "cameras" to match it. I'm not sure if Nintendo is going to attempt that, but my hypothesis is if they did that, the 3D would require no time to adapt to.
Yes hitting a block by moving under it's direct spot shadow is easy. Now try something that isn't a straw man, like my ACTUAL example. I'm not talking about the easy stuff, I'm talking about the hard stuff, like gauging the distance between two platforms when you are jumping forward. In cases where the cues aren't immediately obvious, this can be tricky. It can also sometimes be tricky to jump on enemies moving around under you unless you are very familiar with their size in relation to your character, or there's a big spot shadow. Lots of games going for realism these days are trying to eliminate the "directly under your character" spot shadow. That's proving a little difficult since it gives little frame of reference in jumping.
Wow! That was a epic rant of stupid like none other! Normally I wouldn't waist my oxygen with this.. But I feel if I didn't point out all the inconsistencies I would be doing man kind a disservice.
[QUOTE2=Dark Jaguar]You can't see the back of 3D objects in the real world either without a mirror.[/QUOTE2]Clearly you missed my point.. You most certainly can, you don't need a mirror to walk behind a 3D object and examine it's back side. Seriously, were you high when you wrote that, or do you enjoy making my brain hurt..
[QUOTE2=Dark Jaguar]Yes it's an optical illusion, but it's based on how we see in 3D to begin with. The entire way we see in 3D is an optical illusion. It combines two 2D images together to artificially create a 3D image. All our 3D seeing is an optical illusion. So what? If it appears identical to viewing real 3D objects (which it does), then you'll be able to use that information to judge distances. It should work so well that the "optical illusions" in rooms like the "big small" portrait room in SM64 probably won't work on the 3DS.[/QUOTE2] No, we see images in 3 dimensions because they exists in 3 dimensions, how our brain receives that data is irrelevant. My point was, 3DS images don't exists in 3 dimensions they are rendered on a 2D plane and therefore they are 2D. You can't look behind a Mario block in a 3DS game, but you can look behind a toy block in the real world... That's the difference [QUOTE2=DarkJaguar]Your argument is like arguing that since motion on display screens is an optical illusion (remember, all screens simply show still frames in rapid succession to give the illusion of movement) then you can't judge where something is going to be based on where it was before in games where you need to predict the patterns of bosses or bullet bills or whatever. That's clearly silly. Further, colors other than red green and blue are optical illusions, so arguing that any color puzzles in a game that don't use those specific 3 colors won't work. Of course that's ridiculous. So long as the 3D on the 3DS uses the exact same mechanism our eyes use to see any kind of 3D (it does) then it works just as well.[/QUOTE2] That's a retarded argument I wasn't saying that at all. Again, I think sometimes you just blow smoke to piss me off.
[QUOTE2=DarkJaguar]Truth time, there is one important distinction. The "difference" between the two images your eyes see is determined by how far apart your eyes are from each other. This is simulated in any 3D imaging system, but unless you're very lucky, the positioning of the two images in 3D movie or game isn't going to be the same distance apart as your actual eyes are, and this is going to force your brain to adapt to that new distance and "re-learn" how to gauge distances. Typically, I did this pretty quickly on the Virtual Boy. It is something to be aware of though. I conjectured that the 3D camera could be made to work in tandem with games by determining the exact positional relation between your eyes in a photo, making a profile based on it, and all 3D games could be designed to use that profile to determine the placement of the in-game "cameras" to match it. I'm not sure if Nintendo is going to attempt that, but my hypothesis is if they did that, the 3D would require no time to adapt to.
Yes hitting a block by moving under it's direct spot shadow is easy. Now try something that isn't a straw man, like my ACTUAL example. I'm not talking about the easy stuff, I'm talking about the hard stuff, like gauging the distance between two platforms when you are jumping forward. In cases where the cues aren't immediately obvious, this can be tricky. It can also sometimes be tricky to jump on enemies moving around under you unless you are very familiar with their size in relation to your character, or there's a big spot shadow. Lots of games going for realism these days are trying to eliminate the "directly under your character" spot shadow. That's proving a little difficult since it gives little frame of reference in jumping.[/QUOTE2]Again, since there is no real depth data for your brain to process, being only a optical illusion.. I find that hard to believe.
[Quote2=DarkJaguar]You can't see the back of 3D objects in the real world either without a mirror.[/QUOTE2]That's going in the signature... :)
You seem to completely misunderstand how your own visual system works.
