Let's make a giant list of all NVIDIA 3D Vision failures.
  8 / 9    
[quote name='NickDvB' date='20 March 2011 - 01:17 PM' timestamp='1300583867' post='1210275']
Well said. Nvidia seem to have done a pretty good job of alienating the user-base of the original 3D driver. I realise Nvidia wanted to make a user-friendly consumer product to bring 3D to the mainstream but the 3Dvision kit (and the muppet-mode 3d control-panel) should have been optional. Tying the use of the new feature-reduced driver to an expensive hardware purchase was a big mistake, and trying to limit it's use to "nvidia certified" displays only harms 3D adoption even further.
[/quote]

Absolutely. Also, it's a bad decision on their part because people who buy new gizmos and technologies usually like to push ALL the buttons anyway, that, AND compounded by the fact it actually ruins the users comfort level alot.

I don't think NV are going to want to open up stuff though, it gives them market dominance /shifty.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':shifty:' />






..... /wallbash.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':wallbash:' /> .
[quote name='NickDvB' date='20 March 2011 - 01:17 PM' timestamp='1300583867' post='1210275']

Well said. Nvidia seem to have done a pretty good job of alienating the user-base of the original 3D driver. I realise Nvidia wanted to make a user-friendly consumer product to bring 3D to the mainstream but the 3Dvision kit (and the muppet-mode 3d control-panel) should have been optional. Tying the use of the new feature-reduced driver to an expensive hardware purchase was a big mistake, and trying to limit it's use to "nvidia certified" displays only harms 3D adoption even further.





Absolutely. Also, it's a bad decision on their part because people who buy new gizmos and technologies usually like to push ALL the buttons anyway, that, AND compounded by the fact it actually ruins the users comfort level alot.



I don't think NV are going to want to open up stuff though, it gives them market dominance /shifty.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':shifty:' />













..... /wallbash.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':wallbash:' /> .

Posted 03/25/2011 10:09 AM   
[quote name='andrewf@nvidia' date='24 March 2011 - 09:18 AM' timestamp='1300979927' post='1212570']
What features are you referring to?
[/quote]

Having 3 presets for convergence and depth is the feature i'm referring to.

Tying several customizable toggle keys for convergence and depth is a good idea for sure, however, I mainly hope that your first priority is to make it easier for developers to do this for us.

What i'm saying is; making things easier for the developers should come first. Once things are easy and second nature for the developers there would be no need for user intervention in the first place and no time would be wasted on a feature that should ultimately be getting fazed out in the first place.
[quote name='andrewf@nvidia' date='24 March 2011 - 09:18 AM' timestamp='1300979927' post='1212570']

What features are you referring to?





Having 3 presets for convergence and depth is the feature i'm referring to.



Tying several customizable toggle keys for convergence and depth is a good idea for sure, however, I mainly hope that your first priority is to make it easier for developers to do this for us.



What i'm saying is; making things easier for the developers should come first. Once things are easy and second nature for the developers there would be no need for user intervention in the first place and no time would be wasted on a feature that should ultimately be getting fazed out in the first place.

Posted 03/25/2011 11:09 AM   
[quote name='CamRaiD' date='25 March 2011 - 05:09 AM' timestamp='1301047748' post='1212946']
Absolutely. Also, it's a bad decision on their part because people who buy new gizmos and technologies usually like to push ALL the buttons anyway, that, AND compounded by the fact it actually ruins the users comfort level alot.

I don't think NV are going to want to open up stuff though, it gives them market dominance /shifty.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':shifty:' />

..... /wallbash.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':wallbash:' /> .
[/quote]

Okay guys, I understand that this might be the case, but it could also be equally valid that Nvidia narrows down, channels, and funds a more tighter application because from a practical stand point it makes sense from a support basis.

I have the unique ground of owning both types of setups (as some others do here as well): 1)I have the Nvidia 3D Vision setup, Windows 7, DLP, i7, X58, GTX295 QUAD-SLI all the bells and whistles, and 2) I own a Windows XP 32 bit, 7900 GTX SLI setup, Phenom II x555 Black Edition Dual Core, etc. running Forceware 91.47 and Stereo 91.47 also using my DLP as the 3D display. On a side note: I might add that I also own licenses of iz3d and Tridef, but I also find them not to be even close to 3D Vision quality wise, and somewhat sub-par with what Nvidia USED to be doing on the Old School drivers.

The conclusion I've come to is that while my 7900 GTX setup and old school stereo is wider in its application of both directx and opengl and more flexible in its approach to different display types, it is also partially a mess when it came to support in the day. Yes a lot of games work, but the ability to actually MAKE them work GOOD puts way too much burden on the end user to actually sale this as a quality 3D product AND support it (they don't work for free boys, and neither do I). Yes, I have roughly 200 games that work well on my old setup, but I went through hours, days, and months to get them all tweaked and working correctly. After seeing what I went through with that, I can see why Nvidia, as a business decision, stayed more focus with 3D Vision. It's so much easier to support a product when you have this Asus monitor or that LG monitor. If you're going to sell a product, know your product and know it [them] well.

So it really comes down to two dialectical opposites as I see it, and one possible Hegelian synthesis between the two:

1) Great support and quality with 3D Vision vis-a-vis wide application and lousy quality with iZ3D and TriDef

There is a second dialectical opposite entangled that could lead to Nvidia opening up a little:

2) Great user input community and customization (iZ3D) vis-a-vis A locked down product (3D Vision)

3) [i]Tertium quid[/i]: Keep the tight application and support while offering some more customization for those that have the ability to do it IF they so desire. If your end user community is competent, take advantage of it. Leave the basic functionality as it is there and don't bog down the average end user with thousands of different option, but allow the adept the ability to tap into it a little deeper.

This should give the alchemical process of turning the stream.

My apologies for the phil jargon...
[quote name='CamRaiD' date='25 March 2011 - 05:09 AM' timestamp='1301047748' post='1212946']

Absolutely. Also, it's a bad decision on their part because people who buy new gizmos and technologies usually like to push ALL the buttons anyway, that, AND compounded by the fact it actually ruins the users comfort level alot.



I don't think NV are going to want to open up stuff though, it gives them market dominance /shifty.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':shifty:' />



..... /wallbash.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':wallbash:' /> .





Okay guys, I understand that this might be the case, but it could also be equally valid that Nvidia narrows down, channels, and funds a more tighter application because from a practical stand point it makes sense from a support basis.



I have the unique ground of owning both types of setups (as some others do here as well): 1)I have the Nvidia 3D Vision setup, Windows 7, DLP, i7, X58, GTX295 QUAD-SLI all the bells and whistles, and 2) I own a Windows XP 32 bit, 7900 GTX SLI setup, Phenom II x555 Black Edition Dual Core, etc. running Forceware 91.47 and Stereo 91.47 also using my DLP as the 3D display. On a side note: I might add that I also own licenses of iz3d and Tridef, but I also find them not to be even close to 3D Vision quality wise, and somewhat sub-par with what Nvidia USED to be doing on the Old School drivers.



The conclusion I've come to is that while my 7900 GTX setup and old school stereo is wider in its application of both directx and opengl and more flexible in its approach to different display types, it is also partially a mess when it came to support in the day. Yes a lot of games work, but the ability to actually MAKE them work GOOD puts way too much burden on the end user to actually sale this as a quality 3D product AND support it (they don't work for free boys, and neither do I). Yes, I have roughly 200 games that work well on my old setup, but I went through hours, days, and months to get them all tweaked and working correctly. After seeing what I went through with that, I can see why Nvidia, as a business decision, stayed more focus with 3D Vision. It's so much easier to support a product when you have this Asus monitor or that LG monitor. If you're going to sell a product, know your product and know it [them] well.



