New Xbox 360 S 'Arcade' Coming Soon?

The brand new 250GB Xbox 360 S was just the beginning of Microsoft’s strategy for the their remodelled version of the console. After replacing the now discontinued 360 Elite the company now apparently have plans to reintroduce an arcade version of the 360 based on the new slim design.


According to Amazon.de an new "Xbox 360 4GB Arcade System Bundle" will be released on the 20th August and comes with a speculated 149 Euro price point. However the news isn’t exactly fresh, as Microsoft has recently discussed their interest in releasing another Arcade model 360 based on the new design exclusively for the US market, although European support seems at this point to be out of the question – officially at least.

In an interview with Eurogamer, Microsoft’s Neil Thompson stated that the company had no plans to launch another model of the new 360 in Europe, instead focusing on the current 250GB slim and the continuation of the original 360 Arcade unit.

"The Elite model we'll slowly phase out, but we're continuing with the Arcade model as it stands,"

This response was the exact opposite to what Microsoft’s US arm has said in the past, although that would explain the current situation with many retailers in which the Elite model is completely sold out, but the Arcade in comparison is still reasonably stocked.

The other point is that he could mean that the existing Arcade SKU will be moved into the slim design but without the 4GB storage space listed by Amazon, being more or less an exact continuation of the current system. Of course this is very unlikely, and all signs simply point to his stance being more centred around the company wanting to make a proper official announcement on the matter nearer the time, and after supplies of the old 360 Arcade have run dry.

Either way we should find about this ‘new’ version of the 360 Arcade soon enough.

Tech Analysis: Infamous 2 - Early Screens & Trailer

Infamous 2 made its debut at this year’s E3 showcasing a slight change in art style and numerous graphical upgrades. For the first time the series looked reasonably impressive, throwing around more detailed characters and environments with even greater use of the fancy lighting effects which propped up the first game.

The look was clearly refined, and the tech powering the game enhanced over and above the original. And that is exactly why we are going to be looking at Infamous 2 today, having a peek at what lies beneath the graphical upgrades you might have witnessed in the game’s E3 trailer and demonstration footage.

The original Infamous wasn’t particularly graphically impressive, with no anti-aliasing creating loads of crawling jagged lines, and the somewhat poor texturing, combined with the dark and gritty art style often counteracting the game’s technical proficiency. So it pretty surprising to see this sequel actually appearing relatively impressive this early on in the game, especially when you think about how the build shown off at E3 was pre-alpha code with many engine improvements yet to be implemented.

Sucker Punch has looked at the criticisms levelled at the first game’s visuals and has set about improving them in every way, with a more refined art style backed up with a range of noticeable technical enhancements.

Most interestingly is the announcement that the developers are targeting 60 frames per-second in time for the game’s release – that’s double the framerate of the first game, no mean feat considering the series open world nature. Coincidently, I actually stated whilst playing Infamous, that I though it looked like a 60fps game but running at 30fps, one that appeared to be held back by a lack of optimisation and certain compromises usually associated with titles striving for that rarely seen benchmark in smoothness.

Considering the size and scope of the game it is unlikely that a constant 60fps will be obtainable in this sequel. Instead I expect that Sucker Punch will be able to deliver a framerate that fluctuates between 60fps and 30fps, with the average count hitting around 40-45fps in most scenarios (much like in God Of War 3). So better than 30fps, but not quite the revelatory solid 60fps that is considered the Holy Grail then? We shall have to wait and see.


Like with the original, Infamous 2 appears to be rendering in 720p (1280x720) with no anti-aliasing of any kind, though given the compressed nature of the screenshots it can be quite hard to tell. It could well be 640p, no AA, but both the blur effect combined with the compression artefacts prevent any flawless pixel counting from taking place. Either way, from these screens the game looks closer to 720p with blur than anything else.

In terms of the no AA claim, initially I found that there could be some kind of selective edge smoothing could be going on, however this isn’t actually the case at all. What is basically happening is some reduction in jagged lines caused by the games use of blur and post process effects, which in motion do little to alleviate the overall appearance of aliasing, but in stills do help to cover up the jagged nature of the game’s visuals - although not to the extent of using a proper AA solution. Evidence of aliasing can be found in parts of the image being blurred, which again further proves the lack of any AA.

