StarCraft II Will Support 3D

  • 105 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Avatar image for bradnicholson
Posted by BradNicholson (1556 posts) -
Killzone 3 will support it. Crysis 2 will, too. Why not StarCraft II as well?

Despite being busy as ever with prepping the first release in the StarCraft II trilogy, subtitled Wings of Liberty, Blizzard took the time to swing by South Korea for a little media shindig. At it, IGN PC pressed for an answer to a question some nerdier PC owners might care about--namely if owners will be able to anti-alias the game. Blizzard's Chris Sagaty said no, but then mentioned that the game will support 3D much like Crysis 2 and the host of other titles during this grand 3D fad. Unlike those titles, though, don't expect StarCraft II 3D support right out of the box. These things take time, right?

"No; but we will be releasing 3D in the first few months, for those NVIDIA cards and screens that support it," Sagaty said.
 

1425784-1109041_screenshot061.jpg

== TEASER ==The question as to if this support will extend to other video cards is a little up in the air, but Sagaty suggested the game will with: "we're optimizing for all systems." And as for anti-aliasing? It could happen, much like the 3D support, in a post-launch patch.

If you're staring at the ceiling or wall trying to imagine Wings of Liberty in 3D, join the club. I'm having a hard time picturing how the moon-tech can enhance the experience, no less look cool. I'm guessing that Blizzard, of all studios, will figure out a way to use it effectively in the campaign. Multiplayer, though? I dunno, man. End of the day, I just don't want my eyes to fracture after a couple of hours. That's all I ask.
 
Wings of Libery launches later this month, so expect the 3D patch around September or so.    
Avatar image for bradnicholson
#1 Posted by BradNicholson (1556 posts) -
Killzone 3 will support it. Crysis 2 will, too. Why not StarCraft II as well?

Despite being busy as ever with prepping the first release in the StarCraft II trilogy, subtitled Wings of Liberty, Blizzard took the time to swing by South Korea for a little media shindig. At it, IGN PC pressed for an answer to a question some nerdier PC owners might care about--namely if owners will be able to anti-alias the game. Blizzard's Chris Sagaty said no, but then mentioned that the game will support 3D much like Crysis 2 and the host of other titles during this grand 3D fad. Unlike those titles, though, don't expect StarCraft II 3D support right out of the box. These things take time, right?

"No; but we will be releasing 3D in the first few months, for those NVIDIA cards and screens that support it," Sagaty said.
 

1425784-1109041_screenshot061.jpg

== TEASER ==The question as to if this support will extend to other video cards is a little up in the air, but Sagaty suggested the game will with: "we're optimizing for all systems." And as for anti-aliasing? It could happen, much like the 3D support, in a post-launch patch.

If you're staring at the ceiling or wall trying to imagine Wings of Liberty in 3D, join the club. I'm having a hard time picturing how the moon-tech can enhance the experience, no less look cool. I'm guessing that Blizzard, of all studios, will figure out a way to use it effectively in the campaign. Multiplayer, though? I dunno, man. End of the day, I just don't want my eyes to fracture after a couple of hours. That's all I ask.
 
Wings of Libery launches later this month, so expect the 3D patch around September or so.    
Avatar image for woodelf86
#2 Posted by woodelf86 (207 posts) -

awsome

Avatar image for cap123
#3 Posted by cap123 (2467 posts) -

lol everyone in the industry has gone crazy

Avatar image for flappy
#4 Posted by Flappy (2414 posts) -

Yay for more 3-D?

Avatar image for zonerover
#5 Posted by zonerover (623 posts) -

Wow, yet another product hopping onto the 3D bandwagon. I "thought" Blizzard were above gimmicks.

Avatar image for phrosnite
#6 Edited by phrosnite (3516 posts) -

If Blizzard doesn't get on the bandwagon who will...

Avatar image for zmilla
#7 Posted by ZmillA (2396 posts) -
@zonerover said:
" Wow, yet another product hopping onto the 3D bandwagon. I "thought" Blizzard were above gimmicks. "
so you were absolutely positive they were above gimmicks? sorry I don't get the quote usage.
Avatar image for funexplosions
#8 Posted by FunExplosions (5534 posts) -

And so many people are going to be playing it in 3d, too!

