Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
-REAL- Stereoscopic/Anaglyph 3D PCSX2 samples (unimplemented)
#21
Nope, apart from some pretty basic scripts I can't do nothing since I can't code.
Actually I found a way to avoid problems with unstable framerates, it would be something like "keep alive" the last 2 combined frames till the next frame gets rendered. Tada, only though something like this could be done internally and I guess only when there is no violation by speedhacks because it relies on CORRECT fps reports.

Actually I like passive display idea since I have history with epilepcy but I find the currect generation screens super bad at it, I can notice so badly the gaps between the even and the odd lines that I cant enjoy what i'm watching at all. This would be good at displays that have 4k resolution and more.

I could be wrong or mix it with something related to an other console but PS2 doesn't give enough info to render natively 3D and one of the problems is the z-depth calculation I think. Funnily enough, PSP does infact have everything required to render native 3D even though it's hardware wise an inferior console to PS2. XD
Reply

Sponsored links

#22
I dont like your chances of 3d being implemented into Gsdx as the dev`s are only interested in improving compatibility. I have heard it argued that the Ps2 didnt have it so the emulator shouldn't, but it that was so we would only have native res because the real ps2 didnt have up-scaling like pcsxc2
Msi GF-62VR
Intel  core i7 7700hq @2.8(3.5ghz turbo) Nvidia 6gig GTX1060 16 gigs DDr5   windows 10
*base 64 images don't work here - ref*
Reply
#23
I'm not sure what you mean with "I dont like your chances" but I'm not giving hope here, it's just an alternate way of rendering PS2 games in 3D without the need of the hardware to give such instructions to do it. As for that habit of developers not implementing this and that just because they "said so" or whatever it has been proven that always it turns out to 2 situations, or it's just a ticket to eventualy getting implemented in later in the future or the ticket for people starting to show no interest in the project till eventualy it ends up dead or somebody steals the source code and starts to do what is requested with it. I do agree that compatibility is the most important thing to be taken -and it should indeed- but this doesn't mean that the project wouldn't be good to stay up to date with great standars of the current technology generation. Even if you count out what you said about the upscalling example, technicaly, the same could be said about implementing newer instruction sets to the project or anything between those examples. My point is that you must be careful when you go faster or slower; too fast and you start to make damages and mistakes; too slow and the project dies. Also, -for the record-, other emulators and projects that adopted the 3D support doesn't mean that they are in a better state or they give less attention to compatibility so I find this a bit of a cheap excuse trying to cover up something else.

Ah just saying, the images and the topic I posted was just a perception of "how would it look like if...". It's just an eye candy!
Reply
#24
I believe what omnikam means is he doesn't think there is much chance for Gsdx to add S3D support.

I saw those argument as well. And indeed if we need to stick with the original PS2 then no need to enable Full-HD resolution at all. I believe emulator is meant to do something even better than the original platform. Otherwise we can source a cheap used PS2 at merely USD50 easily instead of using an i7 + GTX480 for for it. I still remember how stunning to play N64 Zelda in S3D ten years ago. I am also speechless when playing Wii's Xenoblade with a passive 3D TV nowadays! (running like a PS3 game in 1080P with community HD texture)
Reply
#25
I don't know which comments you are talking about, but they were probably in the spirit of accurate PS2 emulation is a much larger priority than visual candy/enhancements. It is already a tremendous amount of work to emulate the PS2 properly, so most of the devs are not up to starting other projects like this one. We are always welcome for code patches and help though..
[Image: newsig.jpg]
Reply
#26
I joined just to make my two cents on this. I love 3D also and would love for it to be implemented for some way on the PCSX2. I agree a patch hack (like widescreen) for the emulator would be the best bet. Especially since the frameshifting 3D with two separate camera angles are fixed. So you can't change the effect like Z-buffering. So it would be different 3D effects for every game. Maybe even change the intensity of it also would be nice. I keep thinking why the official PS2 would render 3D. I remember seeing some PS2 accessory from Splitfish. The eyefx 3D glasses. Some games would actually render in real stereoscopic 3D with that thing. http://www.psillustrated.com/psillustrat...0-ps2.html; So 3D on the PCSX2 is possible. Also the PSP can do stereoscopic 3D through some homebrew plugin (http://code.google.com/p/psp3dplugin/). Maybe something from that plugin can help you solve this problem? Because I'm sure that plugin either renders via z-buffer from the PSP or does frameshifting (Guess is z-buffer due to changing the effect). We'll that's all I have to say.

Oh and if anyone can get that PSP3dplugin to display side by side rather then anaglyph. I would like to see how these PSP games would look in real 3D
Reply
#27
Injecting input? O.o ?
Step left look right (frame0) step right look left (frame1) ...
What if the game has a different control scheme, or you just cannot control the camera... or how about real time cutscenes? Ñeh, for a second I thought that device would've had some ideas.

Edgbla was able to get some stereo visuals for PSX, widescreen and even some z-buffer tryout. So methods, like dunno, using the patch system to load two patches and alternate them per frame could be. Otherwise, I always thought this would be easier by just switching some matrices for those vertex transforms but I dunno if GSdx uses any. Or, maybe something done in the vertex shader, some define that alternates per frame.
[Image: nbKSK.jpg]
Reply
#28
It doesn't matter whether z-buffering or frameshifting is picked to be implemented. Both methods provide real stereo 3D. The problem with frameshifting for me would be the fixed 3D effect. But it's all good. So what it isn't accurate, someone will just have to provide the best way to give off the 3D effect for that game.
Reply
#29
I think alternating the things per frame would be the cheapest way. You still only render each frame once, and you could even get anaglyph (at half the framerate) using a new shader in the deinterlacing shaders. =D

The problem is... how to transform the 3D stuff to begin with.
[Image: nbKSK.jpg]
Reply
#30
can this alternative way allow player to alter deep/convergence to best fix each game?
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)