However, seeing as Infamous 2 is only at the pre-alpha stage it is possible that the developers may well include some form of AA in the game. A strong possibility is the use of morphological anti-aliasing, which is relatively easy to implement if you have a few SPU cycles spare. Although just a guess, it would make perfect sense, and it’s pretty unlikely that someone at Sucker Punch hasn’t already considered the approach for this sequel.

Outside of the resolution and lack of anti-aliasing Infamous 2 is sporting a whole host of obvious engine improvements. The characters in particular have been completely reworked, looking far more detailed than before using more geometry and greater levels of texturing. The art style, although still dark and gritty, now has strong influences from Naughty Dog’s Uncharted series, in particular Uncharted 2, looking smoother and more polished as a result.


Looking closer still, you’ll find that it’s not just the characters that have seen a large increase in detail. The buildings which make up the cityscape, and the cars which populate it have also seen noticeable improvements. The buildings are more detailed, and like the characters, benefit from having better use of texturing and increased levels of geometry. In particular the game’s LOD system seems to be less aggressive compared to the first Infamous with buildings retaining detail much further on in the distance compared to before.

Of course, texture detail and geometry complexity are only part of what makes up a graphically impressive game world. In order to make it truly convincing you need to have a balanced and consistent lighting system, with realistic and dynamic shadowing - something which the developers are keen to showcase with Infamous 2.

From the screenshots used in this feature, and from the E3 live demo, and recent trailers it is clear that Infamous 2’s light sources have a greater range compared to the ones used in the first game. Notice not only how the light travels further away from its point of origin, but also how it affects objects all around it, lighting up surrounding shadowed areas and casting some new shadows in others. Unfortunately, at this point none of the dynamic lighting given off by the games visual effects actually casts a shadow of itself anywhere on the environment. Instead it simply creates new or extended shadows for environmental objects.

Enemies do however cast shadows this time around - the fact that they didn’t before is something that looked a little odd, and there appears to some evidence of screen-space ambient occlusion (SSAO) going on in the environment. Just focus your eyes on the signpost to the right-hand side of the street, looking at the shadowing behind it. There are clear signs here that SSAO has been included in this sequel, and the result is a greater amount of natural depth to the overall image. This was something that the original Infamous sorely lacked, and is something which clearly benefits this sequel.


Moving on, the particle system featured in the first Infamous was quite impressive at times, especially when the screen became filled with lightning and sparks began to fly off surrounding metal objects and vehicles. So for Infamous 2 Sucker Punch have also upgraded this part of the engine. Particles are larger and the lightning effects themselves seem to have more of an effect on the surrounding environment than with the first game.

Most of these visual effects all appear to be running at the same resolution as the rest of the game, although compression once again prevents us from accurately gauging this one hundred percent. We can also see that some are clearly rendered using a lower resolution alpha buffer, though the difference is very slight indeed. Sadly the same cannot be said of the smoke particles to be found in the game, which are not only low res, but are also flat 2D sprites which occasionally stand out when combined with the other 3D effects. Still, this issue is only apparent in certain situations, and is unlikely to be noticeable during gameplay as it is in still video captures.

On top of all the improvements that Infamous 2 is delivering we can also glimpse from the E3 live demo, and recent trailers that there is far more in the way of destructible scenery compared to the last game. The sheer amount of things that can be blown up, and that can catch on fire is noticeably greater, as is the level of detail in these objects, which have all benefited from improved texturing and better modelling.


From what we’ve seen so far Sucker Punch has upped the ante for this sequel, refining and building upon an already solid game engine with an even better one. The improvements to character and environmental modelling are obvious, as is the improved lighting and larger special effects, all of which help to create a better sense of depth to the image and generally gel together in creating a more polished look in accordance with the adapted art style.

Surprisingly, the developer also hope to have the game up and running at 60fps by the time of release sometime next year. Surprising, because Infamous 2, like its predecessor, is an open world game, one which features sprawling environments, and at times, densely populated areas which will no doubt compromise the engine’s ability to maintain the targeted 60fps.