So it really comes down to two dialectical opposites as I see it, and one possible Hegelian synthesis between the two:



1) Great support and quality with 3D Vision vis-a-vis wide application and lousy quality with iZ3D and TriDef



There is a second dialectical opposite entangled that could lead to Nvidia opening up a little:



2) Great user input community and customization (iZ3D) vis-a-vis A locked down product (3D Vision)



3) Tertium quid: Keep the tight application and support while offering some more customization for those that have the ability to do it IF they so desire. If your end user community is competent, take advantage of it. Leave the basic functionality as it is there and don't bog down the average end user with thousands of different option, but allow the adept the ability to tap into it a little deeper.



This should give the alchemical process of turning the stream.



My apologies for the phil jargon...

Posted 03/25/2011 01:20 PM   
[quote name='Stange' date='25 March 2011 - 06:09 AM' timestamp='1301051388' post='1212964']
Having 3 presets for convergence and depth is the feature i'm referring to.

Tying several customizable toggle keys for convergence and depth is a good idea for sure, however, I mainly hope that your first priority is to make it easier for developers to do this for us.

What i'm saying is; making things easier for the developers should come first. Once things are easy and second nature for the developers there would be no need for user intervention in the first place and no time would be wasted on a feature that should ultimately be getting fazed out in the first place.
[/quote]

Hi

it actually is quite easy for developers to interact with 3D Vision and we provide them with numerous tools, white papers, and APIs for control.
[quote name='Stange' date='25 March 2011 - 06:09 AM' timestamp='1301051388' post='1212964']

Having 3 presets for convergence and depth is the feature i'm referring to.



Tying several customizable toggle keys for convergence and depth is a good idea for sure, however, I mainly hope that your first priority is to make it easier for developers to do this for us.



What i'm saying is; making things easier for the developers should come first. Once things are easy and second nature for the developers there would be no need for user intervention in the first place and no time would be wasted on a feature that should ultimately be getting fazed out in the first place.





Hi



it actually is quite easy for developers to interact with 3D Vision and we provide them with numerous tools, white papers, and APIs for control.

Posted 03/25/2011 04:33 PM   
[quote name='andrewf@nvidia' date='24 March 2011 - 09:18 AM' timestamp='1300979907' post='1212569']2. Yes I have looked at their products many times. What features do you like? I can comment on them then.[/quote]
How about, from this very thread, as well as others in this forum:
[quote name='Zloth' date='17 March 2011 - 06:22 PM' timestamp='1300407722' post='1209354']When a game plays in 3D, it does an offset for the right and left eye. Could we please have an option to double that offset for one eye and zero it for another? Then we could simply close one eye to make the 3D effect vanish. It would just be like squinting down the barrel of a rifle. It should be handy in games where you need to pick something out on the screen with a 2D screen depth pointer, too.[/quote]
This is implemented in iZ3D. It's especially useful for FPS games with no built in 3d crosshair. It allows you to use iron sights as an actual sight.
[quote name='andrewf@nvidia' date='24 March 2011 - 09:18 AM' timestamp='1300979907' post='1212569']2. Yes I have looked at their products many times. What features do you like? I can comment on them then.

How about, from this very thread, as well as others in this forum:

[quote name='Zloth' date='17 March 2011 - 06:22 PM' timestamp='1300407722' post='1209354']When a game plays in 3D, it does an offset for the right and left eye. Could we please have an option to double that offset for one eye and zero it for another? Then we could simply close one eye to make the 3D effect vanish. It would just be like squinting down the barrel of a rifle. It should be handy in games where you need to pick something out on the screen with a 2D screen depth pointer, too.

This is implemented in iZ3D. It's especially useful for FPS games with no built in 3d crosshair. It allows you to use iron sights as an actual sight.

Intel i7-4770k
EVGA GTX 780 Ti SC
ASRock Z87 Extreme4
8GB DDR3, 240GB Intel SSD, 3TB HDD
Cooler Master Siedon 120M Liquid Cooling
Dell 3007WFP-HC 30" 2560x1600
Alienware OptX AW2310 23" 1920x1080 with 3D Vision
Acer H5360 720p Projector with 3D Vision
ONKYO HT-S5300 7.1 Sound System
Logitech G19 Keyboard, G9 Mouse, G25 Wheel
Saitek X52 Pro and Rudder Pedals

Posted 03/25/2011 04:57 PM   
[quote name='FormulaRedline' date='25 March 2011 - 11:57 AM' timestamp='1301072227' post='1213096']
How about, from this very thread, as well as others in this forum:

This is implemented in iZ3D. It's especially useful for FPS games with no built in 3d crosshair. It allows you to use iron sights as an actual sight.
[/quote]

Hi

We did think about this, but we ultimatley decided to not do it since most people dont squint their eyes even in 2D mode.
[quote name='FormulaRedline' date='25 March 2011 - 11:57 AM' timestamp='1301072227' post='1213096']

How about, from this very thread, as well as others in this forum:



This is implemented in iZ3D. It's especially useful for FPS games with no built in 3d crosshair. It allows you to use iron sights as an actual sight.





Hi



We did think about this, but we ultimatley decided to not do it since most people dont squint their eyes even in 2D mode.

Posted 03/25/2011 06:10 PM   
[quote name='andrewf@nvidia' date='25 March 2011 - 12:10 PM' timestamp='1301076648' post='1213133']
Hi

We did think about this, but we ultimatley decided to not do it since most people dont squint their eyes even in 2D mode.
[/quote]
There's no point in 2D mode. The gun sight is placed right in front of your one cyclopic eye. But people DO do this all the time in real life 3D! When you look down a gun sight in real life, you always close the other eye. What's more, you don't have to be told to do that, you do it by instinct! I doubt we will do the same by instinct at first when gaming but I bet we can learn this behavoir mighty quickly.

What's even more yet... we are getting desperate when it comes to the lack of 3D pointers. This solution would at least be something we could use in games like Dragon Age where we have to select objects at depth.
[quote name='andrewf@nvidia' date='25 March 2011 - 12:10 PM' timestamp='1301076648' post='1213133']

Hi



We did think about this, but we ultimatley decided to not do it since most people dont squint their eyes even in 2D mode.



There's no point in 2D mode. The gun sight is placed right in front of your one cyclopic eye. But people DO do this all the time in real life 3D! When you look down a gun sight in real life, you always close the other eye. What's more, you don't have to be told to do that, you do it by instinct! I doubt we will do the same by instinct at first when gaming but I bet we can learn this behavoir mighty quickly.



What's even more yet... we are getting desperate when it comes to the lack of 3D pointers. This solution would at least be something we could use in games like Dragon Age where we have to select objects at depth.

Posted 03/25/2011 11:35 PM   
[quote name='FormulaRedline' date='25 March 2011 - 11:57 AM' timestamp='1301072227' post='1213096']
How about, from this very thread, as well as others in this forum:

This is implemented in iZ3D. It's especially useful for FPS games with no built in 3d crosshair. It allows you to use iron sights as an actual sight.
[/quote]

I know what that is, and it's a hard sell even for me. It would be far easier to get the developers to fix the iron sights depth in game then no squinting is required. Or for Nvidia to develop a better laser sight. While I think that the right shift and left shift does have its applications, there are far more pressing issues that need tending to.

Although IZ3D implementing it first should give Nvidia incentive to start thinking about solutions like that. Because they are clever.
[quote name='FormulaRedline' date='25 March 2011 - 11:57 AM' timestamp='1301072227' post='1213096']

How about, from this very thread, as well as others in this forum:



This is implemented in iZ3D. It's especially useful for FPS games with no built in 3d crosshair. It allows you to use iron sights as an actual sight.





I know what that is, and it's a hard sell even for me. It would be far easier to get the developers to fix the iron sights depth in game then no squinting is required. Or for Nvidia to develop a better laser sight. While I think that the right shift and left shift does have its applications, there are far more pressing issues that need tending to.



