Pretty much, I have no complaints about depth buffer besides breaking existing patches. Though people used my thread as a platform to protest depth buffer/fake 3D I have no personal problem with it. Some games work with it decently / some don't.
The facts remain that Nvidia can't patch games. Legally or realistically.
Though tbh while I have no problem with depth buffer/fake 3D. I would rather time going into contacting Tridef about granting necessary improvements in order for 3D vision to function to better on the software [frame packed/ sli]
-----------------------------
Comparing 3D Vision / Oculus VR
is apples / oranges.
Oculus can turn out to be next big thing. I've pre-ordered DK2 and own DK1[covered in dust]. But my expectations are realistic. Certain games just aren't meant for it. Games that don't have developer integration are extremely unlikely to ever function at a playable level and this is practically limited to First person games. There are MANY games just not meant for it. Most genre's of games are not meant for VR. So basically it might be great but you are giving up on ALOT of games/genres.
If 3D were to "die" I would be a bit stranded. Since if you were to ask me which games off the top of my head I am most excited for I'd easily say Dragon Age: Inquistion/ Mass Effect[?]/ Witcher 3. There is just no room for VR in those games.
Pretty much, I have no complaints about depth buffer besides breaking existing patches. Though people used my thread as a platform to protest depth buffer/fake 3D I have no personal problem with it. Some games work with it decently / some don't.
The facts remain that Nvidia can't patch games. Legally or realistically.
Though tbh while I have no problem with depth buffer/fake 3D. I would rather time going into contacting Tridef about granting necessary improvements in order for 3D vision to function to better on the software [frame packed/ sli]
-----------------------------
Comparing 3D Vision / Oculus VR
is apples / oranges.
Oculus can turn out to be next big thing. I've pre-ordered DK2 and own DK1[covered in dust]. But my expectations are realistic. Certain games just aren't meant for it. Games that don't have developer integration are extremely unlikely to ever function at a playable level and this is practically limited to First person games. There are MANY games just not meant for it. Most genre's of games are not meant for VR. So basically it might be great but you are giving up on ALOT of games/genres.
If 3D were to "die" I would be a bit stranded. Since if you were to ask me which games off the top of my head I am most excited for I'd easily say Dragon Age: Inquistion/ Mass Effect[?]/ Witcher 3. There is just no room for VR in those games.
Co-founder of helixmod.blog.com
If you like one of my helixmod patches and want to donate. Can send to me through paypal - eqzitara@yahoo.com
[quote="Conan481"]BTW, I also have Tridef. Why is Tridef SO MUCH BETTER and offers REAL 3D?[/quote]
I find tridef terrible in most of the games I tried it with, its slow, doesn't support NVidia SLI, a lot of the games have broken features (2D gun models in MW3 seriously???!!!)and the Power mode is just the same fake 3D as we are seeing now in some recent NVidia drivers.
Most of the games I tried it with are the ones that are broken for NVidia 3D Vision, and were also just as broken in Tridef, or Tridef couldn't/wouldn't launch them in 3D at all. I assume its different if you have an ATI card, but seeing as most of us here are NVidia users it seems beside the point...
I would rather play 2D than be forced to rely on Tridef. The only title I played for any length of time was Rift, and it ran at barely playable framerates with my SLI 670 setup.
Conan481 said:BTW, I also have Tridef. Why is Tridef SO MUCH BETTER and offers REAL 3D?
I find tridef terrible in most of the games I tried it with, its slow, doesn't support NVidia SLI, a lot of the games have broken features (2D gun models in MW3 seriously???!!!)and the Power mode is just the same fake 3D as we are seeing now in some recent NVidia drivers.
Most of the games I tried it with are the ones that are broken for NVidia 3D Vision, and were also just as broken in Tridef, or Tridef couldn't/wouldn't launch them in 3D at all. I assume its different if you have an ATI card, but seeing as most of us here are NVidia users it seems beside the point...
I would rather play 2D than be forced to rely on Tridef. The only title I played for any length of time was Rift, and it ran at barely playable framerates with my SLI 670 setup.
I understand distributing actual shader code fixes would have legal ramifications, but what about the driver having generic "on the fly" fixes ala TriDef and lua acripts. After all, tridef allows generic style fixes via profiles.
I understand distributing actual shader code fixes would have legal ramifications, but what about the driver having generic "on the fly" fixes ala TriDef and lua acripts. After all, tridef allows generic style fixes via profiles.