However, if this sequel sticks to the level design blue print of the first game then there shouldn’t be so much of a problem. The original Infamous made use of having various tall buildings obscuring distant streets, and denser parts of the environment in order to maintain framerate, so it’s highly likely that the developers will do the same thing here in this sequel. This controlled use of your viewpoint in a game in which the player controls the camera, and in which the engine cannot predict the load, is particularly important in maintaining a smooth framerate - let alone 60fps, especially when optimisations in other areas may not be so convenient when you’re pushing around more onscreen at any given time.

Either way, Infamous 2 is shaping up rather well. Graphically, at this early stage (its pre-alpha) it already looks noticeably superior to the last game and still has ways to go until it’s finished. Nailing down that now seemingly mythical 60fps is going to be the toughest challenge the developer faces, along with maintaining resolution and overall environmental detail at the same time. But so far it all looks to be going smoothly, with controlled use of lower-res transparencies, and only minor such cutbacks in image quality in order to sustain the various improvements we are seeing.

As more developments surface we shall be taking another look at the technology behind Infamous 2 in the future. Hopefully some uncompressed framebuffer grabs come our way finally allowing us to properly determine rendering resolution and clear up any inconsistencies we might be finding.

PS3 Gets More 3D Features

It’s not just games and BluRay movies that you’ll be able to view in 3D on the PlayStation 3. At an exclusive London event Mick Hocking, Sony Worldwide Studios head of 3D games, revealed that support for both 3D TV shows, and YouTube 3D was coming in a future firmware upgrade for Sony’s flagship gaming system.

"Crucially for us, PlayStation 3 will be able to store all types of 3D content. And we can do this through properly upgrading the Firmware on the platform.

Hocking also mentioned that Sony have plans to release a full 3D update for their PlayTV PVR add-on for the PS3, which will enable users to record both current HD broadcasts along with 3D Freeview content when it finally arrives. In addition, support for 3D photos and video camera recordings will be hitting the PS3 by the end of this year, although no firm dates were revealed.

"So you'll see 3D games in the next 12 months, you'll see Blu-ray movies in 3D, and as soon as the broadcasts start through our PlayTV services, you're going to watch 3D content [via that].

"YouTube will be supporting 3D content over the next 12 months as well - and you'll be able to watch that on the PlayStation 3. And as you start taking 3D pictures of your family or 3D camcorder movies, you can play those back on PS3, too."

This news means that not only is the PS3 vastly becoming a solid destination for all music, video, and games media, but also for all 3D entertainment content too.

All in all, Sony’s plan in attempting to conquer the living room appears to be going well, with BluRay becoming the next disc-based movie standard after a short format war with HD-DVD, and with strong support for 3D gaming already in motion, the inclusion of 3D TV show and YouTube support is the icing on the cake.

Tech Report: A Look At The EDRAM On Valhalla

We brought you our inside the 360 slim feature just over a week ago, revealing the internal layout of the console, and the all important details surrounding the chip and die shrinks contained within. However, one piece of the puzzle was missing – both the size and exact whereabouts of the EDRAM in the CPU/GPU package. This is something which is of particular interest seeing as this piece of silicon has always been behind in terms of process node changes, and has yet to be intergrated into the same die as the GPU.

This still seems to be the case - as you will see in the image of the console’s motherboard below – that the EDRAM is a separate entity from both the CPU/GPU combo, which now appears to be housed on a single die.


So, both the GPU and CPU are firmly on a single die, and the EDRAM is once again separate, all of which is housed on a single package, codenamed Valhalla. The CPU/GPU is now on a 45nm process node, although the EDRAM looks to be noticeably larger. The overall die size is some 34% smaller than the Jasper chipset’s CPU and GPU combined, inc EDRAM. And is 53% smaller than the ones used in the first 360 chipsets. For reference the Jasper chipset featured both the CPU and GPU at 65nm, whilst the original 360 featured 90nm versions of both chips.

From the above image it doesn’t look like the EDRAM has been fabbed at 45nm – it’s far too large in size for that. Instead all signs point to it being around 55nm or 65nm as speculated in our original article from a couple of months back. Interestingly, this is opposite to what the latest pieces of scattered information were saying in our later article – in which a 45nm EDRAM was hotly expected to be included.