If you are going to argue you can see the "backs" of things in the real world because you can go to the other side, that's also true of objects in video games. If you can rotate the camera, you can look at the back of a block there too.
This has no bearing at all on how you see objects in 3D though.
Let me explain. Your eyes aren't magic. They don't have the ability to intrinsically "know" the 3D attribute of something. It must be inferred from visual cues. The biggest cue we have (but not the only one) is binocular vision.
When you look at something with just one eye, all you see is a 2D image. Yes the world outside is 3D, but all your eye ever receives is a 2D image of that 3D world. The light enters your eye and hits your retina, which is a 2D surface. Your optic nerve does a little preprocessing and then sends this data to your brain. Your brain then attempts to discern what things are using other visual data. It is very complex. The only way you can even tell where one thing starts and the next thing begins is through visual processing. The same is true of 3D. Part of the way it is able to put together 3D from this one 2D image is from outlines. When one outline is interrupted by another outline which remains consistent and unbroken, the brain makes the assumption that it is because that second object is in front of the first. This can lead to optical illusions if you know this. It's how you can have "impossible shapes" like the following.
<img src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/81/Impossible_cube_illusion_angle.svg/582px-Impossible_cube_illusion_angle.svg.png">
Due to this particular method of gathering 3D from the 2D image on your retina, it assumes that this is a 3D shape (when in fact it is a 2D illustration), but due to how the lines interrupt each other, it makes two contradictory assumptions about the shape, and the object thus looks impossible.
Another method used to get some 3D data from a 2D image is relative size. This is based on your existing internal database of objects, gathered by experience in life up to that point. In other words, when you have an idea of the size of people, and the fact that they are consistent, the brain can assume that if a small person is standing next to a tall person, and the dimensions are sufficiently exaggerated, and the feet of the smaller are above the feet of the farther, it is because one person is standing much closer than the second. However, again this is a quick assumption our brains make that is true enough to be usable, but can be manipulated in another illusion.
http://www.visualillusion.net/Chap07/Page01.php
Here is an entire class of depth perception illusions. This is caused by the fact that our brains have to cobble together our awareness of 3D from 2D images.
This brings me to the final point. Binocular vision just means using 2 eyes, but if you want the word used for our ability to combine the two images to form a 3D idea of depth perception, here it is.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stereopsis
This explains in detail how it works. Not all animals can do this. Birds have their eyes located on the sides of their heads. They have a huge visual range, a panorama if you will, but lack stereopsis because the images from their eyes don't overlap. As a result, they can't use that method for depth perception and are strictly reliant on the other cues I mentioned. They seem to do pretty well for themselves though, except when they fly into buildings.
Do your homework next time. Our individual eyes see strictly 2D images. The world may be 3D, but our senses are limited. Just because something HAS an attribute doesn't mean our eyes can magically detect it, there has to be some mechanism in our eyes that they can use TO detect it.
If you understand that mechanism, you can manipulate it to feed it all sorts of data in the form of illusions. The 3DS and all 3D technology uses EXACTLY the same mechanism that our eyes normally use to process two 2D images into one 3D image. It works in the same way and, to our brains, is indistinguishable from the real thing. Explain specifically why that shouldn't be the case. Also, keep that quote. It should remind you to not make assumptions and do proper research.
I'm ending this conversation...
So be it. Just make sure you look up how our visual systems work some time. It's two 2D images combined to create a 3D internal representation of the outside world. The reason that things like the 3DS even CAN produce an illusion of 3D is because that's how it works.
DJ is correct, etoven. 3D displays work because they display sort of like how our eyes see 3d.
One innovation I saw on the new Sony system (I don't know if the 3DS does this or not) is that the system uses the internal gyroscope to adjust the image to the proper prospective as you rotate the machine around. I saw a demo of that and it looked fricking amazing.. So if you wanted to see what was behind a block, you could simply turn the screen around..
I also have to go with DJ on this one. I know, very well, from times I've walked around with only one contact lens in (my other eye is functionally useless in this situation). With normal sight in both eyes, it is often possible to determine depth because the subtle distance between the eyes provides this information. When I can see out of only one eye, I can only confirm depth by physically viewing multiple sides of an object sequentially, or use some other secondary clue. In this instance, I am not seeing in three dimensions.