Although IZ3D implementing it first should give Nvidia incentive to start thinking about solutions like that. Because they are clever.

AMD Phenom II X3 720 @ 2.8GHZ
8GB RAM
Mitsubishi Diamond Pro 2070sb @ 2048x1536 @ 85hz
Edimensional glasses and Nvidia 3D Vision

Posted 03/26/2011 07:14 AM   
I like this thread. All the unresolved issues which we are complaining about since the start of 3d vision are still pretty much all unresolved. Sure we got new profiles. But what else has changed??

Autoconvergence? Nope.
OpenGL? Nope( with many requests!)
Convergence preset keys? Nope.


For instance the 3d aiming. Nvidia decides its not imprortant enough, when infact in real life you always shoot with one eye closed. That will make many fps games unplayable. IZI3D understands this, and has thought about this allot better. So nvidia? Where is the innovation?? and when are going to show off this fabled 11+ work days?? I dont see any changes. 3D Vision Surround still not gets a playable framerate with D3D9. My point is that your working hard, but we as the 3d vision community don't notice any changes except new profiles...
I like this thread. All the unresolved issues which we are complaining about since the start of 3d vision are still pretty much all unresolved. Sure we got new profiles. But what else has changed??



Autoconvergence? Nope.

OpenGL? Nope( with many requests!)

Convergence preset keys? Nope.





For instance the 3d aiming. Nvidia decides its not imprortant enough, when infact in real life you always shoot with one eye closed. That will make many fps games unplayable. IZI3D understands this, and has thought about this allot better. So nvidia? Where is the innovation?? and when are going to show off this fabled 11+ work days?? I dont see any changes. 3D Vision Surround still not gets a playable framerate with D3D9. My point is that your working hard, but we as the 3d vision community don't notice any changes except new profiles...

Posted 03/26/2011 02:22 PM   
[quote name='oracletriplex' date='24 March 2011 - 07:01 PM' timestamp='1301007677' post='1212767']
Yeah, they are afraid of cutting into their precious Quadro market. Even though the number of people who use those types of applications equate to less than one tenth of a percent of the total market. And the ones that do it in 3D are even less than that. They didn't seem too concerned about it before 3D Vision launched when the OpenGL 3d driver was given away for free, am I right?

Right now I'm still combing through the 3DV dll files. The laser sight bmp's were a good start.
[/quote]
Yeah but it is a pretty lucrative market where 3D Vision is probably just breaking even at this point despite the large premium on the shutter glasses and 3D Vision kit. Its the same reason Nvidia goes to great lengths to differentiate GeForce and Quadro drivers/hardware and performance, if one could just buy a $500 GeForce card and get the same features and performance as a $2000 Quadro card, then obviously there's no reason to buy that Quadro. Idk, you might be looking at a similar demographic with regard to OpenGL game demand as that one tenth of one percent that uses 3D Vision Pro on Quadro parts. If 3D Vision users make up 1% of GeForce users maybe only 1 in 10 find OpenGL gaming important given OpenGL titles make up less than 10% of game releases on the Windows platform nowadays. Honestly I can't think of a single OpenGL title save for maybe Riddick: Dark Athena I even remotely thought would be cool in 3D Vision so no real loss to me.

As for the OpenGL 3D driver, from everything I've gathered there was a pretty good lapse in support that was largely due to the Vista/DX10/unified shader driver re-write. Seems like support was there up til the R9x drivers, then R1x0 and beyond signaled a significant driver re-write for DX10, Vista and unified shaders. 3D Vision wasn't released for a good year and a half after that so there was at least that gap in support. Personally I think it was something that was cut due to resource limitations during the transition and just never re-implemented, but as AndrewF indicated, if there was more demand for it, we might see it again. I just don't think we'll see that kind of overwhelming demand for OpenGL simply because there's so few OpenGL releases nowadays.
[quote name='oracletriplex' date='24 March 2011 - 07:01 PM' timestamp='1301007677' post='1212767']

Yeah, they are afraid of cutting into their precious Quadro market. Even though the number of people who use those types of applications equate to less than one tenth of a percent of the total market. And the ones that do it in 3D are even less than that. They didn't seem too concerned about it before 3D Vision launched when the OpenGL 3d driver was given away for free, am I right?



Right now I'm still combing through the 3DV dll files. The laser sight bmp's were a good start.



Yeah but it is a pretty lucrative market where 3D Vision is probably just breaking even at this point despite the large premium on the shutter glasses and 3D Vision kit. Its the same reason Nvidia goes to great lengths to differentiate GeForce and Quadro drivers/hardware and performance, if one could just buy a $500 GeForce card and get the same features and performance as a $2000 Quadro card, then obviously there's no reason to buy that Quadro. Idk, you might be looking at a similar demographic with regard to OpenGL game demand as that one tenth of one percent that uses 3D Vision Pro on Quadro parts. If 3D Vision users make up 1% of GeForce users maybe only 1 in 10 find OpenGL gaming important given OpenGL titles make up less than 10% of game releases on the Windows platform nowadays. Honestly I can't think of a single OpenGL title save for maybe Riddick: Dark Athena I even remotely thought would be cool in 3D Vision so no real loss to me.



As for the OpenGL 3D driver, from everything I've gathered there was a pretty good lapse in support that was largely due to the Vista/DX10/unified shader driver re-write. Seems like support was there up til the R9x drivers, then R1x0 and beyond signaled a significant driver re-write for DX10, Vista and unified shaders. 3D Vision wasn't released for a good year and a half after that so there was at least that gap in support. Personally I think it was something that was cut due to resource limitations during the transition and just never re-implemented, but as AndrewF indicated, if there was more demand for it, we might see it again. I just don't think we'll see that kind of overwhelming demand for OpenGL simply because there's so few OpenGL releases nowadays.

-=HeliX=- Mod 3DV Game Fixes
My 3D Vision Games List Ratings

Intel Core i7 5930K @4.5GHz | Gigabyte X99 Gaming 5 | Win10 x64 Pro | Corsair H105
Nvidia GeForce Titan X SLI Hybrid | ROG Swift PG278Q 144Hz + 3D Vision/G-Sync | 32GB Adata DDR4 2666
Intel Samsung 950Pro SSD | Samsung EVO 4x1 RAID 0 |
Yamaha VX-677 A/V Receiver | Polk Audio RM6880 7.1 | LG Blu-Ray
Auzen X-Fi HT HD | Logitech G710/G502/G27 | Corsair Air 540 | EVGA P2-1200W

Posted 03/26/2011 05:07 PM   
[quote name='Zloth' date='25 March 2011 - 07:35 PM' timestamp='1301096118' post='1213231']
There's no point in 2D mode. The gun sight is placed right in front of your one cyclopic eye. But people DO do this all the time in real life 3D! When you look down a gun sight in real life, you always close the other eye. What's more, you don't have to be told to do that, you do it by instinct! I doubt we will do the same by instinct at first when gaming but I bet we can learn this behavoir mighty quickly.

What's even more yet... we are getting desperate when it comes to the lack of 3D pointers. This solution would at least be something we could use in games like Dragon Age where we have to select objects at depth.
[/quote]
Yeah I've seen it brought up before in the past and I think its a terrible idea/implementation as well. Not only are you required to mirror and mime your mouse clicks to eye squinting, you ultimately end up with a 2D image in a single eye that largely defeats the purpose of S3D to begin with. I've gone over the "realism" argument as well and I think the overwhelming majority of 3D or 2D users would agree that having to close an eye each time they aimed down sight would become a tedious chore. Also, wouldn't you get that annoying crosshair/ironsight rendered in only a single eye this way?

I guess if its easily implemented I wouldn't mind an option for it for those who want it. If its a simple solution then more options are always a good thing, but if its a difficult implementation that needs constant tweaking/reworking I think there's other features that would be more deserving of the driver team's attention.