Why the difference in die size compared to the other chips then? Well, the EDRAM itself has always been behind on process reductions, with complications in shrinking the chip being the main reason behind such slow comparative progress being made. Cost is also another factor. It could be that it is simply too expensive to economically reduce the EDRAM in size whilst obtaining optimal yields during production (a certain number of chips produced are unusable). Plus, the slower progress of reliable die shrinks to the EDRAM could have also held back development of the Valhalla CPU/GPU combination, with the complex integration of the EDRAM at a different size posing unnecessary problems and expenditure.

Integrating all three chips (CPU, GPU and EDRAM) would take the cooperation of ATI, NEC and IBM in order to make it happen given the increased complexity required for such a design. The cost of which would have been larger than simply producing three separate chips, or in this case two on one package. Another issue is getting the design and final production grade silicon ready on time, and given the increased complexity it is unlikely that this was ever going to happen. Effectively, all things considered, the cost/benefit ratio to having not only die shrinks, but also complete integration of all three chips on one die was perhaps too poor for consideration.

That’s not to say that later on down the line the EDRAM won’t be included in another internal revision of the 360, because it is very likely that Microsoft are working to do exactly that at some point in the future. It is possible for this to happen now, just not quite being the cost saving measure they are after at this point in time. Maybe with the next, and possibly last revision to the hardware, we will find that all three chips will have been completely integrated into a single die, rather than a single package. At that point, we expect that the EDRAM along with the now combined CPU/GPU will all be produced on the same process node.

With the current Xbox 360 S (slim) we have here what is clearly the best price/performance ratio available at this point in time with regards to heat reduction, and overall saving in silicon. Whatever changes we (and many others) might speculate, there is no doubt that Microsoft have done their very best in producing the most efficient, and cost effective version of the 360 to date. It is also the quietest and most solidly built too, which is not something you can really say about the console before the Slim’s arrival.

Editorial: A Taxing Problem

On Tuesday 22 June 2010 George Osbourne and the Conservative / Lib Dem coalition government unveiled their emergency budget, a budget apparently designed to get business moving again, and kick-start the British economy working towards reducing our increasingly high national debt. As part of this plan the budget included both a rise in VAT from 17.5% to 20% (a 2.5% overall rise), and the announcement that tax breaks were no longer on the agenda for the games industry.

This news has seemingly deflated the industry, with retailers worried about the large dent in profits this will have for their business as they struggle to compete on price with supermarkets and chain multiples, and developers left wondering if the British government actually takes their industry seriously.


In the last couple of years much progress has been made between the UK games industry (represented by ELSPA) and the government. This resulted in the acknowledgement that the games industry was perhaps in the position to best regulate itself with regards to age restricted sales, finally making the PEGI (Pan European Games Information) system not only legal (comming into effect later this year), but also replacing the BBFC system used for the last fifteen years or so in rating software. That, and the acceptance that in order for British companies to compete in games development on a worldwide scale that they would need some kind of tax break incentive.

Whilst the budget obviously doesn’t impact on the newly reformed PEGI system, it does however completely discard the industry’s need for some kind of tax break initiative in order to bring in a constant pool of talent, and a firm reason to stay in Britain, rather than let that talent slip through their fingers and into the hands of Canadian or European software houses, thus further shrinking our regressing industry. The government however doesn’t now appear to see this as an issue, or rather it doesn’t think that the games industry ‘needs’ prioritisation - to be thought about outside the realms of every other business.

Just a few months ago the Labour Government was looking into providing some kind of support for the industry, not necessarily tax breaks, but something along those lines in order to help us become major players on the world stage. With the new government, and the budget announcement, the need for industry help has being thrown completely back into it’s face, with Osbourne stating: “We will not go ahead with poorly targeted tax relief for the videogame industry”. A clear sign of either misunderstanding of the industry, or simply the feeling that the government thinks it isn’t important enough to consider.