When playing a game on the 3DS, you no longer need cues or sequential multiple perspectives to confirm depth. The image appears to your eyes just as it does when you're looking at objects in the distance, and motion allows you to make calculations you can't normally do on 3D represented on a 2D screen. Of course, if you close one eye while viewing the 3DS screen, that depth vanishes entirely and it looks like a flat image, as it would on a regular 2D screen.
Suffice it to say, the experience is much different, at least with Pilotwings. I found it much easier to judge the locations of the floating rings than I did on other versions of what is otherwise the same game simply because it was now possible to tell, by illusion of true depth, how close my plane was to the ring. This is something you can only assume in previous versions.
That's a pretty cool solution there etoven, and closer to a virtual reality system. If the display could get around the fact that you really can't move your head around relative to the screen or the illusion is broken, it'd be good.
Actually the 3DS has a gyroscope built into it and uses it in that camera game where you shoot pictures of yourself overlayed on whatever the 3DS camera sees. Spinning the system around also spins the internal world (the enemies) to match, which is needed to keep them matching up with the real world being shown on the screen. It's pretty trippy actually, since it's using the 3D camera to take images of the real world so the whole thing looks 3D, except for the big detail that the enemies always appear in the foreground. If the imaging system was better designed, it should be able to use the 3D pictures to determine where things like chairs are placed and model that something should be behind it and in front of the desk behind the chair.
The Jaguar's (not released) VR helmet had head tracking, so you could turn in a circle to look around for the game demoed with it, Missile Command 3D. (It was eventually released minus the VR headset support) But yeah, the 3DS has a motion sensor, so it should be able to do something like that.
On another note, I played some Red Alarm today. Only hit the walls which you can't tell from openings because the graphics are all wireframe once. :) Good game though, I know I've said it but hopefully VB games come to 3DS Virtual Console someday...
Even if it had been released, I doubt you'd be able to find a functioning Jaguar system to use it with.
Dark Jaguar Wrote:Even if it had been released, I doubt you'd be able to find a functioning Jaguar system to use it with.
I remember once my mom rented a Jaguar system for me and my step brother (at the time) to play with on our house boat.
I've never actually used a Jaguar... I remember seeing them in stores a few times in the early '90s, but I don't think I've ever actually played one. If I ever did in a store demo I've forgotten about it, and I do remember playing other systems in store demos -- NES, SNES, Genesis, Virtual Boy, Turbografx (just once, I think), 3DO (not often), Playstation...
Every year there's a small "retro gaming" convention around here. They've got all sorts of obscure relics on display and for play. I got a chance at the CDi Zelda games at one, and I also had a chance to play an actual working Jaguar. If I remember right, it actually stopped working near the end of the convention. Apparently a day's play was too much for the poor thing. What game taxed it so? Tempest 2000.
That's pretty cool, I wish there was something like that around here. :)
I've heard a lot about Jaguar CD drives being quite unreliable. That's part of why they cost so much, they're rare first (20,000 probably is all that was made), so there weren't many, and then a bunch broke over time and some of the things that can go wrong apparently aren't easy to fix. Of course that means that it's a risky purchase, who knows if it'll break soon and you'll have nothing to show for your money, but if you're a diehard Jaguar fan, you want a Jag CD. And as sites like Atari-Age prove, there are still a surprisingly large number of Atari console fans out there.
As for the base Jaguar though, as it's solid state it's not as unreliable as the CD unit, but given how cheaply made they apparently were, I wouldn't be at all surprised if they were indeed unreliable systems. The Jaguar itself is a little on the uncommon side too, only 250,000 were made... and Atari had only sold about half of them in early 1996, more than two years after launch, according to reports they issued at the time (while preparing to give up, close down, and sell off the company).
There are lots of Atari fans, but the Jaguar is probably on the "Virtual Boy" end of that fandom. I myself have a decent collection of 2600 games, but never really considered trying to find a working Jaguar and CD addon. Before I did that I'd probably get the 5200 or something. There's actually a boxed copy of Frogger for the 5200 sitting at one of the Vintage Stocks here, so that'd be a good buy if I had a system to play it on.
It's becoming very apparent that proper repair is going to become more and more important to classic gaming. The Atari Jaguars are the front of that wave. If they are going to be maintained and still actually be around, people are going to have to learn to either repair them or find people that can repair them. The alternative is for all the remaining ones to slowly break down until none are left.