Avatar image for redhatdrew
#9 Posted by RedHatDrew (372 posts) -
@phrosnite:  Everyone else in the industry, phrosnite. Everyone else in the industry.
 
E3D 2010: Never Forget.
Avatar image for zonerover
#10 Posted by zonerover (623 posts) -
@ZmillA said:
" @zonerover said:
" Wow, yet another product hopping onto the 3D bandwagon. I "thought" Blizzard were above gimmicks. "
so you were absolutely positive they were above gimmicks? sorry I don't get the quote usage. "
Well, I was thinking of typing /sarcasm or something like that, but I thought "this" would signify it alright.
Avatar image for gike987
#11 Edited by gike987 (1748 posts) -

Why do they need to patch in support? The Nvidia drivers works in pretty much all games. It's nothing new.
 
Also, 3D works pretty well in strategy games. Just imagine looking down on a Warhammer table but with moving figurines and you know how it looks.

Avatar image for cikame
#12 Posted by cikame (1593 posts) -

In cutscenes sure but i doubt a game on a very level playing field would benefit from having 3D... but then so far i haven't seen anything in my life benefit from being in 3D.

Avatar image for kazona
#13 Posted by Kazona (3366 posts) -

Let me get this straight. They won't add a graphic standard that has been around for years, and just about everyone can use, yet they are going to use 3-D, something only a handful of people have the capability to use?  
 
I know 3D is the big new thing nowadays, but to completely neglect a thing as anti-aliasing seems pretty lazy to me.

Avatar image for jeffsekai
#14 Posted by Jeffsekai (7156 posts) -

This has been known for a week now. The fuck are they paying you guys for.

Avatar image for one_eye_jacked
#15 Posted by ONE_EYE_JACKED (49 posts) -

ermmmm. anyone with any idea how it will work or look like? RTS in 3-D? A little skeptical here

Avatar image for toowalrus
#16 Posted by TooWalrus (13380 posts) -

It's just an optional feature for those who like this sort of thing, and lets face it, a lot of people do. It's not going to handicap the people who prefer the standard look, so chill. It doesn't sound like they're putting too much time into the 3-D, anyway.

Avatar image for jayzilla
#17 Posted by Jayzilla (2689 posts) -

Playing games in 3D that usually tend to go in game sessions of upwards of a few hours is a terrible idea. I like to play RTS's and Turn-based/RTS hybrids like the Total War series( RTS on the battle map/Turn-based on the tactical map) for long periods of time. I think the only place 3D makes a huge impact is on the social/casual market where you play in bite size gaming chunks.

Avatar image for this_dude
#18 Posted by This_Dude (305 posts) -

ROFL  no Anti-Aliasing support,  but they're already planning on supporting 3-D?   i hate bandwagons.

Avatar image for cypher
#19 Edited by Cypher (107 posts) -
@Kazona: The reason why antialiasing doesn't work is due to the way they're doing much of their rendering (they're using deferred lighting so they can have more than a few lights in the scene without killing performance). D3D9, quite simply, cannot combine antialiasing with deferred lighting due to how AA is handled in D3D9, and it's non-trivial to do in D3D10 and 11. It might be added in a later patch, but don't bet on it.
Avatar image for buckybit
#20 Posted by buckybit (1517 posts) -
checking if it is April 1st again - no it's not. 
 
About implementing 3D Support in your games: If all your objects in the game are already 3D models, you can use some sort of tags or triggers to define the 'depth' effects through a graphic card driver? 
 
This does not seem to be such a big deal.  
 
If there's a demand for it? I don't know. But I remember video game mags telling on their frontpages: "3D Cards - who really needs them?" back when the first Voodoo et. al. came out.
Avatar image for s0ndor
#21 Posted by S0ndor (2717 posts) -

Wow, that adds absolutely zero value. You are watching tiny little pixels destroy eachother from a bird's eye view. Little different from an FPS where people are constantly shooting you with a wide variety of projectiles.

Avatar image for slax0r
#22 Posted by slax0r (29 posts) -
@Kazona said:

" Let me get this straight. They won't add a graphic standard that has been around for years, and just about everyone can use, yet they are going to use 3-D, something only a handful of people have the capability to use?   I know 3D is the big new thing nowadays, but to completely neglect a thing as anti-aliasing seems pretty lazy to me. "

SC2 uses deferred shading, which makes the inclusion of AA non-trivial and not entirely accurate.
 