The result is that more publishers might well up ship and move abroad where it is cheaper to set up a development studio and make games, taking any potential talent with them. Another issue is with what happens to all the potential talent in this country. Will they be nurtured and then cultivated into the next inspiring leaders of software development, or will they simply fade away without proper training, or the right guidance in order to make this happen?

These are just some of the questions the industry is asking, and indeed worried about, something which the government should really be taking stock of given the fact that videogame sales and the industry brings in a lot of money for the British economy as a whole.

Thankfully the changes made to both Corporation Tax, and Capital Gains Tax do present a small beacon of light to British businesses, although the changes in CGT are said to make more unattractive for foreign investors to invest in British business. Any reductions in taxes bestowed upon businesses is likely to help the games industry as much as any other, and in which case the setbacks that have been felt are not the be all and end all of the issue. ELSPA will continue to campaign for greater understanding, and more help for the industry, whilst publishers, as always will take their business elsewhere sending a clear message to the British government as a whole.

Now it’s time for the organisation to once again build bridges with the government and the issue of videogames, perhaps attempting to bring about another chance at understanding our industry and what it means to the economy, and society as a whole. Only then will we see progress being made, and it’s progress that this industry needs to see.

Whatever the outcome, in the meantime it is likely that the UK’s position on the world stage of games development will further decrease, much like it has been doing these past few years. This isn’t something that will benefit our economy, not will it be something which threatens the amount of stellar games that reaxh our shores. It’s just that more of these games will be produced elsewhere, further stagnating our industry growth and creative impact in the future.

The battle on this front is far from over, that’s for sure. But what about the retail sector and the rise in VAT?

This is equally as interesting, mainly because it has so much more of an impact on the everyday consumer, than the closed, behind the scenes workings of the industry. Any changes here are easily going to felt by you and me, everyone that at least purchases videogames from the high street.

In January 2011 the government plans to increase VAT by 2.5%, from the established threshold of 17.5% to 20%. What this means is that for every sale the company will be handing over more of their profits to the taxman rather than being able to re-invest it back into their business, or as it seems with the larger chain retailers, back into executives, and shareholders pockets. Small independent retailers are likely to be hit the hardest with this decision, with RRP’s rarely being stuck to, and a massive price cutting war ensuing on almost every major release.

Most games actually carry an RRP of either £44.99 or £49.99, however, pretty much every chain retailer, games or otherwise sells these titles at either £39.99 or £44.99 reducing their amount of margin in order to compete, but at the same time making it impossible for smaller stores to even break even when selling these games. All the while the consumer thinks that its okay for the price to drop blissfully unaware that development costs are spiralling out of control, and that pretty soon the price of games ‘will’ have to go up, or perhaps the size and cinematic scope will have to drop right back down again.

Either way this particular debate is a minefield of shorts, with valid opinions on both sides, and the retailer usually the one to back down when it comes to the crunch.

So what happens when the VAT rise comes into effect? Well, the most obvious thing is the drop in revenue felt by retailers everywhere. Fewer profits mean a harder business to run, with fewer opportunities for expansion, and less of a reason to focus on the customers needs, instead pushing towards an even harder sales culture. Some may even expand more aggressively into the online sector, one which will largely be unaffected by the rise in VAT. Well, if you’re based in Jersey that is.

There are a few ways this could go. One, the retailer takes the hit keeping retail prices at the current level, ignoring the RRP given to them by the publisher. Two, they could raise the price of games in accordance with the rate of VAT. Though this would mean prising up titles to the nearest pound, rather than the nearest five pounds as historically done over the last twenty years or so. And three, the retailer adheres to the RRP set on games by the publisher, with the consumer seeing a large price hike on most software titles across the board.

The implications will be felt on choosing any of the three options above. If the retailer decides to take the hit by absorbing the additional rise in VAT, the consumer benefits by having similarly priced games, but at the cost of better customer service. With overall profits down shareholders aren’t likely to be happy, and the executives of most chain retailers are likely to demand that they keep their bonuses at the expense of customer or staff satisfaction. At the same time the age old trend of expansion and growth will be much harder to achieve resulting in a far greater push towards the hard sell.

