Very Wierd Question :P

It’s me again and my friend asked me a question that even I had trouble finding out. you know how 3D game engines make 3D games right ?
but is it really 3D ?

Example the screen on your pc is flat and making everything you see 2D.

And Fps = Frames per seccond

And what I know of frame per secconds is how many image’s are shown at a fast speed.
and a image (Of anything is 2D not really 3D ) soo why do we call it 3D ???
Like a vedio camera when it records it saves images everything it recorded as images then plays them all at a fast speed but as I typed above anytype of images would be 2D images so why do we still call em 3D if its not real 3D why not just call it Fake 3D ?

(To the people that dont understand this question please ask for more information or please do not post if you have really no idea of what I am talking about …)

very wierd question I think has no answer to …

The engine creates true 3D, but has to project it onto a 2D screen (which demands a bit more from the processor since it does not only has to create and manipulate the 3D models, but ALSO has to project them).
What you see in video games is real-time rendered 3D.
And we speak of FPS because that’s the amount of times the screen is refreshed per second.
In other words, if you have a framerate of, let’s say 75, then the 3D scene is projected (or rendered) 75 per second onto a 2D screen.

You must remember, you are just viewing objects in 2D. The objects themselves are composed of data in the x,y, and z coordinates. You can look at them from front, back and from all views around them.

It’s really 3D, the only time it’s not 3D is when it’s displayed on the monitor.

By the same logic you could claim that the real world isn’t really 3D, because you can only see a 2D projection of it at any one time. Well, 2 2D projections, one in each eye, and some fancy manipulation and assumptions to guess at what the depth probably is, but it’s a 2D projection nonetheless.

What makes a 3D game 3D is more that the game world can be interacted with in three dimensions… as opposed to say a platformer, where you only have left/right and up/down.

That depends on how far you wish to define “3D” and in what perspective.

Most 3D games are infact 3D; that is to say the majority of objects are composed of 3D geometry (XYZ space). We can also prove this with the fact that if we were to play quake or any similar First person shooter, and then walked into a room full of mirrors (on the game of course), we’d see almost every aspect of our 3d character, the same as in real life. Remeber, it isnt like we need a 3D display for a first person shooter (we’re supposed to be seeing thrugh the eyes of the character, so a 3D display would actually be giving us additional info) Other games could be displayed in a true 3d means, but we dont really have that technology, and definatly not back when 3d games were first being made.

Tv /Monitors are in 2D, since this is all we need and much like our eyes, video recording is simply capturing a 2D viewpoint, so why would we need a 3D display for 2D data? This is most logical since displaying it in 3D wont give us much benifit, which is why we have 3 primary colours, and not 4:

Our eye (mainly) see in red, green and blue, so we use those as our basis on making colours (our primary colours, not to be confused with subtractive colour space teached in art (red blue yellow)). Birds have 4+ colour receptor thingys so they have 4 primary colours. So, we display objects by a 2D means when we only need a 2D output.

And Fps = Frames per seccond

And what I know of frame per secconds is how many image’s are shown at a fast speed.
and a image (Of anything is 2D not really 3D ) soo why do we call it 3D ???
Like a vedio camera when it records it saves images everything it recorded as images then plays them all at a fast speed but as I typed above anytype of images would be 2D images so why do we still call em 3D if its not real 3D why not just call it Fake 3D ?
Read above and also: Frames “doesnt” really mean 2D, but you are correct. Remember, when “FPS” exisited, we didnt really have 3D modeling apps then /Games. In order to show something moving /changing there would have to be an alteration in the image (frame), back then we only had film, so a new image had to be on each frame of the film to be shown.

Now, your graphic card also isnt the same as a film recorder, it’s all digital so frames dont really exist because… well… theres no film, but of course they use the same wording (FPS) because (i suppose) of the original meanings. So when your game say 24/fps /50fps that basically means 50 new still images are being captured and /or being played back.

Anything that has lenght, breadth & height(X,Y,Z) is classified as 3D. Anything with lenght & breadth(X,Y) is classified 2D.

As most games of today have (X,Y,Z) they are entirely 3D.

However games like Doom 1 & 2 are both 3D & 2D. As the characters only have a length & breadth but the level/map is 3D as it has (X,Y,Z).

Classic mario games are 2D as there is no depth they are flat. As they only have the (X,Y) co-ordinates.

Paper is a 3D object as it has depth but the image on the paper is 2D faking/making the elusion of 3D, but its not really 3D as there is no real depth and you are unable to move around the object and so is 2D.

Google “hypercube”. That will really get your goat.

o.O I go to sleep and I just woke up so many answer’s.
:slight_smile: Anyways This makes alot more sence now I have to say thanks for clearing this question up for me I really appreciate everyone that helped me understand / Find out the answer to this question that has been bothering me for quite some time now. =P

Anyways I think thats about it

OR ELSE BLENDER WILL COME AND HUNT YOU !!! (lol had to say that)

What bugs me is that a movie will display in very high definition quite well on a lower end pc, and yet a game does not.
The conversion from 3d to 2d is where it breaks down.

Wouldn’t it be interesting if every possible 3d position was pre-rendered and then it would only have to play back the appropriate frame like a movie as you come to it.
However, this would consume vast quantities of hard drive space and take an extremely loooooong time to render.

But hey… this would not work because how could something or someone cross your field of vision!

The fact is that a game has to render the output on the spot depending on the xyz coordinates. Whereas a movie or picture is pre rendered.

That paradox that may destroy our universe.

haha thats how i thought games like goldeneye 64 and stuff worked before i know about blender 3d stuff and that it is actually a cube not just a whole bunch of pictures of diffrent angles

yea that is a problem.

some times when i said I was doing 3d pictures, some people thought I was doing pictures that you could move around.(which disn’t make sense) but some people were confused

On this thought, it would be cool to have 3D games that you could interact with in 3d space rather than on a 2D screen. Imagine that!

I’ve played a hologram game, where the karate guys were actually displayed in 3d above the “table”, but you couldn’t really interact with 'em.(physically)

That isn’t quite true. The frames do exists. Your video card has video memory in which it stores the picture for the monitor. Every so often (generally 60th, or 75th a second) the video card redoes the nessicary work to display the image. So, it actually does store a frame in memory, and renders to the video memory when it does a render update. At that point, the video memory is locked, it renders, puts the “frame” in memory, unlocks it, and displays the “frame” on the monitor until the software end tells it to display something else.

FPS = frames per second
FPS in games and apps = Number of renders per second

You monitor always runs at 60/70hz vert refresh (can be lower or higher). However, your video card can be running anywhere from 0-thousands of FPS. But it always displayes it’s “frames” at the refresh rate of the monitor (60-/70+hz).

Nerd, their called frames because someone wanted them to be called that, they could have been called cheeesey puffs if they really wanted to.

The fact is, the word “frame” which is used in the term FPS derrived from film which is a reference to a physicall feature of film. Infact, the whole term comes from the original reference to film/video… Since digtal video does displays the same image, in the same way but via differernt means (memory output/digital rather than projecting the film) the term FPS is still relivent and used in digital media, they could have named it “screens per second” but they didnt.

Now, Why do you think a screen capture of a videocard is called a screenshot /screen capture? Why isnt it called frame capture /shot? Why is a desktop recording app called a screenCast and not a FrameCast?

For someone who doesnt understand the term FPS, it should be easier to understand when referencing to the original medium in which it was used to discribe a feature rather than the digital version where the output is more commonly refference as a screen.