But ideally for FPS titles one of the two options is possible:

1) Crosshair and ironsights are rendered at the correct depth by the developer. We know this is possible with nearly flawless implementations in games like BFBC2, COD4/5/6, and Borderlands where crosshair and ironsights are perfect in S3D.

2) Ironsights can be rendered at various depths independent of everything else in the scene and in-game crosshair if rendered in 2D can be turned off completely. Then use Nvidia's 3D Crosshair instead at the expense of performance. Any 2D HUD/UI elements or troublesome effects could be adjusted for depth or turned off completely if too problematic. The ability to easily disable these UI elements or problematic effects probably needs to be implemented by the developer, although Nvidia probably has some control over this with quite a bit more effort to implement.
[quote name='Zloth' date='25 March 2011 - 07:35 PM' timestamp='1301096118' post='1213231']

There's no point in 2D mode. The gun sight is placed right in front of your one cyclopic eye. But people DO do this all the time in real life 3D! When you look down a gun sight in real life, you always close the other eye. What's more, you don't have to be told to do that, you do it by instinct! I doubt we will do the same by instinct at first when gaming but I bet we can learn this behavoir mighty quickly.



What's even more yet... we are getting desperate when it comes to the lack of 3D pointers. This solution would at least be something we could use in games like Dragon Age where we have to select objects at depth.



Yeah I've seen it brought up before in the past and I think its a terrible idea/implementation as well. Not only are you required to mirror and mime your mouse clicks to eye squinting, you ultimately end up with a 2D image in a single eye that largely defeats the purpose of S3D to begin with. I've gone over the "realism" argument as well and I think the overwhelming majority of 3D or 2D users would agree that having to close an eye each time they aimed down sight would become a tedious chore. Also, wouldn't you get that annoying crosshair/ironsight rendered in only a single eye this way?



I guess if its easily implemented I wouldn't mind an option for it for those who want it. If its a simple solution then more options are always a good thing, but if its a difficult implementation that needs constant tweaking/reworking I think there's other features that would be more deserving of the driver team's attention.



But ideally for FPS titles one of the two options is possible:



1) Crosshair and ironsights are rendered at the correct depth by the developer. We know this is possible with nearly flawless implementations in games like BFBC2, COD4/5/6, and Borderlands where crosshair and ironsights are perfect in S3D.



2) Ironsights can be rendered at various depths independent of everything else in the scene and in-game crosshair if rendered in 2D can be turned off completely. Then use Nvidia's 3D Crosshair instead at the expense of performance. Any 2D HUD/UI elements or troublesome effects could be adjusted for depth or turned off completely if too problematic. The ability to easily disable these UI elements or problematic effects probably needs to be implemented by the developer, although Nvidia probably has some control over this with quite a bit more effort to implement.

-=HeliX=- Mod 3DV Game Fixes
My 3D Vision Games List Ratings

Intel Core i7 5930K @4.5GHz | Gigabyte X99 Gaming 5 | Win10 x64 Pro | Corsair H105
Nvidia GeForce Titan X SLI Hybrid | ROG Swift PG278Q 144Hz + 3D Vision/G-Sync | 32GB Adata DDR4 2666
Intel Samsung 950Pro SSD | Samsung EVO 4x1 RAID 0 |
Yamaha VX-677 A/V Receiver | Polk Audio RM6880 7.1 | LG Blu-Ray
Auzen X-Fi HT HD | Logitech G710/G502/G27 | Corsair Air 540 | EVGA P2-1200W

Posted 03/26/2011 05:13 PM   
I guess I will throw in 2 more cents about the Leftshift/RightShift aiming solution iZ3D has offered for 3D pointing/aiming. I see lots of critics but few people that have actually tried it. Ask yourself this. When the normal ingame gunsight/pointer of 99.9% of games renders incorrectly at only screen depth. What is it that you actually see when trying to shoot targets? The answer is 2 gunsights. Unless you concentrate or close one eye you don't actually notice there is only a single gunsight for each eye. Yes that's right, in 99.9% of the games you play. If the user can't disable the ingame gunsight. You end up with a single gunsight for each eye shifted off-center making it inaccurate. You just don't realize it because your brain tricks you into seeing 2 gunsights. Yes that's with NVidias 3D too. Try it for yourself with Nvidia's 3D Vision. Play a 3D Vision game where you can't turn off the ingame gunsight and close one eye at a time. You will see one gunsight for each eye. iZ3D shifting technique doesn't not intentionally render a single gunsight for each eye. This simply happens with stereo rendering of most ingame gunsights with with whatever 3D driver you use. What iZ3D's technique allows you to do is chose one of those two inaccurate ingame sights and turn it into a working accurate sight! I myself have used iZ3D's aiming technique. When using it I keep both eyes open. I simply configure the drivers to use my dominant eye and place that selected gunsight over my target. BAM! Head shot! The trick is to learn to ignore the extra gunsight and aim with a sight that is slightly off-center of the screen. People seem soooo concerned with squinting, one sight per eye, and loss of 3D without understand what actually happens. Something not a single person seems to have caught onto is this. By shifting only eye in 3D the player/user can be made to feel like they are walking sideways. This is because one eye is looking straight and the other is looking slightly off to the side. The stronger you set the separation the stronger the sideways effect feels while moving about ingame. I myself don't find it to distracting. More important than anything else is. Without a working pointer/sight the game may become virtually unplayable in 3D. I would chose a working game with a little bit of inconvenience over not being able to play it at all.

[quote name='oracletriplex' date='26 March 2011 - 07:14 AM' timestamp='1301123668' post='1213334']
I know what that is, and it's a hard sell even for me. It would be far easier to get the developers to fix the iron sights depth in game then no squinting is required.[/quote]You seem to think it would be easier to get every game company(HUNDREDS of them) to make special patches to fix each game VS NVidia coming up with a single solution to fix everything in one shot? I simply can not agree with that idea at all. Sorry.

[quote name='chiz' date='26 March 2011 - 05:13 PM' timestamp='1301159623' post='1213552']
Yeah I've seen it brought up before in the past and I think its a terrible idea/implementation as well. Not only are you required to mirror and mime your mouse clicks to eye squinting, you ultimately end up with a 2D image in a single eye that largely defeats the purpose of S3D to begin with. I've gone over the "realism" argument as well and I think the overwhelming majority of 3D or 2D users would agree that having to close an eye each time they aimed down sight would become a tedious chore.[/quote]You seem like you may have an understanding of the realism. If you do the following is for everyone who doesn't. If you don't this will help you to.
In Real Life when a Marksman aims it is actually Monoscopic. He/She only sees in Stereoscopic/3D when moving through their environment with both eyes open. When a Marksman brings up their gun to shoot they use a single eye to aim with the sights. It doesn't matter weather they decide to close one eye or not. Their brain simply allows one eye to dominate and their vision becomes Monoscopic even in Real Life. If they do actually squint this is only to help the brain let the aiming eye dominate. For those that are able to keep their 2nd eye open. This really only helps with peripheral and not with 3D perception. I guess closing one eye every time you shoot while gaming may be annoying to some. It does replicate real life for some people. Others like myself can actually keep both eyes open while shooting and it is less distracting ingame. Either way it would be nice to have this feature as an OPTION for those who want to use it or at least experiment with it. Honestly I hate being told what "TO" and "NOT TO" do. NVidia's current approach is very frustrating for many users who know what they are doing but have their hands tied.

