Crytek Interview, Part III of III

[PressBot]

MTBS is pleased to be joined by Jens Schöbel, Technical Designer (and stereoscopic 3D wiz) for Crytek, developers of the upcoming Crysis 2 video game and CryENGINE 3 game engine!



Crytek first made headlines in stereoscopic 3D gaming with a demo they did on an iZ3D monitor at GDC 2009.  They later demonstrated CryENGINE 3 running in stereoscopic 3D on the big screen at SIGGRAPH 2009.  Now Crysis 2 is getting set for release in the new year, complete with native stereoscopic 3D support on PC and console (Xbox 360 and Sony PS3).

Today, the final part of our mystery tour to find out what they have cooking in 3D!  Check out part one and part two if you haven't already.
1. While I think our industry is filled with companies that are excited about 3D gaming, they are equally unexcited about working together as a cohesive industry.  Sony, Nvidia, AMD, and more are all very proprietary in how they position themselves.  Even when they are announcing 3D specifications or "open initiatives", they are firmly tied to their brand, and their brand alone.  While the biggest adversaries got behind 3D movies through Blu-Ray, stereoscopic 3D gaming is playing out very differently.  Do you agree with this viewpoint?  Do you see game developers acting as the cohesion for the stereoscopic 3D gaming industry?  What do game developers need that they aren't getting?

Well, let's answer the last question first. In my opinion, most of the game developers need more guts. It is quite easy to say, "We never have done this before! It will not work." To have guts means, to look at your company's core idea. One of Crytek’s core ideas was and is being technologically cutting edge. That explains why we implemented S-3D into Crysis 2.

This is a technology no AAA title ever has done before, so that was a good option for us to choose.  Nevertheless stereo 3D for us means being and staying cutting edge. That's what other developers need: A clear goal where they want to be in five or ten years. Overcoming the burdens of the non-cohesive industry is harder than setting your own company vision.

For cohesion, you should remember that stereo 3D gaming is currently a niche. It will and is getting stronger. We are going into S-3D and we clearly know that this is a good bonus. As stated earlier we don’t change the story or game play too much in the 3D version of the game. Our clear goal is it to push 3D. This doesn’t necessarily hold true for other companies as well.

There is too much risk to break down a...

Read full article...

[tritosine5G]

Hey, I wholeheartedly agree with the gut part, thats a story in itself ...Way to go crytek.

-guys, I admit I made some precautions about my questions , so theres still some hope something will unfold in a few days at GDC , add yours if you want, theres some time left!!
http://crysis.4thdimension.info/forum/s ... post465152

[Dom]

So anything done in 3d is better than 2d and great that crytek is doing stereo3d, But is this gonna be like a 3d ready game its good but sitill only 50 percent of what 3d stereo can do.

What about labeling your games 3d suitability with a "signature" , like "SEME" = Stereo Entertainment Multimedia Enviroment.

[tritosine5G]

only 50 percent of what 3d stereo can do.

nah, I dont think they did such bad job. Remember they shown that trailer in s3d at E3 to the whole audience, and you dont see ppl complaining, rather the opposite, they say it was better than the perfomance hitter killzone3, not the game , the 3d.

(that uses some awful lresolution like 640*720 to gain headroom for 3d tho, still ... )
Pop out is rarely useful for a first person shooter anyway.
-btw what happened to my signature. Its still there in other topics. Ok its back, nm.

[Dom]

only 50 percent of what 3d stereo can do.

nah, I dont think they did such bad job. Remember they shown that trailer in s3d at E3 to the whole audience, and you dont see ppl complaining, rather the opposite, they say it was better than the perfomance hitter killzone3, not the game , the 3d.

Yeah I hope so but I mean stereo3d in general, its not up to par yet and seems they are sticking with the semi sefficient form of "3d ready" for Nvidia none the less. Other systems may yeild far better results in terms of immersion. Still what to do with all the game titles I have now, only to play them in 2d and hope studios make something of a good return in the form of enhanced 3d not "normal" or for the settled.

[christ0ff]

Thanks for these interviews Neal !

It is always great to hear how professionals see the future of 3D.
It actually pointed out something I hadn't thought about when dealing with 3D Movies on 3D TVs, and that is the depth settings should change depending on the size of the TV! That was eye-opening for me to read that...

I wonder if when talking about the 3d-BluRay specs, how this would be handled?

I would assume that a wheel like the 3dvision transmitter to adjust depth could be added to every 3DTV but clearly I haven't seen that on the ones for sale right now...or maybe it would be managed by the 3d-BluRay device itself... I just don't know...

But maybe you do, Sensei

[Fredz]

If you shoot a movie for one screen size you'll not be able to obtain the same perceived depth on another display by only modifying the separation between the two images. There is an interesting article on the Siggraph website that illustrates the problem of varying screen sizes for stereo 3D : Stereoscopic 3D Film and Animation - Getting It Right

I've put up a little table to help me understand the situation better, feel free to comment if you find anything wrong in it.

For example, if you've got a movie with a maximal separation of 65mm on a 65" display, it will have a maximal separation of 40mm on a 40" display. This means that a point perceived 100m behind the screen on the 65" display if viewed at 2,6m (maximal distance for visual acuity¹) will be perceived at 3,90m on the 40" display when viewed from the same distance. If you look at this point at the best distance¹ of 1,6m for the 40", the perceived depth will be of only 2,40m.

If you augment the distance between the two images to have a maximal separation of 65mm on the 40", and watch the same point from the ideal distance of 1,6m, the perceived depth will be of 101m, which is a lot better and in the same order of magnitude than the perceived distance of 100m on the 65" display.

But in these conditions, a point perceived at 1m on the 65" screen will be perceived at 2m on the 40" screen, which is way off and should look quite distorted. And a point that lies on the screen plane on the 65" will be perceived at 1m on the 40". In fact, all the points that would have resulted in an out-of-the-screen effect would be behind the screen plane in this case.

You can try to move the images a little bit more appart to try to obtain better results, at the risk of having a maximal separation superior to the one of your eyes which will cause eyestrain, but the results will be similar as shown in the last column.

In fact, the only way to have the same perceived depth on all displays would be to scale up the image for lower screen sizes depending on the size of the screen the movie was shot for. But you could miss quite a big part of the image then, especially on close-ups. For a movie shot for a 65" display (the biggest size for 3D consumer TVs I know of) you would need to scale the image x1,625 to view it with the same perceived depth on a 40" screen and at the same viewing distance, which would not be the optimal distance to view a movie on this screen size.

¹ Viewing Distance Calculator

[tritosine5G]

http://tinyurl.com/2uaam5b

SHOWING THEIR STEREOSCOPIC EDITOR!!! WOW!!!

-gr8 link Fredz.

[christ0ff]

Thanks Fredz !

That was very educational (at least for me)...

Maybe one could hope that the way BluRay 3D stores a movie would allow for a dynamic way to configure the 3D for different setups, but I am likely dreaming...