Crysis 3 will be awesome, but will it have Dual frame rendering 3D instead of 2D + depth?
  1 / 3    
I've been watching these videos from Crysis 3 7 Wonders and it seems that Crytek is really doing a great marketing job for the game. These Crysis 3 Episodes really look awesome and graphics are beyond perfection. Watch Episodes 1-4 (which are already available) Episodes 5-7 ( not released yet) and see the perfect graphics that this game will have. Watch the videos in HD quality. Link: http://www.crysis.com/us/crysis-3/seven-wonders I am pretty sure Crysis 3 is going to be DX11 native and have graphics beyond our imagination. Crytek is really doing a hard work in this sequel, after all the criticizing about Crysis 2 console graphics, that only got better with a DX11 patch, (which really changed the game a lot). I haven't heard any word from Crytek about Dual Frame rendering 3D, I only know Cryengine 3 has native 3D support and that the game will be 3D Ready for sure, but I would love to know that the most advanced game in the world will have true 3D for us enthusiasts that have a nice gaming rig and can take the performance loss and play this amazing game with the best 3D quality available. I keep crossing my finges and believing they will finally give us this present. I loved playing Crysis 2 in 3D, but I am sure if it had real 3D, it would be much better and my PC would be able to handle the performance hit. Big february ahead of us, since Dead Space 3 and Crysis 3 are coming out. 2 games that have the potencial to really look amazing and superb with 3D Vision.
I've been watching these videos from Crysis 3 7 Wonders and it seems that Crytek is really doing a great marketing job for the game. These Crysis 3 Episodes really look awesome and graphics are beyond perfection. Watch Episodes 1-4 (which are already available) Episodes 5-7 ( not released yet) and see the perfect graphics that this game will have. Watch the videos in HD quality.

Link: http://www.crysis.com/us/crysis-3/seven-wonders


I am pretty sure Crysis 3 is going to be DX11 native and have graphics beyond our imagination. Crytek is really doing a hard work in this sequel, after all the criticizing about Crysis 2 console graphics, that only got better with a DX11 patch, (which really changed the game a lot).
I haven't heard any word from Crytek about Dual Frame rendering 3D, I only know Cryengine 3 has native 3D support and that the game will be 3D Ready for sure, but I would love to know that the most advanced game in the world will have true 3D for us enthusiasts that have a nice gaming rig and can take the performance loss and play this amazing game with the best 3D quality available.
I keep crossing my finges and believing they will finally give us this present.

I loved playing Crysis 2 in 3D, but I am sure if it had real 3D, it would be much better and my PC would be able to handle the performance hit.

Big february ahead of us, since Dead Space 3 and Crysis 3 are coming out. 2 games that have the potencial to really look amazing and superb with 3D Vision.

Windows 7 Home Premium 64 Bits - Core i7 2600K @ 4.5ghz - Asus Maximus IV Extreme Z68 - Geforce EVGA GTX 690 - 8GB Corsair Vengeance DDR3 1600 9-9-9-24 (2T) - Thermaltake Armor+ - SSD Intel 510 Series Sata3 256GB - HD WD Caviar Black Sata3 64mb 2TB - HD WD Caviar Black 1TB Sata3 64mb - Bose Sound System - LG H20L GGW Blu Ray/DVD/CD RW - LG GH20 DVD RAM - PSU Thermaltake Toughpower 1000W - Samsung S27A950D 3D Vision Ready + 3D HDTV SAMSUNG PL63C7000 3DTVPLAY + ROLLERMOD CHECKERBOARD

#1
Posted 01/17/2013 01:51 PM   
On one hand, The company needed to find the right balance for people to buy into the 3D aspect so I think they did the right thing to do what they did in Crysis 2. I enjoy S3D but it is a niche technology and with Windows 8 supporting S3D natively, I also wonder what they will do with 3D rendering in Crysis 3. Not everybody's system can afford the hit! They have already said that Crysis 3 will melt your computer so turning up eyecandy and pure S3D might only be for triple 690's. On the other hand a lot of people in the mainstream can enjoy S3D if they use their own brand of 3D. If you wanted to maximize sales for 3d enthusiast, what would you do?
On one hand, The company needed to find the right balance for people to buy into the 3D aspect so I think they did the right thing to do what they did in Crysis 2. I enjoy S3D but it is a niche technology and with Windows 8 supporting S3D natively, I also wonder what they will do with 3D rendering in Crysis 3. Not everybody's system can afford the hit! They have already said that Crysis 3 will melt your computer so turning up eyecandy and pure S3D might only be for triple 690's. On the other hand a lot of people in the mainstream can enjoy S3D if they use their own brand of 3D. If you wanted to maximize sales for 3d enthusiast, what would you do?