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deferred_shading
Avatar image for meatsim
#23 Posted by MeatSim (11108 posts) -

Waste of time.

Avatar image for archer88
#24 Posted by Archer88 (320 posts) -

No AA? really? Thats kind of sad.

Avatar image for cypher
#25 Posted by Cypher (107 posts) -
@buckybit: 
" About implementing 3D Support in your games: If all your objects in the game are already 3D models, you can use some sort of tags or triggers to define the 'depth' effects through a graphic card driver? "
 
Yeah, there are ways to take just the depth data of the scene and use that to fake the 3D, but it will look very iffy, and have a bunch of problems due to missing data (note that it'll look like a film that's been upconverted to 3D). Keep in mind that for true 3D support, what you want to know is, "Are you doing stereoscopic rendering?", since THAT is what provides for the best 3D experience. For most games, this isn't too difficult to add, if you don't care about performance/memory, since you can "simply" render the scene twice: once where the camera normally is, and again about 3 inches to the side, and feed one frame to each eye. The thing is, a GPU driver can't do that magically, and the program needs to add specific support for that functionality.
Avatar image for endaround
#26 Posted by endaround (2264 posts) -

"Hell, it's about time"  
 
Well, ok not really

Avatar image for jimbo
#27 Posted by Jimbo (10453 posts) -
Avatar image for yummylee
#28 Posted by Yummylee (24646 posts) -

Crysis 2 is in 3D aswell? I'd fear my eyeballs would probably melt at the sight.

Avatar image for buckybit
#29 Posted by buckybit (1517 posts) -
@Cypher: thanks for the info. much appreciated. :)
Avatar image for ssully
#30 Posted by SSully (5095 posts) -

All i have to say is thank god they arent delaying the game to implement it. 

Avatar image for metiphis
#31 Posted by Metiphis (412 posts) -

Jeese Brad they make you come in on a holiday?  Dang!

Avatar image for warxsnake
#32 Posted by warxsnake (2720 posts) -
Avatar image for teaspoon83
#33 Posted by Teaspoon83 (632 posts) -

Next generation of people are going to have terrible eye sight because 3D ruined their eyes. Although I will say, South Korea with the people filling stadiums to see the matches, might be kinda neat for the added 3D effect.

Avatar image for piderman
#34 Posted by piderman (187 posts) -
Avatar image for nail1080
#35 Posted by nail1080 (2025 posts) -
@piderman said:
" @warxsnake said:
" @Jimbo said:
" Games already compatible with NVIDIA 3D Vision (ie. everything). "
"
"
better keep this bumped for the foolish people out there who don't know what news is. Yes that's you Brad Nic, this isn't news....duh!
Avatar image for tahnit
#36 Posted by Tahnit (181 posts) -

I have the 3d vision kit for nivida. It works very well when the software is optimized for it. WoW had a patch later on that added a 3d cursor functionality. It worked very very well and it was easy to click on just about everything. However the 3d was later broken in a WoW patch. Blizz still hasnt fixed it.
 
If they get a 3d cursor in starcraft 2, ill play it in 3d.

Avatar image for donos
#37 Posted by Donos (1237 posts) -

Well thats.... not particularly enticing? Frankly, I don't see why they're bothering to add in 3D post-launch. They can't use it as a bullet-point on the box, and I don't see the kind of people who buy games digitally caring about 3D.
 
Anyways, implementing 3D in a top-down RTS seems pretty straight forward. Ground stays on the screen, taller units extend upwards, flying units float above. Simple, but nothing particularly interesting.

Avatar image for totaleklypse
#38 Posted by TotalEklypse (982 posts) -

o look ...the tiny missile on screen ...JUST POPPED OUT AT ME. O GOD IT BURNS. 
 
i'm not buyin new cards and screens just to get a headachey 3d experience. no gracias

Avatar image for rhombus_of_terror
#39 Posted by Rhombus_Of_Terror (2427 posts) -

Time for a new genre methinks;  
 
RT3DS.

Avatar image for ribeye
#40 Posted by ribeye (479 posts) -

i can't bring myself to be excited about 3D, seems like a (successful) money grab at this point, i'll hold out for the holodeck thanks
Avatar image for waffles13
#41 Posted by Waffles13 (622 posts) -

Wait, so they went out of their way to create a graphics engine that they can't anti-alias, yet they have the time to implement 3D? I own a budget games from over a decade ago, and THOSE have AA support. 
 