[quote name='chiz' date='26 March 2011 - 05:13 PM' timestamp='1301159623' post='1213552']
wouldn't you get that annoying crosshair/ironsight rendered in only a single eye this way?[/quote]Like I said above. This has always been happening. Most just don't notice it. Also, I guess you don't know that the military has been using monocular aiming sights for quite a while. Here is one of many great examples. [url="http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Apache_Helicopter_Helmet_&_Display_System_-_GPN-2000-001550.jpg"]Link[/url] The key to aiming with this system is to have the sight over the users dominant eye. This was highlighted in the movie [url="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0099575/"]Firebirds[/url] where the star pilot was forced to switch his brains eye dominance to match the Helmet's aiming sight because they did not manufacture the helmet with it on the other side. He drove around in a jeep with some underwear covering one eye and also holding a Periscope on the other. It was supposed to be funny and it was. lol. Anyway, with iZ3D implementation we can pick our dominant eye and don't have to ware underwear on our heads if we don't want to.

My personal standing on the issue is IMPLEMENT IT! The user should be allowed to chose weather or not to use a feature. Decisions like this should not be chosen for them. Especially when no alternative solution is offered.

I think I understand NVidias standing. They want all featured "Features" to be "Foolproof". If everything is not foolproof, some "Fool" will use the feature incorrectly or simply not like it and complain or give a bad review. Time and Time Again, NVidia seems to chose the cautious approach. They never want to lose face by admitting a failure or lack of something. I understand this. I also understand that all the Hardcore 3D users aren't babes and deserve more control over their 3D experience. Locking everything is actually making NVidia lose face with the Hardcore crowd. I also believe the Hardcore crowd are the type more likely to adopt things like 3D Vision in the first place. Seems like they are shooting themselves in the foot with their core consumer group over and over again to be honest. /wallbash.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':wallbash:' />

Well that's my 2 cents and a $1.50 extra tacked on. lol
PS, my goal isn't not to offend anyone. I just am stating how I see the situation. /smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':smile:' />
Edit: +1 NVidia for at least looking at the feature and telling us about. Damn shame they chose not to use it. /sad.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':sad:' />
I guess I will throw in 2 more cents about the Leftshift/RightShift aiming solution iZ3D has offered for 3D pointing/aiming. I see lots of critics but few people that have actually tried it. Ask yourself this. When the normal ingame gunsight/pointer of 99.9% of games renders incorrectly at only screen depth. What is it that you actually see when trying to shoot targets? The answer is 2 gunsights. Unless you concentrate or close one eye you don't actually notice there is only a single gunsight for each eye. Yes that's right, in 99.9% of the games you play. If the user can't disable the ingame gunsight. You end up with a single gunsight for each eye shifted off-center making it inaccurate. You just don't realize it because your brain tricks you into seeing 2 gunsights. Yes that's with NVidias 3D too. Try it for yourself with Nvidia's 3D Vision. Play a 3D Vision game where you can't turn off the ingame gunsight and close one eye at a time. You will see one gunsight for each eye. iZ3D shifting technique doesn't not intentionally render a single gunsight for each eye. This simply happens with stereo rendering of most ingame gunsights with with whatever 3D driver you use. What iZ3D's technique allows you to do is chose one of those two inaccurate ingame sights and turn it into a working accurate sight! I myself have used iZ3D's aiming technique. When using it I keep both eyes open. I simply configure the drivers to use my dominant eye and place that selected gunsight over my target. BAM! Head shot! The trick is to learn to ignore the extra gunsight and aim with a sight that is slightly off-center of the screen. People seem soooo concerned with squinting, one sight per eye, and loss of 3D without understand what actually happens. Something not a single person seems to have caught onto is this. By shifting only eye in 3D the player/user can be made to feel like they are walking sideways. This is because one eye is looking straight and the other is looking slightly off to the side. The stronger you set the separation the stronger the sideways effect feels while moving about ingame. I myself don't find it to distracting. More important than anything else is. Without a working pointer/sight the game may become virtually unplayable in 3D. I would chose a working game with a little bit of inconvenience over not being able to play it at all.



[quote name='oracletriplex' date='26 March 2011 - 07:14 AM' timestamp='1301123668' post='1213334']

I know what that is, and it's a hard sell even for me. It would be far easier to get the developers to fix the iron sights depth in game then no squinting is required.You seem to think it would be easier to get every game company(HUNDREDS of them) to make special patches to fix each game VS NVidia coming up with a single solution to fix everything in one shot? I simply can not agree with that idea at all. Sorry.



[quote name='chiz' date='26 March 2011 - 05:13 PM' timestamp='1301159623' post='1213552']

Yeah I've seen it brought up before in the past and I think its a terrible idea/implementation as well. Not only are you required to mirror and mime your mouse clicks to eye squinting, you ultimately end up with a 2D image in a single eye that largely defeats the purpose of S3D to begin with. I've gone over the "realism" argument as well and I think the overwhelming majority of 3D or 2D users would agree that having to close an eye each time they aimed down sight would become a tedious chore.You seem like you may have an understanding of the realism. If you do the following is for everyone who doesn't. If you don't this will help you to.

In Real Life when a Marksman aims it is actually Monoscopic. He/She only sees in Stereoscopic/3D when moving through their environment with both eyes open. When a Marksman brings up their gun to shoot they use a single eye to aim with the sights. It doesn't matter weather they decide to close one eye or not. Their brain simply allows one eye to dominate and their vision becomes Monoscopic even in Real Life. If they do actually squint this is only to help the brain let the aiming eye dominate. For those that are able to keep their 2nd eye open. This really only helps with peripheral and not with 3D perception. I guess closing one eye every time you shoot while gaming may be annoying to some. It does replicate real life for some people. Others like myself can actually keep both eyes open while shooting and it is less distracting ingame. Either way it would be nice to have this feature as an OPTION for those who want to use it or at least experiment with it. Honestly I hate being told what "TO" and "NOT TO" do. NVidia's current approach is very frustrating for many users who know what they are doing but have their hands tied.



[quote name='chiz' date='26 March 2011 - 05:13 PM' timestamp='1301159623' post='1213552']

wouldn't you get that annoying crosshair/ironsight rendered in only a single eye this way?Like I said above. This has always been happening. Most just don't notice it. Also, I guess you don't know that the military has been using monocular aiming sights for quite a while. Here is one of many great examples. Link The key to aiming with this system is to have the sight over the users dominant eye. This was highlighted in the movie Firebirds where the star pilot was forced to switch his brains eye dominance to match the Helmet's aiming sight because they did not manufacture the helmet with it on the other side. He drove around in a jeep with some underwear covering one eye and also holding a Periscope on the other. It was supposed to be funny and it was. lol. Anyway, with iZ3D implementation we can pick our dominant eye and don't have to ware underwear on our heads if we don't want to.



My personal standing on the issue is IMPLEMENT IT! The user should be allowed to chose weather or not to use a feature. Decisions like this should not be chosen for them. Especially when no alternative solution is offered.



I think I understand NVidias standing. They want all featured "Features" to be "Foolproof". If everything is not foolproof, some "Fool" will use the feature incorrectly or simply not like it and complain or give a bad review. Time and Time Again, NVidia seems to chose the cautious approach. They never want to lose face by admitting a failure or lack of something. I understand this. I also understand that all the Hardcore 3D users aren't babes and deserve more control over their 3D experience. Locking everything is actually making NVidia lose face with the Hardcore crowd. I also believe the Hardcore crowd are the type more likely to adopt things like 3D Vision in the first place. Seems like they are shooting themselves in the foot with their core consumer group over and over again to be honest. /wallbash.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':wallbash:' />



Well that's my 2 cents and a $1.50 extra tacked on. lol

PS, my goal isn't not to offend anyone. I just am stating how I see the situation. /smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':smile:' />

Edit: +1 NVidia for at least looking at the feature and telling us about. Damn shame they chose not to use it. /sad.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':sad:' />

Posted 03/26/2011 09:51 PM   
chiz,
The other OpenGL title that would be interesting in S3D would be [u]Amnesia: The Dark Descent[/u] since it has reached all but AAA status since its inception in the retail market. Since you do a lot of interacting with the environment in this game, 3D would've been huge.