#2
Posted 01/17/2013 06:34 PM   
i would make an option... r_StereoMode [0=off/1/2] 1: Dual rendering 2: Post Stereo quad sli is the max, i.e. two 690
i would make an option...

r_StereoMode [0=off/1/2]
1: Dual rendering
2: Post Stereo

quad sli is the max, i.e. two 690

NVIDIA TITAN X (Pascal), Intel Core i7-6900K, Win 10 Pro,
ASUS ROG Rampage V Edition 10, G.Skill RipJaws V 4x 8GB DDR4-3200 CL14-14-14-34,
ASUS ROG Swift PG258Q, ASUS ROG Swift PG278Q, Acer Predator XB280HK, BenQ W710ST

#3
Posted 01/17/2013 06:49 PM   
I wouldn't mind an option but it really should offer proper 3D at the least. Fake 3D is a joke.
I wouldn't mind an option but it really should offer proper 3D at the least. Fake 3D is a joke.

#4
Posted 01/17/2013 07:37 PM   
[quote="HCFORDE50"]On one hand, The company needed to find the right balance for people to buy into the 3D aspect so I think they did the right thing to do what they did in Crysis 2. I enjoy S3D but it is a niche technology and with Windows 8 supporting S3D natively, I also wonder what they will do with 3D rendering in Crysis 3. Not everybody's system can afford the hit! They have already said that Crysis 3 will melt your computer so turning up eyecandy and pure S3D might only be for triple 690's. On the other hand a lot of people in the mainstream can enjoy S3D if they use their own brand of 3D. If you wanted to maximize sales for 3d enthusiast, what would you do?[/quote] I sure as $@!% wouldn't [b]LOCK[/b] out regular dual rendering out thats for f'ing sure. That was an ignorant choice. They had James Jamerson watch it and say it looked nice, so they assumed it was awesome when they didn't know the difference between 3d in games and movies. Making that type of 3d possible is one thing, taking away the choice to use normal 3d is another. ---- I couldn't believe post processing AA was forced on in Crysis 2 with no option for full anisotropic filtering either. Took me like 6 hours of preparing it to look good, which has become just about routine. I now always search for " game name mods" or "tweaks" before i play. I'd almost think the industry is actively trying to alienate older gamers and enthusiasts.
HCFORDE50 said:On one hand, The company needed to find the right balance for people to buy into the 3D aspect so I think they did the right thing to do what they did in Crysis 2. I enjoy S3D but it is a niche technology and with Windows 8 supporting S3D natively, I also wonder what they will do with 3D rendering in Crysis 3. Not everybody's system can afford the hit! They have already said that Crysis 3 will melt your computer so turning up eyecandy and pure S3D might only be for triple 690's. On the other hand a lot of people in the mainstream can enjoy S3D if they use their own brand of 3D. If you wanted to maximize sales for 3d enthusiast, what would you do?


I sure as $@!% wouldn't LOCK out regular dual rendering out thats for f'ing sure. That was an ignorant choice. They had James Jamerson watch it and say it looked nice, so they assumed it was awesome when they didn't know the difference between 3d in games and movies. Making that type of 3d possible is one thing, taking away the choice to use normal 3d is another.

----

I couldn't believe post processing AA was forced on in Crysis 2 with no option for full anisotropic filtering either. Took me like 6 hours of preparing it to look good, which has become just about routine. I now always search for " game name mods" or "tweaks" before i play. I'd almost think the industry is actively trying to alienate older gamers and enthusiasts.