This hard sales nature, constantly expecting the customer to buy add-ons with every purchase, to take ‘that’ warranty even if they don’t really need it, will become far more prevalent as the main driving force behind some businesses. We have already seen this trend manifest strongly with the chain multiples over the last five or six years, with the focus less on good customer service and more on getting unrealistic results every time a sale is made. If stores decide to take the hit on tax, then it seems that this course of action is far the most obvious one, though not really the best, as more and more customers have been turning away from traditional retail and into the online marketplace due to this reason, and of course the reduced prices these sites provide.

Raising the retail price on games instead, perhaps in order to preserve some of those profits, has it’s own set of problems. Namely, the online retailers, in which this 2.5% tax rise has little to no meaning other than more potential sales for them. You see, most large online retailers are based in Jersey, a region of the UK unaffected by our VAT rises and reductions, and this allows them to continuously not only compete on price, but also see them slashed in an attempt to gain valuable sales from traditional bricks and mortar outlets.

The advantage is that any potential high street stores looking for a break could well turn to online in order to achieve it. With lower prices, but also lower taxes to pay, they could still stand to compete against both online and the supermarkets.

You also have to look at how the market has changed over the last fifteen years or so, and how the customer base has changed. If prices are in fact raised, who will be happy enough to continue paying the raised amount? And for how long? If you look at how people shop it is clear that most customers expect games to become cheaper, or rather, they expect the average new release price to be no more than £40, and quite often look for it to be less than that. With this in mind raising the overall price threshold for games in accordance with the tax hike, or maybe to the nearest £5, isn’t such a good idea as many customers will instead take their business online, or to someone who isn’t doing the same.

Ultimately, today’s so-called ‘specialist’ chain retailers have very little to offer customers outside of being a ‘one-stop’ shop for games. They very rarely stock niche, or hardcore titles, and if they do it is always in extremely small numbers. Plus overall service has largely diminished over the last few years. In essence, there’s very little to keep customers coming back into stores, thus making the VAT predicament all the more difficult to deal with.

Indies on the other hand have the toughest decision to make. They largely operate on the low-margin, high-quality service model, in many cases going that extra mile to differentiate themselves from the large multiples. For them keeping prices low is going to be hard, and I can see that many simply won’t be able to compete in this area, meaning it’s down to whether or not the customer thinks the service, and shop itself, is worth them spending the extra £5 or so.

And then you have the large entertainment chain stores, ones that stock everything from music and DVD to videogames and MP3 players. This segment of the retail community is perhaps the toughest of them all, with competition from online stores and supermarkets, to the likes of digital distribution with iTunes and other download services.

Having prices go up is simply not an option, consumers already see both music and films as largely disposable, and videogames are strongly heading that way, if not already. For them I suspect that most titles will stay below the increased VAT price, with the business taking the added hit as a result. Maybe the use of promotions, and worked out deals with suppliers will negate these issues slightly. But then again, everyone will be looking to maximise margins.

Currently, it’s far too early to see how well the retail sector in general will react to this change. I’m guessing that many hours of consumer research, and cleaver marketing will no doubt help to carve out a temporary solution until something more concrete can be worked out. Either way, many are predicting that customers will be lining up to grab a bargain before the tax increase takes place in January next year, with many retailers likely to grabbing every last slice of the pie before the challenge really sets in.

In conclusion, the budget announcement has done no favours for the industry as a whole, creating yet more issues on either side of the fence. On one hand you have a lot of hard work between ELSPA and the old Labour government seemingly, if not partially wasted. And on the other, the whole retail sector if left with yet another ‘price’ problem to deal with. But perhaps it’s not all doom and gloom. Instead businesses in general have had some tax breaks (which will help the games industry), and with regards to the VAT increase, every retailer is in the same boat. Although it has to be said, that videogames and entertainment retail is amongst the toughest in the world, and this increase is hardly going to make it any easier.

Tech Report: The 3D Behind Crysis 2

During E3 Crytek boasted about it’s incredible method of displaying games in 3D with minimal performance hit. Previously many developers have spoken out about how difficult it would be to get high-end fully featured titles running in this format on consoles, sighting performance issues, and especially the limitations caused by having to render every frame twice (one for each eye) for the effect to be possible. However the ambitious developer of the massively anticipated Crysis 2 has managed to get the game up and running with far less impact on performance.