To that end, I'm starting to get a lot more proactive in repairing my own systems. I've figured out exactly which capacitor has broken down in my first Game Gear (marked with the exact specifications, which is fortunate) and intend to buy a replacement as soon as I can get a proper soldering kit (I need one for smaller circuitry). Beyond that I've looked into how to buff scratches out of plastic, including clear plastic like that which is covering the GG's screen. If all goes well, I'll have my first GG up and running again and scuff free, which will be nice since the plastic on that one is much smoother.
My Saturn also has a rather odd issue. Certain "shadowed" textures are oddly glitched. It's not a CD reading issue or a disk scratch, it appears to be some flaw in the processing. I think it's another capacitor issue, one that doesn't kill the system but just one small part of it that doesn't affect game logic. I can't locate it though because I don't see any that are suffering from the typical signs, like leaking fluid or swelling. The only alternative is to desolder and test every single capacitor in the system, but wow that's a lot of work. If you have the chance, just look inside a Saturn at some point. It's insane how complicated it is in one of those things. It's like in the mad attempt to catch up to Sony's 3D capabilities, Sega just slapped together every single processor they could find and stuck them all on one set of boards. That's aside from the fact that the graphics system uses rectangles as the basic unit of rendering instead of triangles. At any rate I get lost just taking the thing apart. There's like 20 screws holding it all in place.
Oh yes, there's also the matter of the damaged power port on my SNES. Technically I managed to get it working just fine by bending the now-exposed connector pins in the port so they contact the power plug, but that's only a temporary fix. That's going to be a huge pain to fix properly. The little plastic part in that plug was connected to the plastic section that covers the whole setup of power plug, a/v plug, and channel selector. While it's not connected to the rest of the plastic shell, it doesn't slide off. I have found I'll need to desolder parts off the main board just to get that plastic part to come off, and then I'll need to replace the whole thing with another from another SNES. Other than that, the reset switch isn't working. Something under the contact the switch hits isn't properly connecting. I had fixed it already at one point, but now that won't work. The plastic switch on the main board itself is one solid chunk of plastic fixed to the board, so getting in there is going to be rather difficult. It can probably be removed by desoldering something or other, but i haven't really checked that out too thoroughly.
My NES is in good shape already because while the US model does have some ridiculous design flaws, they are really easy to fix, if time consuming. The connector pins slowly get bent out of place and stop forming a solid connection (quickly if you use those really large connector addons like the Game Genie). The fix is simple as just bending the pins outward, all 72 of them. I also cleaned when while I was at it which was much quicker. My NES is also the only system I modded, since the mod has no down sides and the modification is actually documented in Nintendo repair manuals. Simply clip one connector on the 10NES lockout chip and it switches into permanent "key" mode, allowing all games to run (no games ever tried to "detect" this method). The unofficial games also all run just fine without it, though the ones with switches need to be switched to the second mode. Considering the Japanese system never had any lockout chip and the second model of the NES removed it, this is pretty much the most official hack there is, so I went with it and haven't looked back.
Oh yes, I need to find some way to repair N64 control sticks. Those things are far too fragile, and replacement sticks will eventually run out.
Other than this, I do basic maintenance on everything else. Every few years I take apart my old controllers and clean them out, which makes them a lot more responsive. I clean the contacts on my cartridge games and in the systems themselves, and do the same for optical disks and the laser lenses in the systems that use those. I've been fortunate in that I've never had to recalibrate any disk reading trays. Every now and then, I find a scratch on a disk and take it down to Vintage Stock to get resurfaced (that place is simply great for nerds around here), which works far better than those cheap "repair kits" they sell in stores.
I'm looking for a way to deal with a creeping rust issue that a couple of my systems are developing on certain metal parts. My SNES is probably the biggest culprit. The main board is mostly fine, it's the RF shielding that's suffering the most (and some metal parts surrounding the cartridge connector).
Oh yes, one thing I'm really looking forward to is 3D printing. When that's finally cheap enough for average people to have them, they'll change pretty much everything, and for the first time in a while, in a non-digital way (okay, partially digital). Replacing broken components will be a lot easier when intact ones can be scanned in and replicated whenever they are needed. It only works for solid forms from a single material (think T1000 limitations), but it already works for hard plastic, metal, and rubber. I could easily replace, say, the top plastic shell of my Genesis or controller buttons with one of those things. I could also potentially replace the rubber inserts inside controllers, though I'd have to add the metal contacts manually when they are done "printing".
Wow that was a speech...