46" Samsung ES7500 3DTV (checkerboard, high FOV as desktop monitor, highly recommend!) - Metro 2033 3D PNG screens - Metro LL filter realism mod - Flugan's Deus Ex:HR Depth changers - Nvidia tech support online form - Nvidia support: 1-800-797-6530

#5
Posted 01/17/2013 07:39 PM   
Still, they have to appeal to the mid stream gamers that have middling systems for s3D or LOSE THE SALE. They even states as I remember that if Crysis 2 did not sell well, that there would not be a Crysis 3. This is a company. A company has to make a profit to stay in business. All of these decisions have to be in the mix. Maybe youwould prefer all the games to be direct ports from consoles (like Modern Warfare 3). Instead they are offered a compromise. Maybe less than perfect but well executed under their budget and time constraints. It did not start out to be an S3D title at all so they gave it to us as a present, be thankful. I am surethey have listened to the complainers that have not taken the time to read what there process was to ad it on. Good stuff!!! Why do we think that doing S3D is so easy anyway. It is a new technology that can get out of hand quickly if you do not understand it and the end result can be better if they just left it at 2D instead if not done right. Not all 3D movies are on the same level. Some that are made with 3D intentionally have it over those that have been converted to 3D quickly. Yeah, James Cameron said he liked it. James Cameron also know what it takes to do a descent job at it. The bar is higher this time and I am sure they will put out a "better" product but I am also sure they will not be able to please every body.
Still, they have to appeal to the mid stream gamers that have middling systems for s3D or LOSE THE SALE. They even states as I remember that if Crysis 2 did not sell well, that there would not be a Crysis 3. This is a company. A company has to make a profit to stay in business. All of these decisions have to be in the mix. Maybe youwould prefer all the games to be direct ports from consoles (like Modern Warfare 3). Instead they are offered a compromise. Maybe less than perfect but well executed under their budget and time constraints. It did not start out to be an S3D title at all so they gave it to us as a present, be thankful. I am surethey have listened to the complainers that have not taken the time to read what there process was to ad it on. Good stuff!!!

Why do we think that doing S3D is so easy anyway. It is a new technology that can get out of hand quickly if you do not understand it and the end result can be better if they just left it at 2D instead if not done right. Not all 3D movies are on the same level. Some that are made with 3D intentionally have it over those that have been converted to 3D quickly. Yeah, James Cameron said he liked it. James Cameron also know what it takes to do a descent job at it. The bar is higher this time and I am sure they will put out a "better" product but I am also sure they will not be able to please every body.

#6
Posted 01/18/2013 12:09 AM   
Please excuse the errors in the previous post, I was in a hurry. I have been watching episode 4, over and over again!!! The Typhoon weapon weapon seems like a bit of fun. I have invested in 27" 2560*1440 ISP monitors. This tight dot pitch does wonders for any game. When I first got the monitor Crysis 2 was the first game I opened. Simply gorgeous. No AA was really needed, the game looked like the cut scenes. 27" is the sweet spot for S3D in my opinion but I wish we could do S3D in that high resolution.
Please excuse the errors in the previous post, I was in a hurry.

I have been watching episode 4, over and over again!!! The Typhoon weapon weapon seems like a bit of fun. I have invested in 27" 2560*1440 ISP monitors. This tight dot pitch does wonders for any game. When I first got the monitor Crysis 2 was the first game I opened. Simply gorgeous. No AA was really needed, the game looked like the cut scenes. 27" is the sweet spot for S3D in my opinion but I wish we could do S3D in that high resolution.

#7
Posted 01/18/2013 04:39 AM   
Yeah, unfortunatelly nothing higher than 1080p 3D at the moment. My wife has an Apple Thunderbolt display 27" 2560x1440, and the image is wonderfull, beyond perfection, and also the glass glossy screen just makes colours look amazing, but it's no good for me, since I can't do any 3D with it. Sure 2D 1440p is really cool, but I would not trade 3D gaming for very high 2D resolution. Nothing beats S3D technology. I'm glad to hear Crysis 3 will melt computers, I was hoping for that. I have good faith that Crysis 3 won't be a console port, that PC and console plataforms are being developed totally separated. You can see by these amazing Episodes videos, that is definatelly a PC footage. PS3 and Xbox could never handle those graphics settings. This game will rule, I know that no other game company have the power and ability to go beyond today's games graphics like Crytek team can. They're just the best in this field, and by far. Their engine is the most advanced in the world, that's why I think if they put some effort into S3D they can do some magic, they just need to care more about it, I mean real S3D, not that fake shit. I also agree that we should have the choice. It's important to have the fake S3D for the mainstream, but why not give us enthusiasts the choice for real S3D so we can really put our GTX 680, 690 to it's knees.... That's all about Crysis isnt it? and that's something that did not happended with Crysis 2. I wanna hear in the near future that famous saying: Can your PC run Crysis 3, like it was back in 2008....
Yeah, unfortunatelly nothing higher than 1080p 3D at the moment.
My wife has an Apple Thunderbolt display 27" 2560x1440, and the image is wonderfull, beyond perfection, and also the glass glossy screen just makes colours look amazing, but it's no good for me, since I can't do any 3D with it.
Sure 2D 1440p is really cool, but I would not trade 3D gaming for very high 2D resolution. Nothing beats S3D technology.