At E3 Crytek demonstrated a version of Crysis 2 running in full stereoscopic 3D, claiming that the effect cost them only an extra 1.5% of processing power over rendering the game in traditional 2D. Mightily impressive you might think, and that was exactly my thoughts after reading about their presentation. How could it be that a resource heavy game like Crysis was running in full 3D – and in 720p for that matter – without the kind of noticeable impact on performance that the likes of Killzone 3 and Motorstorm seem to be suffering from? The answer is in ‘how’ the effect is created compared to those games.


You see, for Crysis 2 the developers are using a cheat of sorts, a method of 2D to 3D conversion, much like the process that goes on behind the scenes in taking an old 2D movie and then processing it in certain ways so it displays in 3D, complete with a reasonable level of natural depth. Although Crytek themselves haven’t shed any light on the process, it is plainly apparent on what options they might be using, and all signs point to a pixel-shift, plus depth buffer approach to creating the 3D effect.

This type of 2D displacement tech is very similar to the ones used in film production, and the process works in much the same way in videogames. The only difference is that you are relying on a mathematical algorithm in order to fill in any gaps left behind the pixel shift, and of course using the Z-buffer for depth information. All work in 2D displacement is done on a pixel level, nothing geometry-wise is processed at all, it is a completely post process effect.

Here's how it works:

Starting off, the Z-buffer gives you the depth information from a single point of view (POV) required to create the 3D scene. After which the overall viewing distance for the eyes is calculated, thus creating an ideal viewing position in which to determine how far away certain objects are from the screen, etc. Next, the pixels are moved from left to right, and vice versa in order to create the images for each eye using the above Z-buffer info and calculated viewing distance.

You now have a rough approximation of two separate frames (one for each) in order for the 3D effect to be displayed. Essentially rendering is done for one viewpoint, and then two different views are created by shifting pixels around left to right, and vice versa. However, you may also have a few holes in the image arising from changes in what is visible on screen from one frame to the next after the left/right pixel shift has occurred.

Like with the post process conversion of 2D film stock into a 3D print, these holes need to be filled in with information that is not longer there. But unlike with that conversion process – in which a post production artist manually creates new details on a frame by frame basis – for videogame rendering it has to be done in real time by a cleverly designed algorithm instead.

This of course creates problems, seeing as it isn’t easy for a mathematical routine to fill in the gaps left behind in the image without some side effects. Just look at how the upscaling process can leave so many unwanted artefacts if not done carefully, and with a high degree of accuracy. The same thing is equally important here, with the developer needing to create something that carefully determines what information has been cut out, and what needs to replace it.

In Crytek’s case, their method of converting a 2D image into a 3D one in real-time is particularly successful, with little in the way of apparent side effects according to the press who have seen it running. The amount of depth perception is said to be lower than the likes of Guerrilla Games’ Killzone 3 – which actually renders individual frames for each eye – although still appearing fairly natural with only a slight hint at that cardboard cut out look which plague most 2D to 3D conversions.


Impressively, Crytek are also using 3D in a way no other developer seem to be doing at the moment. Rather than having images (such as explosions and particles) jump out at you during play, they are instead using the effect to create a natural depth which extends into the television set, acting as an extension of your natural peripheral vision.

So far the 3D tech behind Crysis 2 has certainly impressed, although Crytek it seems are not the only ones to be using it. Sony are also developing a similar process for first and third party usage in order to make 3D a little more achievable on the PS3, negating the heavy performance cost that comes with rendering the effect for real.

With the 3D race now officially on, it will be interesting to see how developers implement the effect into their games, especially with regards to either rendering in proper 3D with individual frames for each eye, or with the 2D displacement tech talked about on this page today.

Crytek has shown that it is possible to convincingly include support for the format without having to completely rewrite their engine in order to include it, whilst Guerrilla Games has also showcased the advantages of actually downgrading image quality in order to create an unparalleled natural depth that can only e achieved by actually rendering in 3D.

What is apparent is that the two different approaches to including 3D in the latest software releases provide clear support for developers on both sides of the coin when it comes to adopting the format.