[quote="Foulplay99"][quote="Conan481"]Why no 3D vision Surround support!? I spent all this money on Nvidia hardware and 3D vision surround at this time is not supported?
When do you expect a proper 3D fixes that don't rely on layering 2D planes to create a "Fake 3D" effect.
Steve, why don't you donwnload Helix Bioshock Infinite fix and compare that to your "3D solution" How can one person (though hard work) create something that is Infinitely (sorry for the pun) better then what you guys, as a multi billion dollar company are doing?
Please, we want REAL 3D support.[/quote]
I highly suspect its because a company aren't legally authorised to distribute modified code for another companies game, so whilst its fine for a private individual to modify and distribute a 3D Vision fix for a specific game, NVidia are possibly not able to do the same and are restricted to actions purely within their drivers - which is far more restrictive.
@ Steve.K - thanks for the added functionality, I appreciate it![/quote]
You guys keep mentioning legality, but nobody can explain how Tridef is operating as a business. How could they operate an illegal business because they are definitely modifying game code.
BTW, Tridef at this point has vastly superior 3D then Nvidia (non community fixed games) I played almost all of AC4 with Tridef and it's REAL 3D and looks good. It's not perfect (some reflections, and post processing effects broken) but it works. Still, when the community fixes a game, it's best played on a 3D vision setup. That, and surround is the only reason I'm still thinking of buying next gen NVidia cards, but if they don't get on DX11 soon, then 3D vision is truly dead forever anyway. We have Flugan working on something that looks promising and maybe Helix will come back one day....
I think we all realize that 3D is a niche at this point, but how much can it really cost to have 3D implemented? We're not talking millions of dollars and hundreds of people here. I remember days when Helix would have a game fix in less then a couple of days, and thats ONE PERSON (a genius). Also, this little niche of 3D vision users spends A LOT of money on Nvidia hardware.
I don't think it's unreasonable that at the very minimum Nvidia sponsored games should have 3D Support.
@Steve, nobody here is against you BTW, and we know you just work for a HUGE company, but maybe you could just pass on our concerns to people that make the decisions or send them a link to this thread.
thanks.
Conan481 said:Why no 3D vision Surround support!? I spent all this money on Nvidia hardware and 3D vision surround at this time is not supported?
When do you expect a proper 3D fixes that don't rely on layering 2D planes to create a "Fake 3D" effect.
Steve, why don't you donwnload Helix Bioshock Infinite fix and compare that to your "3D solution" How can one person (though hard work) create something that is Infinitely (sorry for the pun) better then what you guys, as a multi billion dollar company are doing?
Please, we want REAL 3D support.
I highly suspect its because a company aren't legally authorised to distribute modified code for another companies game, so whilst its fine for a private individual to modify and distribute a 3D Vision fix for a specific game, NVidia are possibly not able to do the same and are restricted to actions purely within their drivers - which is far more restrictive.
@ Steve.K - thanks for the added functionality, I appreciate it!
You guys keep mentioning legality, but nobody can explain how Tridef is operating as a business. How could they operate an illegal business because they are definitely modifying game code.
BTW, Tridef at this point has vastly superior 3D then Nvidia (non community fixed games) I played almost all of AC4 with Tridef and it's REAL 3D and looks good. It's not perfect (some reflections, and post processing effects broken) but it works. Still, when the community fixes a game, it's best played on a 3D vision setup. That, and surround is the only reason I'm still thinking of buying next gen NVidia cards, but if they don't get on DX11 soon, then 3D vision is truly dead forever anyway. We have Flugan working on something that looks promising and maybe Helix will come back one day....
I think we all realize that 3D is a niche at this point, but how much can it really cost to have 3D implemented? We're not talking millions of dollars and hundreds of people here. I remember days when Helix would have a game fix in less then a couple of days, and thats ONE PERSON (a genius). Also, this little niche of 3D vision users spends A LOT of money on Nvidia hardware.
I don't think it's unreasonable that at the very minimum Nvidia sponsored games should have 3D Support.
@Steve, nobody here is against you BTW, and we know you just work for a HUGE company, but maybe you could just pass on our concerns to people that make the decisions or send them a link to this thread.
thanks.
I played Bioshock Infinite in Tridef as well with the custom profile from DHR, and it was great at the time. Yeah performance is not the greatest and no SLI, but I was getting very playable framerates for every game I tried.