I'm glad to hear Crysis 3 will melt computers, I was hoping for that. I have good faith that Crysis 3 won't be a console port, that PC and console plataforms are being developed totally separated. You can see by these amazing Episodes videos, that is definatelly a PC footage. PS3 and Xbox could never handle those graphics settings. This game will rule, I know that no other game company have the power and ability to go beyond today's games graphics like Crytek team can. They're just the best in this field, and by far. Their engine is the most advanced in the world, that's why I think if they put some effort into S3D they can do some magic, they just need to care more about it, I mean real S3D, not that fake shit.

I also agree that we should have the choice. It's important to have the fake S3D for the mainstream, but why not give us enthusiasts the choice for real S3D so we can really put our GTX 680, 690 to it's knees....
That's all about Crysis isnt it? and that's something that did not happended with Crysis 2.

I wanna hear in the near future that famous saying: Can your PC run Crysis 3, like it was back in 2008....

Windows 7 Home Premium 64 Bits - Core i7 2600K @ 4.5ghz - Asus Maximus IV Extreme Z68 - Geforce EVGA GTX 690 - 8GB Corsair Vengeance DDR3 1600 9-9-9-24 (2T) - Thermaltake Armor+ - SSD Intel 510 Series Sata3 256GB - HD WD Caviar Black Sata3 64mb 2TB - HD WD Caviar Black 1TB Sata3 64mb - Bose Sound System - LG H20L GGW Blu Ray/DVD/CD RW - LG GH20 DVD RAM - PSU Thermaltake Toughpower 1000W - Samsung S27A950D 3D Vision Ready + 3D HDTV SAMSUNG PL63C7000 3DTVPLAY + ROLLERMOD CHECKERBOARD

#8
Posted 01/18/2013 02:04 PM   
@HCFORDE50: What makes you think they would lose sales if Crytek offered a the option to use normal 3D? I don't think you understand how 3D Vision works. 3D is easy for Nvidia because it works completely automatically by virtue of the fact that the Nvidia video card is already juggling around all the information used in 3D. Its completely automatic. They locked this completely automatic function out. It was completely free, no effort necessary. They PUT IT effort to lock out this completely automatic function. If you still agree with it, you must one serious Crytek fan blinded by your hard-on. Not only that, they lowered the rendering resolution in this mode. I played in 2D, its pseudo 3d was not an option. If they lock out normal 3D, which could be fixed possibly by the 3D community using Helix's drivers, that would be a another completely unnecessary degradation of there product and another [unintentional] slap in the face to PC 3D users. In my opinion, even 27" is not very immersive. I only use my 27" VG278H when i absolutely have to and i've stated that many times on this forum. I prefer my 46" for its wider FOV despite the ppi loss. My last monitor before this was a 2560x1600 3007wfp. James Cameron doesn't do 3D in movies that well. They could be so much better. I take it you never saw Captain EO. Real true to life depth in possible in movies, just like it is in games. Maybe stating your opinions and guesses as if they were facts isn't such a great idea after all. Reason number 354,325,432 i think the age of the poster would always show in a forum.
@HCFORDE50: What makes you think they would lose sales if Crytek offered a the option to use normal 3D? I don't think you understand how 3D Vision works. 3D is easy for Nvidia because it works completely automatically by virtue of the fact that the Nvidia video card is already juggling around all the information used in 3D. Its completely automatic. They locked this completely automatic function out. It was completely free, no effort necessary. They PUT IT effort to lock out this completely automatic function. If you still agree with it, you must one serious Crytek fan blinded by your hard-on. Not only that, they lowered the rendering resolution in this mode. I played in 2D, its pseudo 3d was not an option.

