Ben-DutkaWould you rather have 3D or 60 frames per second? Well, EA boss Peter Moore says the majority will choose the latter.
In speaking to CVG about the trade-off, the EA Sports head honcho said he doesn't believe gamers want to sacrifice the max 60FPS for 3D. EA Sports hasn't announced a 3D title just yet (although Sony will make next year's MLB: The Show in 3D) and right now, Moore isn't so keen on the idea. If you remember, Sony limited 3D titles to a maximum of 30 frames per second and that may or may not be a worthwhile sacrifice. Said Moore:
"I've seen a couple of our games running in 3D [behind closed doors]. There are some cool moments, but there is a cost for my development teams to do it. There is a tax on the hardware – you know, you need two cameras. there is a frame-rate issue… you've got to bring it back up again.
I don't think gamers want to sacrifice a smooth frame-rate. In other words, games that are current running at 60fps going down to 30 just for 3D."
He also added that you still have "to be able to play the game." He mentioned the top-down perspectives in sports franchises like FIFA and Madden and reminds us that "the higher the camera is, the less the impact of 3D happens to be." Moore did admit that it's a little "too early" to pass judgment, though, and right now, EA will simply "watch and wait." Some people say the immersion offered by 3D gaming is better than 60FPS, simply because it's such a drastic visual difference.
But is that where you come out? Perhaps the type of game comes into play, too.