The only hope I see for OpenGL 3D Vision here is if the GLDirect owner decides he wants to make a modern version. The implementation here will almost always be in the past tense too, since about 98% of modern games are not and will not be using OpenGL. So any ability to actually play 3D in OpenGL will be, largely, for nostalgic purposes.

Best,
photios
chiz,

The other OpenGL title that would be interesting in S3D would be Amnesia: The Dark Descent since it has reached all but AAA status since its inception in the retail market. Since you do a lot of interacting with the environment in this game, 3D would've been huge.



The only hope I see for OpenGL 3D Vision here is if the GLDirect owner decides he wants to make a modern version. The implementation here will almost always be in the past tense too, since about 98% of modern games are not and will not be using OpenGL. So any ability to actually play 3D in OpenGL will be, largely, for nostalgic purposes.



Best,

photios

Posted 03/26/2011 10:28 PM   
There's certainly nothing wrong with the left\right shift feature, after all IZ3D wouldn't implement it if it wasn't a good idea and it didn't serve its intended purpose. At this point their feature set is kicking Nvidia's ass.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think that any good feature should be completely off the table. But I just don't think it should take priority over other more necessary changes. It makes a good short term solution to the problem of iron sights at wrong depth. But there must be another way, and Nvidia has to find it.

These are problems that have been present in Nvidia's 3D implementation for at least ten years. It's simply a problem of Nvidia trying to craft 3D AROUND existing graphics technologies. And they haven't figured it out yet. I'm still trying to figure out why. They had ten goddamned years to fix it.

I wish, and it's only a wish, that these guys could come down here and see this thread.
There's certainly nothing wrong with the left\right shift feature, after all IZ3D wouldn't implement it if it wasn't a good idea and it didn't serve its intended purpose. At this point their feature set is kicking Nvidia's ass.



Don't get me wrong, I don't think that any good feature should be completely off the table. But I just don't think it should take priority over other more necessary changes. It makes a good short term solution to the problem of iron sights at wrong depth. But there must be another way, and Nvidia has to find it.



These are problems that have been present in Nvidia's 3D implementation for at least ten years. It's simply a problem of Nvidia trying to craft 3D AROUND existing graphics technologies. And they haven't figured it out yet. I'm still trying to figure out why. They had ten goddamned years to fix it.



I wish, and it's only a wish, that these guys could come down here and see this thread.

AMD Phenom II X3 720 @ 2.8GHZ
8GB RAM
Mitsubishi Diamond Pro 2070sb @ 2048x1536 @ 85hz
Edimensional glasses and Nvidia 3D Vision

Posted 03/27/2011 05:48 AM   
[quote name='LCountach' date='26 March 2011 - 05:51 PM' timestamp='1301176269' post='1213658']
I guess I will throw in 2 more cents about the Leftshift/RightShift aiming solution iZ3D has offered for 3D pointing/aiming. I see lots of critics but few people that have actually tried it. Ask yourself this. When the normal ingame gunsight/pointer of 99.9% of games renders incorrectly at only screen depth. What is it that you actually see when trying to shoot targets? The answer is 2 gunsights. Unless you concentrate or close one eye you don't actually notice there is only a single gunsight for each eye. Yes that's right, in 99.9% of the games you play. If the user can't disable the ingame gunsight. You end up with a single gunsight for each eye shifted off-center making it inaccurate. You just don't realize it because your brain tricks you into seeing 2 gunsights. Yes that's with NVidias 3D too. Try it for yourself with Nvidia's 3D Vision. Play a 3D Vision game where you can't turn off the ingame gunsight and close one eye at a time. You will see one gunsight for each eye. iZ3D shifting technique doesn't not intentionally render a single gunsight for each eye. This simply happens with stereo rendering of most ingame gunsights with with whatever 3D driver you use. What iZ3D's technique allows you to do is chose one of those two inaccurate ingame sights and turn it into a working accurate sight! I myself have used iZ3D's aiming technique. When using it I keep both eyes open. I simply configure the drivers to use my dominant eye and place that selected gunsight over my target. BAM! Head shot! The trick is to learn to ignore the extra gunsight and aim with a sight that is slightly off-center of the screen. People seem soooo concerned with squinting, one sight per eye, and loss of 3D without understand what actually happens. Something not a single person seems to have caught onto is this. By shifting only eye in 3D the player/user can be made to feel like they are walking sideways. This is because one eye is looking straight and the other is looking slightly off to the side. The stronger you set the separation the stronger the sideways effect feels while moving about ingame. I myself don't find it to distracting. More important than anything else is. Without a working pointer/sight the game may become virtually unplayable in 3D. I would chose a working game with a little bit of inconvenience over not being able to play it at all.[/quote]
Actually in 99.9% of games that render crosshair/cursor at screen depth I can compensate by using low depth and high convergence settings so that everything lines up just fine as the crosshair/sites will still be at screen depth but everything you aim at will be behind that, and anything between the crosshair/ironsight will feel like they are pop-out. This is not ideal as it greatly limits the sense of depth in a scene, but it is still vastly superior to having multiple crosshair or having to constantly squint or stare at multiple crosshair/cursors, imo.

Also, if you were trying to garner support with your description of iZ3D's implementation I'm not sure you succeeded, as I don't think vertigo is really on the list of features people are looking for when checking out 3D Vision.

[quote name='LCountach' date='26 March 2011 - 05:51 PM' timestamp='1301176269' post='1213658']
You seem to think it would be easier to get every game company(HUNDREDS of them) to make special patches to fix each game VS NVidia coming up with a single solution to fix everything in one shot? I simply can not agree with that idea at all. Sorry.[/quote]
Again this is a bit of a generalization and oversimplification of the problem, as not everyone is going to be happy with your proposed solution. Compared to flawless 3D implemention where everything is rendered at the proper depth for both eyes, I think everyone can agree this is the best S3D implementation. Personally, I know for a fact if it came down to squinting to aim with 3D Vision.... or just playing in 2D, I'd just play the game in 2D or not play it all in favor or a game that played better in S3D.


[quote name='LCountach' date='26 March 2011 - 05:51 PM' timestamp='1301176269' post='1213658']
You seem like you may have an understanding of the realism. If you do the following is for everyone who doesn't. If you don't this will help you to.
In Real Life when a Marksman aims it is actually Monoscopic. He/She only sees in Stereoscopic/3D when moving through their environment with both eyes open. When a Marksman brings up their gun to shoot they use a single eye to aim with the sights. It doesn't matter weather they decide to close one eye or not. Their brain simply allows one eye to dominate and their vision becomes Monoscopic even in Real Life. If they do actually squint this is only to help the brain let the aiming eye dominate. For those that are able to keep their 2nd eye open. This really only helps with peripheral and not with 3D perception. I guess closing one eye every time you shoot while gaming may be annoying to some. It does replicate real life for some people. Others like myself can actually keep both eyes open while shooting and it is less distracting ingame. Either way it would be nice to have this feature as an OPTION for those who want to use it or at least experiment with it. Honestly I hate being told what "TO" and "NOT TO" do. NVidia's current approach is very frustrating for many users who know what they are doing but have their hands tied.[/quote]
Again, I fully understand the "realism" argument of real-life marksmen aiming with one eye, but as AndrewF and many others have also countered, you don't even close one eye even when S3D is disabled and most gamers have never fired a gun in their lives, so this argument is a moot point. Perhaps you are unfamiliar with a term used for entertainment and media called suspension of disbelief, if not this link can perhaps help you understand better: http://www.mediacollege.com/glossary/s/suspension-of-disbelief.html

Basically, "realism" in entertainment should never trump game dynamics, fluidity, or fun-factor by over-emphasizing the mundane or making the trivial overly tedious. Having to close one eye constantly to mirror your in-game actions makes gaming and aiming a chore, plain and simple, not to mention the end result completely defeats the point of stereo 3D to begin with because you are no longer viewing a S3D image with both eyes, you're actually seeing a flat 2D image with just a single eye. Again, this is a campy workaround, not a solution imo.