If they lock out normal 3D, which could be fixed possibly by the 3D community using Helix's drivers, that would be a another completely unnecessary degradation of there product and another [unintentional] slap in the face to PC 3D users.

In my opinion, even 27" is not very immersive. I only use my 27" VG278H when i absolutely have to and i've stated that many times on this forum. I prefer my 46" for its wider FOV despite the ppi loss. My last monitor before this was a 2560x1600 3007wfp.

James Cameron doesn't do 3D in movies that well. They could be so much better. I take it you never saw Captain EO. Real true to life depth in possible in movies, just like it is in games.

Maybe stating your opinions and guesses as if they were facts isn't such a great idea after all. Reason number 354,325,432 i think the age of the poster would always show in a forum.

46" Samsung ES7500 3DTV (checkerboard, high FOV as desktop monitor, highly recommend!) - Metro 2033 3D PNG screens - Metro LL filter realism mod - Flugan's Deus Ex:HR Depth changers - Nvidia tech support online form - Nvidia support: 1-800-797-6530

#9
Posted 01/18/2013 05:05 PM   
Watcha! If Crisis 3 is released with this generation of consoles I am willing to bet money the graphics aren't going to be that good. If it wasn't for3D Challenging my system I can't think of any game that seriously challenges my rig. In 2D, on my single 1680x1050 monitor, I can play every game I have, max settings at high FPS. (Unless I go bonkers withFSAA) Case in point: Far Cry 3. Everything Ultra but geometry (down one) and only 2x DX11 AA (whatever it's called). The lowest it got on my 10 minute play through was44 fps during typical pirate base take-down combat and (often way) above 55 all other times. Until next gen consoles come out, I think we will be disappointed by graphics.
Watcha!

If Crisis 3 is released with this generation of consoles I am willing to bet money the graphics aren't going to be that good. If it wasn't for3D Challenging my system I can't think of any game that seriously challenges my rig.

In 2D, on my single 1680x1050 monitor, I can play every game I have, max settings at high FPS. (Unless I go bonkers withFSAA) Case in point: Far Cry 3. Everything Ultra but geometry (down one) and only 2x DX11 AA (whatever it's called). The lowest it got on my 10 minute play through was44 fps during typical pirate base take-down combat and (often way) above 55 all other times.

Until next gen consoles come out, I think we will be disappointed by graphics.

Lord, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference.
-------------------
Vitals: Windows 7 64bit, i5 2500 @ 4.4ghz, SLI GTX670, 8GB, Viewsonic VX2268WM

Handy Driver Discussion
Helix Mod - community fixes
Bo3b's Shaderhacker School - How to fix 3D in games
3dsolutionsgaming.com - videos, reviews and 3D fixes

#10
Posted 01/19/2013 09:19 AM   
silly question, why does everyone keep saying Crysis 2 didnt do "Real 3D"? still SBS looks awesome if you ask me. Hanging for C3, oh i hunting i will go in the elephant grass
silly question, why does everyone keep saying Crysis 2 didnt do "Real 3D"? still SBS looks awesome if you ask me.

Hanging for C3, oh i hunting i will go in the elephant grass

65" Samsung ES8000 LED, i7-3820, Asus P9X79, GTX680 SLI, Win8 Checkerboard /Win7 Frame Sequential

#11
Posted 01/19/2013 12:53 PM   
I loaded up Crysis 2's 3D to take some screenshots of the reduced render resolution and noticed some of the problems i experienced the first time weren't there. Before the gun's would shift back and forth in depth every time they finished doing something like reloading, firing, etc. Didn't happen this time so it appears that was just a bug. That definitely effected my overall opinion of the 3D. So its better than i originally thought, but IMO its still not worth using in its current state. The maximum separation isn't close to my IPD and the render resolution is very low, but i am interested to see if they can improve it as it looks like it could work well.
I loaded up Crysis 2's 3D to take some screenshots of the reduced render resolution and noticed some of the problems i experienced the first time weren't there. Before the gun's would shift back and forth in depth every time they finished doing something like reloading, firing, etc. Didn't happen this time so it appears that was just a bug. That definitely effected my overall opinion of the 3D. So its better than i originally thought, but IMO its still not worth using in its current state. The maximum separation isn't close to my IPD and the render resolution is very low, but i am interested to see if they can improve it as it looks like it could work well.