Honestly, they've had years and years to develop this game with a practically infinite money flow from WoW, and yet they couldn't figure out how to make an engine that can do lighting and AA?  Why do people put up with a company that takes three times as long as anyone else to put out a game that isn't all that much better?

Fuck Blizzard.

Avatar image for zimbo
#42 Edited by Zimbo (872 posts) -
@Waffles13:
Try reading some of the comments before spouting your opinion. Some people have already explained why the game does not have AA. It's hardly a big deal. The game is going to look great.
Avatar image for mjhealy
#43 Posted by MjHealy (1993 posts) -

How about they delay it for another year to put in the 3D?

Avatar image for teekomeeko
#44 Posted by teekomeeko (726 posts) -

Good God, why are people so upset about this?  

Fucking people are so wanting to join the 3D hate bandwagon that they are flat out ignoring the fact that a ton of PC games already support it. This is a total non-issue.

Avatar image for meteora
#45 Posted by Meteora (5844 posts) -

Its pretty strange that StarCraft II doesn't have AA, but that doesn't really matter to me. AA tends to kill performance for me, and as others said, SC2 will have deferred shading, which is unheard of for me until this point in time. 
 
While the 3D effect is negligible for me, having developers such as Blizzard jump on this bandwagon helps the 3D momentum. Right now at this moment there isn't a whole lot of value behind jumping in on the 3D experience, but it will help out in the future where 3D will start to become a standard experience. Just like how we jumped from 2D models to 3D models.

Avatar image for shuborno
#46 Posted by Shuborno (905 posts) -

So you take a game that requires you to switch your focus quickly to different parts of the battlefield, and you add... eye-strain inducing 3D?
 
Sounds like an instant headache.

Avatar image for shimakaze
#47 Posted by Shimakaze (176 posts) -
@Cypher said:
For most games, this isn't too difficult to add, if you don't care about performance/memory, since you can "simply" render the scene twice: once where the camera normally is, and again about 3 inches to the side, and feed one frame to each eye. The thing is, a GPU driver can't do that magically, and the program needs to add specific support for that functionality. "
But that's exactly it... the GPU driver CAN add a second camera to ANY direct3D based application.  The game developers doesn't have to build it into the game. In fact most games work in 3d without any patching simply based on how Direct3D works. if the game is in OpenGL then Nvidia's driver can't handle it (though some others can). The games that don't work with 3d are usually because objects (or more commonly effects like glows/shadows/particles) appear at the wrong depth because they aren't physically in the same world as the 3d objects but are composited into the scene after it's rendered. for that same reason sky-boxes are often at the wrong depth as well. But I would estimate 75% of polygonal games (not counting isometric games) have good support though some of them work better with glows and shadows disabled.
 
when they say they will add 3d support into Starcraft what they mean is they will make it "3d vision ready" which is just to ensure that everything works perfectly out of the box including any post effects/cursors/menus etc. The game would have worked in 3d without it but maybe not as well.
Avatar image for shimakaze
#48 Posted by Shimakaze (176 posts) -
@Shuborno said:
" So you take a game that requires you to switch your focus quickly to different parts of the battlefield, and you add... eye-strain inducing 3D?  Sounds like an instant headache. "
Wow you must have a horrible time walking around in real life, or do you always keep one eye closed? :-P
Avatar image for crosstheatlantic
#49 Posted by CrossTheAtlantic (1154 posts) -
@teekomeeko said:
" Good God, why are people so upset about this?  

Fucking people are so wanting to join the 3D hate bandwagon that they are flat out ignoring the fact that a ton of PC games already support it. This is a total non-issue. "
I feel like the hate would be warranted if Blizzard was all "We're pushing the game back even more... but for 3d!" which isn't the case so I don't know. I think 3d is a cheapass fad, but I'm hoping it will die in time. Since this game doesn't HAVE to be played in 3d, no big deal to me. 
 
I just don't see what the hell it will even add. "Whoa, now my units pop out AT me!!!"
Avatar image for joeltgm
#50 Posted by JoelTGM (5784 posts) -

Cool, it's not hard to implement.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.