Just as much as you "hate being told what "TO" and "NOT TO" do", I hate the attitude of those who insist their non-optimal, unpopular workarounds are more important and deserve more attention than the flawless support and implemention we know is possible without any such workarounds. Given how many hit games are out there now without proper profiles, I'd say those games are more deserving of Nvidia's attention so that EVERYONE can enjoy their 3D Vision with both eyes wide open, not with one shut half the time each time they do something as simple as aiming.

A better solution imo would be the one proposed a few days ago with multiple depth/convergence presets that could be bound to different hotkeys. Then you could configure 2 different depth/convergence settings so that if you did need to aim down ironsights or a scope, you could configure proper convergence/depth for that view and then seamlessly toggle that setting by binding it to the same button as your ADS (Aim Down Sights) button, so RMB for example would change to Preset 2 and also bring up Aim Down Sight mode simultaneously, and ofc, not have to squint or close one eye at any point to avoid problems with stereo crosstalk.

[quote name='LCountach' date='26 March 2011 - 05:51 PM' timestamp='1301176269' post='1213658']
Like I said above. This has always been happening. Most just don't notice it. Also, I guess you don't know that the military has been using monocular aiming sights for quite a while. Here is one of many great examples. [url="http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Apache_Helicopter_Helmet_&_Display_System_-_GPN-2000-001550.jpg"]Link[/url] The key to aiming with this system is to have the sight over the users dominant eye. This was highlighted in the movie [url="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0099575/"]Firebirds[/url] where the star pilot was forced to switch his brains eye dominance to match the Helmet's aiming sight because they did not manufacture the helmet with it on the other side. He drove around in a jeep with some underwear covering one eye and also holding a Periscope on the other. It was supposed to be funny and it was. lol. Anyway, with iZ3D implementation we can pick our dominant eye and don't have to ware underwear on our heads if we don't want to.[/quote]
The main difference here though is that you don't see any crosshair with the other eye, and certainly not one that's incorrectly placed relative to the target. If you could completely disable the crosshair in your non-dominant eye and also choose your offset then this would be a more viable solution.

[quote name='LCountach' date='26 March 2011 - 05:51 PM' timestamp='1301176269' post='1213658']
My personal standing on the issue is IMPLEMENT IT! The user should be allowed to chose weather or not to use a feature. Decisions like this should not be chosen for them. Especially when no alternative solution is offered.[/quote]
And my personal standing on the issue is implement it if its not too difficult or doesn't interfere with development of more important features or game compatibility efforts. The user has the discretion of deciding if this feature is important enough at the time of purchase, so any decision was made by the user when they bought the kit. Not everyone is going to get everything they want and Nvidia absolutely has the discretion of deciding what features to implement or not based on what they think will result in the best end-user experience for their product. If you don't think so, then you'll NEVER be satisfied with any product until you reset your expectations to ones based in realism (sorry couldn't resist the double entendre).

[quote name='LCountach' date='26 March 2011 - 05:51 PM' timestamp='1301176269' post='1213658']
I think I understand NVidias standing. They want all featured "Features" to be "Foolproof". If everything is not foolproof, some "Fool" will use the feature incorrectly or simply not like it and complain or give a bad review. Time and Time Again, NVidia seems to chose the cautious approach. They never want to lose face by admitting a failure or lack of something. I understand this. I also understand that all the Hardcore 3D users aren't babes and deserve more control over their 3D experience. Locking everything is actually making NVidia lose face with the Hardcore crowd. I also believe the Hardcore crowd are the type more likely to adopt things like 3D Vision in the first place. Seems like they are shooting themselves in the foot with their core consumer group over and over again to be honest. /wallbash.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':wallbash:' />

Well that's my 2 cents and a $1.50 extra tacked on. lol
PS, my goal isn't not to offend anyone. I just am stating how I see the situation. /smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':smile:' />
Edit: +1 NVidia for at least looking at the feature and telling us about. Damn shame they chose not to use it. /sad.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':sad:' />
[/quote]
Yes they certainly look to produce a "polished" product with flawless support when possible because that generally produces the best results. What this means is working with the developers during development to make sure 3D Vision is seamlessly implemented. We've seen the results of their efforts in games that are "3D Vision Ready" and I don't think anyone, even you, would argue your workaround deserves more attention from Nvidia than working with developers in the latest and greatest games. When it works, its incredible, the problem isn't with Nvidia's workflow and implementation, its just that there's not enough games coming out with this kind of support. Now, if given the choice would you want Nvidia to work on looking backward and making old games look mediocre in 3D Vision? Or would prefer they look forward and focus on getting current and future titles working well with 3D Vision? Obviously they are not doing a great job atm of working on new releases, so I'd certainly want them to refocus on that first before looking at non-optimal workarounds.
[quote name='LCountach' date='26 March 2011 - 05:51 PM' timestamp='1301176269' post='1213658']

I guess I will throw in 2 more cents about the Leftshift/RightShift aiming solution iZ3D has offered for 3D pointing/aiming. I see lots of critics but few people that have actually tried it. Ask yourself this. When the normal ingame gunsight/pointer of 99.9% of games renders incorrectly at only screen depth. What is it that you actually see when trying to shoot targets? The answer is 2 gunsights. Unless you concentrate or close one eye you don't actually notice there is only a single gunsight for each eye. Yes that's right, in 99.9% of the games you play. If the user can't disable the ingame gunsight. You end up with a single gunsight for each eye shifted off-center making it inaccurate. You just don't realize it because your brain tricks you into seeing 2 gunsights. Yes that's with NVidias 3D too. Try it for yourself with Nvidia's 3D Vision. Play a 3D Vision game where you can't turn off the ingame gunsight and close one eye at a time. You will see one gunsight for each eye. iZ3D shifting technique doesn't not intentionally render a single gunsight for each eye. This simply happens with stereo rendering of most ingame gunsights with with whatever 3D driver you use. What iZ3D's technique allows you to do is chose one of those two inaccurate ingame sights and turn it into a working accurate sight! I myself have used iZ3D's aiming technique. When using it I keep both eyes open. I simply configure the drivers to use my dominant eye and place that selected gunsight over my target. BAM! Head shot! The trick is to learn to ignore the extra gunsight and aim with a sight that is slightly off-center of the screen. People seem soooo concerned with squinting, one sight per eye, and loss of 3D without understand what actually happens. Something not a single person seems to have caught onto is this. By shifting only eye in 3D the player/user can be made to feel like they are walking sideways. This is because one eye is looking straight and the other is looking slightly off to the side. The stronger you set the separation the stronger the sideways effect feels while moving about ingame. I myself don't find it to distracting. More important than anything else is. Without a working pointer/sight the game may become virtually unplayable in 3D. I would chose a working game with a little bit of inconvenience over not being able to play it at all.

Actually in 99.9% of games that render crosshair/cursor at screen depth I can compensate by using low depth and high convergence settings so that everything lines up just fine as the crosshair/sites will still be at screen depth but everything you aim at will be behind that, and anything between the crosshair/ironsight will feel like they are pop-out. This is not ideal as it greatly limits the sense of depth in a scene, but it is still vastly superior to having multiple crosshair or having to constantly squint or stare at multiple crosshair/cursors, imo.



Also, if you were trying to garner support with your description of iZ3D's implementation I'm not sure you succeeded, as I don't think vertigo is really on the list of features people are looking for when checking out 3D Vision.



[quote name='LCountach' date='26 March 2011 - 05:51 PM' timestamp='1301176269' post='1213658']

You seem to think it would be easier to get every game company(HUNDREDS of them) to make special patches to fix each game VS NVidia coming up with a single solution to fix everything in one shot? I simply can not agree with that idea at all. Sorry.