46" Samsung ES7500 3DTV (checkerboard, high FOV as desktop monitor, highly recommend!) - Metro 2033 3D PNG screens - Metro LL filter realism mod - Flugan's Deus Ex:HR Depth changers - Nvidia tech support online form - Nvidia support: 1-800-797-6530

#12
Posted 01/19/2013 02:47 PM   
LIBERTINE, oh LIBERTINE; The OP is focusing about 3D AND Crysis. 46" is not a monitor but a TV. Can you play Crysis in 3D on it a 60FPS? Crytek would lose sales by just offering Nvidia based S3D because of the performance hit. That is what they wanted to avoid. How big was S3D when they began development? It was added on as a gift, accept it for what it was. Because it was not initially developed for S3D, could it be that there were other development issues that cause them to lock Nvidia 3Dvision out as you say? Nvidia 3Dvision is not just plug-n-play as you suggest and everything comes out fine. If that were the case then why are some 3Dvision games better in S3D than others? Why would anything have to be tweaked by the community? Could it also be that there are other S3D solutions than Nvidia that they wanted to address? Hmmm.... It also comes down to support issues and legitimate complaints comparatively there were a few vocal whiners but... there always will be. If you want to talk about "locking out", then talk to the Nvidia people first about "locking out technology" and why they do it. Look at what I actually said also. I said Cameron did a descent job. S3D is a work in process/progress. Microsoft is even trying to make it easier so in the future we may even see better S3D with less effort from the developers. It does take extra work and extra work mean added monetary investment, added monetary investment means they have to determine if it will be profitable. Having a 46" TV and an ASUS 27" just for fun is not the person they have to please as much as the person that has a single 22" 3D monitor that he saved up to get and has a GTX560ti running it. We who can afford the higher end stuff forget that the most money is NOT made selling the highest end product the the vast amount of middling products that are sold to the mass market. The middle market can do only so much with a high-end game. Crytek's stated position was to squeeze as much performance out of the game as they could in the short time they had for the middle market. Thanks to their efforts they had the sales to invest in Crysis 3. Crysis 3 will be the one to be judged on the overall S3D effort. I play games in Surround (24" & 27"rarely), 27" 2560*1440, 110" projection(2D & 3D), 22" 3D They all have their pros & cons.
LIBERTINE, oh LIBERTINE;

The OP is focusing about 3D AND Crysis.

46" is not a monitor but a TV. Can you play Crysis in 3D on it a 60FPS?

Crytek would lose sales by just offering Nvidia based S3D because of the performance hit. That is what they wanted to avoid. How big was S3D when they began development? It was added on as a gift, accept it for what it was. Because it was not initially developed for S3D, could it be that there were other development issues that cause them to lock Nvidia 3Dvision out as you say?

Nvidia 3Dvision is not just plug-n-play as you suggest and everything comes out fine. If that were the case then why are some 3Dvision games better in S3D than others? Why would anything have to be tweaked by the community?

Could it also be that there are other S3D solutions than Nvidia that they wanted to address? Hmmm....
It also comes down to support issues and legitimate complaints comparatively there were a few vocal whiners but... there always will be.

If you want to talk about "locking out", then talk to the Nvidia people first about "locking out technology" and why they do it.

Look at what I actually said also. I said Cameron did a descent job.

S3D is a work in process/progress. Microsoft is even trying to make it easier so in the future we may even see better S3D with less effort from the developers. It does take extra work and extra work mean added monetary investment, added monetary investment means they have to determine if it will be profitable. Having a 46" TV and an ASUS 27" just for fun is not the person they have to please as much as the person that has a single 22" 3D monitor that he saved up to get and has a GTX560ti running it.

We who can afford the higher end stuff forget that the most money is NOT made selling the highest end product the the vast amount of middling products that are sold to the mass market. The middle market can do only so much with a high-end game. Crytek's stated position was to squeeze as much performance out of the game as they could in the short time they had for the middle market. Thanks to their efforts they had the sales to invest in Crysis 3. Crysis 3 will be the one to be judged on the overall S3D effort.

I play games in Surround (24" & 27"rarely), 27" 2560*1440, 110" projection(2D & 3D), 22" 3D
They all have their pros & cons.