Again this is a bit of a generalization and oversimplification of the problem, as not everyone is going to be happy with your proposed solution. Compared to flawless 3D implemention where everything is rendered at the proper depth for both eyes, I think everyone can agree this is the best S3D implementation. Personally, I know for a fact if it came down to squinting to aim with 3D Vision.... or just playing in 2D, I'd just play the game in 2D or not play it all in favor or a game that played better in S3D.





[quote name='LCountach' date='26 March 2011 - 05:51 PM' timestamp='1301176269' post='1213658']

You seem like you may have an understanding of the realism. If you do the following is for everyone who doesn't. If you don't this will help you to.

In Real Life when a Marksman aims it is actually Monoscopic. He/She only sees in Stereoscopic/3D when moving through their environment with both eyes open. When a Marksman brings up their gun to shoot they use a single eye to aim with the sights. It doesn't matter weather they decide to close one eye or not. Their brain simply allows one eye to dominate and their vision becomes Monoscopic even in Real Life. If they do actually squint this is only to help the brain let the aiming eye dominate. For those that are able to keep their 2nd eye open. This really only helps with peripheral and not with 3D perception. I guess closing one eye every time you shoot while gaming may be annoying to some. It does replicate real life for some people. Others like myself can actually keep both eyes open while shooting and it is less distracting ingame. Either way it would be nice to have this feature as an OPTION for those who want to use it or at least experiment with it. Honestly I hate being told what "TO" and "NOT TO" do. NVidia's current approach is very frustrating for many users who know what they are doing but have their hands tied.

Again, I fully understand the "realism" argument of real-life marksmen aiming with one eye, but as AndrewF and many others have also countered, you don't even close one eye even when S3D is disabled and most gamers have never fired a gun in their lives, so this argument is a moot point. Perhaps you are unfamiliar with a term used for entertainment and media called suspension of disbelief, if not this link can perhaps help you understand better: http://www.mediacollege.com/glossary/s/suspension-of-disbelief.html



Basically, "realism" in entertainment should never trump game dynamics, fluidity, or fun-factor by over-emphasizing the mundane or making the trivial overly tedious. Having to close one eye constantly to mirror your in-game actions makes gaming and aiming a chore, plain and simple, not to mention the end result completely defeats the point of stereo 3D to begin with because you are no longer viewing a S3D image with both eyes, you're actually seeing a flat 2D image with just a single eye. Again, this is a campy workaround, not a solution imo.



Just as much as you "hate being told what "TO" and "NOT TO" do", I hate the attitude of those who insist their non-optimal, unpopular workarounds are more important and deserve more attention than the flawless support and implemention we know is possible without any such workarounds. Given how many hit games are out there now without proper profiles, I'd say those games are more deserving of Nvidia's attention so that EVERYONE can enjoy their 3D Vision with both eyes wide open, not with one shut half the time each time they do something as simple as aiming.



A better solution imo would be the one proposed a few days ago with multiple depth/convergence presets that could be bound to different hotkeys. Then you could configure 2 different depth/convergence settings so that if you did need to aim down ironsights or a scope, you could configure proper convergence/depth for that view and then seamlessly toggle that setting by binding it to the same button as your ADS (Aim Down Sights) button, so RMB for example would change to Preset 2 and also bring up Aim Down Sight mode simultaneously, and ofc, not have to squint or close one eye at any point to avoid problems with stereo crosstalk.



[quote name='LCountach' date='26 March 2011 - 05:51 PM' timestamp='1301176269' post='1213658']

Like I said above. This has always been happening. Most just don't notice it. Also, I guess you don't know that the military has been using monocular aiming sights for quite a while. Here is one of many great examples. Link The key to aiming with this system is to have the sight over the users dominant eye. This was highlighted in the movie Firebirds where the star pilot was forced to switch his brains eye dominance to match the Helmet's aiming sight because they did not manufacture the helmet with it on the other side. He drove around in a jeep with some underwear covering one eye and also holding a Periscope on the other. It was supposed to be funny and it was. lol. Anyway, with iZ3D implementation we can pick our dominant eye and don't have to ware underwear on our heads if we don't want to.

The main difference here though is that you don't see any crosshair with the other eye, and certainly not one that's incorrectly placed relative to the target. If you could completely disable the crosshair in your non-dominant eye and also choose your offset then this would be a more viable solution.



[quote name='LCountach' date='26 March 2011 - 05:51 PM' timestamp='1301176269' post='1213658']

My personal standing on the issue is IMPLEMENT IT! The user should be allowed to chose weather or not to use a feature. Decisions like this should not be chosen for them. Especially when no alternative solution is offered.

And my personal standing on the issue is implement it if its not too difficult or doesn't interfere with development of more important features or game compatibility efforts. The user has the discretion of deciding if this feature is important enough at the time of purchase, so any decision was made by the user when they bought the kit. Not everyone is going to get everything they want and Nvidia absolutely has the discretion of deciding what features to implement or not based on what they think will result in the best end-user experience for their product. If you don't think so, then you'll NEVER be satisfied with any product until you reset your expectations to ones based in realism (sorry couldn't resist the double entendre).



[quote name='LCountach' date='26 March 2011 - 05:51 PM' timestamp='1301176269' post='1213658']

I think I understand NVidias standing. They want all featured "Features" to be "Foolproof". If everything is not foolproof, some "Fool" will use the feature incorrectly or simply not like it and complain or give a bad review. Time and Time Again, NVidia seems to chose the cautious approach. They never want to lose face by admitting a failure or lack of something. I understand this. I also understand that all the Hardcore 3D users aren't babes and deserve more control over their 3D experience. Locking everything is actually making NVidia lose face with the Hardcore crowd. I also believe the Hardcore crowd are the type more likely to adopt things like 3D Vision in the first place. Seems like they are shooting themselves in the foot with their core consumer group over and over again to be honest. /wallbash.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':wallbash:' />



Well that's my 2 cents and a $1.50 extra tacked on. lol

PS, my goal isn't not to offend anyone. I just am stating how I see the situation. /smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':smile:' />

Edit: +1 NVidia for at least looking at the feature and telling us about. Damn shame they chose not to use it. /sad.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':sad:' />



Yes they certainly look to produce a "polished" product with flawless support when possible because that generally produces the best results. What this means is working with the developers during development to make sure 3D Vision is seamlessly implemented. We've seen the results of their efforts in games that are "3D Vision Ready" and I don't think anyone, even you, would argue your workaround deserves more attention from Nvidia than working with developers in the latest and greatest games. When it works, its incredible, the problem isn't with Nvidia's workflow and implementation, its just that there's not enough games coming out with this kind of support. Now, if given the choice would you want Nvidia to work on looking backward and making old games look mediocre in 3D Vision? Or would prefer they look forward and focus on getting current and future titles working well with 3D Vision? Obviously they are not doing a great job atm of working on new releases, so I'd certainly want them to refocus on that first before looking at non-optimal workarounds.

-=HeliX=- Mod 3DV Game Fixes
My 3D Vision Games List Ratings

Intel Core i7 5930K @4.5GHz | Gigabyte X99 Gaming 5 | Win10 x64 Pro | Corsair H105
Nvidia GeForce Titan X SLI Hybrid | ROG Swift PG278Q 144Hz + 3D Vision/G-Sync | 32GB Adata DDR4 2666
Intel Samsung 950Pro SSD | Samsung EVO 4x1 RAID 0 |
Yamaha VX-677 A/V Receiver | Polk Audio RM6880 7.1 | LG Blu-Ray
Auzen X-Fi HT HD | Logitech G710/G502/G27 | Corsair Air 540 | EVGA P2-1200W

Posted 03/28/2011 09:57 PM   
  8 / 9    
Scroll To Top