#13
Posted 01/19/2013 03:04 PM   
[quote="HCFORDE50"] 46" is not a monitor but a TV. Can you play Crysis in 3D on it a 60FPS?[/quote]Of course. There are other settings i can lower if needed. And yes it is a TV, a big one, it even has pixels.... and advanced contrast enhancements, sharpening, black level correction, white level adjustment, gamma adjustment among others and an 80 to 90 degree screen FOV depending on how im sitting. Imo 27" and under 3D monitors have stunted 3D's growth caused by their underwhelming low screen FOV and effects of linear perspective. That aside... Ok, i can see by the rest of your post that the main thing we disagree on seems to be the amount of effort involved in making the choice available. I think it would be less than trivial. Their shader 3D code as i understand it is a set of functions performed outside of [in an object oriented C++ sort of way] the existing render code and should be no effort to bypass. No effort. You might say that their shader 3d was a gift to people with lower end hardware, but that would seem to discount the possibility of lowering some of the many in-game settings while using normal 3D. and there is simply no reason to limit the interaxial (separation).
HCFORDE50 said:

46" is not a monitor but a TV. Can you play Crysis in 3D on it a 60FPS?
Of course. There are other settings i can lower if needed. And yes it is a TV, a big one, it even has pixels.... and advanced contrast enhancements, sharpening, black level correction, white level adjustment, gamma adjustment among others and an 80 to 90 degree screen FOV depending on how im sitting. Imo 27" and under 3D monitors have stunted 3D's growth caused by their underwhelming low screen FOV and effects of linear perspective. That aside...

Ok, i can see by the rest of your post that the main thing we disagree on seems to be the amount of effort involved in making the choice available. I think it would be less than trivial. Their shader 3D code as i understand it is a set of functions performed outside of [in an object oriented C++ sort of way] the existing render code and should be no effort to bypass. No effort.

You might say that their shader 3d was a gift to people with lower end hardware, but that would seem to discount the possibility of lowering some of the many in-game settings while using normal 3D. and there is simply no reason to limit the interaxial (separation).

46" Samsung ES7500 3DTV (checkerboard, high FOV as desktop monitor, highly recommend!) - Metro 2033 3D PNG screens - Metro LL filter realism mod - Flugan's Deus Ex:HR Depth changers - Nvidia tech support online form - Nvidia support: 1-800-797-6530

#14
Posted 01/19/2013 04:39 PM   
Crisis2's 3D is awful. I hate it when devs get involved because they often balls it up, make claims about their product's 3D which us often incorrect or block us out completely. I think Crytek tried to appeal to their console market with their 2.5D rendering; it failed. I honestly think Crisis is one of the forces behind the3D hate. I know I sound elitist but so what! If games were left 'pure' and devs were encouraged to provide multiple graphics options and customers were informed (like I was 4 years ago) that some games would work better than others, 3D would grow as hardware becomes more affordable. Shoddy, fake 3D that has been promoted by ignorant devs does as much damage as rubbish 3D cinema (quality flicks accepted). Sorry but it does my head in almost as much as those entitled people who believe it possible all games should support3D perfectly despite the difference in hardware specs etc. Possible: yes; practicable: no.
Crisis2's 3D is awful. I hate it when devs get involved because they often balls it up, make claims about their product's 3D which us often incorrect or block us out completely.
I think Crytek tried to appeal to their console market with their 2.5D rendering; it failed. I honestly think Crisis is one of the forces behind the3D hate.
I know I sound elitist but so what! If games were left 'pure' and devs were encouraged to provide multiple graphics options and customers were informed (like I was 4 years ago) that some games would work better than others, 3D would grow as hardware becomes more affordable.

Shoddy, fake 3D that has been promoted by ignorant devs does as much damage as rubbish 3D cinema (quality flicks accepted).

Sorry but it does my head in almost as much as those entitled people who believe it possible all games should support3D perfectly despite the difference in hardware specs etc. Possible: yes; practicable: no.

Lord, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference.
-------------------
Vitals: Windows 7 64bit, i5 2500 @ 4.4ghz, SLI GTX670, 8GB, Viewsonic VX2268WM

Handy Driver Discussion
Helix Mod - community fixes
Bo3b's Shaderhacker School - How to fix 3D in games
3dsolutionsgaming.com - videos, reviews and 3D fixes

#15
Posted 01/19/2013 05:52 PM   
  1 / 3    
Scroll To Top