I played Bioshock Infinite in Tridef as well with the custom profile from DHR, and it was great at the time. Yeah performance is not the greatest and no SLI, but I was getting very playable framerates for every game I tried.
Though I am also weary of Tridef. It auto disables all functions/shaders that are incompatible.
Like it could be subtle, it could disable shadows, it could remove a whole friggin ocean.
I've heard stories where you can enable something like tessellation and game will say enabled but Tridef just doesnt enable it. Its literally impossible to know whats being disabled as well.
Its definetly illegal to do what we do and manually make changes to game like helixmod [when you are doing for profit]
Tridef isn't illegal but its mainly disabling;/automatic and has slight improvements over 3D vision in *some* games. TBH alot of you are comparing 3D Vision games that don't work to tridef games that work. There is a whole bucket of games that are vice versa and that is not included community mods.
---------------
Saying Tridef is better then 3D vision after comparing 1-2 games is quite silly tbh. Though I do agree we could greatly benefit from having Tridef support. I think the problem is you guys are actively looking for games that don't work and comparing instead of looking that games that "do" work.
But again, yes. We could definetly better from having full Tridef support. I really don't know why nvidia never contacted them since they'd probably do it for free since we have to pay for software.
Though I am also weary of Tridef. It auto disables all functions/shaders that are incompatible.
Like it could be subtle, it could disable shadows, it could remove a whole friggin ocean.
I've heard stories where you can enable something like tessellation and game will say enabled but Tridef just doesnt enable it. Its literally impossible to know whats being disabled as well.
Its definetly illegal to do what we do and manually make changes to game like helixmod [when you are doing for profit]
Tridef isn't illegal but its mainly disabling;/automatic and has slight improvements over 3D vision in *some* games. TBH alot of you are comparing 3D Vision games that don't work to tridef games that work. There is a whole bucket of games that are vice versa and that is not included community mods.
---------------
Saying Tridef is better then 3D vision after comparing 1-2 games is quite silly tbh. Though I do agree we could greatly benefit from having Tridef support. I think the problem is you guys are actively looking for games that don't work and comparing instead of looking that games that "do" work.
But again, yes. We could definetly better from having full Tridef support. I really don't know why nvidia never contacted them since they'd probably do it for free since we have to pay for software.
Co-founder of helixmod.blog.com
If you like one of my helixmod patches and want to donate. Can send to me through paypal - eqzitara@yahoo.com
[quote="eqzitara"]The facts remain that Nvidia can't patch games. Legally or realistically.
[/quote]I don't think it's that black & white. For starters, the letter of the law and the spirit of the law are two different things, and as has been discussed above, the spirit of the law often holds more weight in matters like this (eg. screenshots, twitch.tv).
But even if, for argument's sake, nvidia is 100% unable to patch games for legal reasons, what's to stop them from providing those patches to the developers themselves, so that the devs can include it themselves in the next Steam patch of their game? My guess is: nothing. Nvidia probably already do this from time to time to help games get optimised for with things like physX and TXAA.
[quote="eqzitara"]But again, yes. We could definetly better from having full Tridef support. I really don't know why nvidia never contacted them since they'd probably do it for free since we have to pay for software.[/quote] good question! Seems like a missed opportunity for both companies.
eqzitara said:The facts remain that Nvidia can't patch games. Legally or realistically.
I don't think it's that black & white. For starters, the letter of the law and the spirit of the law are two different things, and as has been discussed above, the spirit of the law often holds more weight in matters like this (eg. screenshots, twitch.tv).
But even if, for argument's sake, nvidia is 100% unable to patch games for legal reasons, what's to stop them from providing those patches to the developers themselves, so that the devs can include it themselves in the next Steam patch of their game? My guess is: nothing. Nvidia probably already do this from time to time to help games get optimised for with things like physX and TXAA.
eqzitara said:But again, yes. We could definetly better from having full Tridef support. I really don't know why nvidia never contacted them since they'd probably do it for free since we have to pay for software.
good question! Seems like a missed opportunity for both companies.
[quote="eqzitara"]Pretty much, I have no complaints about depth buffer besides breaking existing patches. Though people used my thread as a platform to protest depth buffer/fake 3D I have no personal problem with it. Some games work with it decently / some don't.
The facts remain that Nvidia can't patch games. Legally or realistically.
Though tbh while I have no problem with depth buffer/fake 3D. I would rather time going into contacting Tridef about granting necessary improvements in order for 3D vision to function to better on the software [frame packed/ sli]
-----------------------------
Comparing 3D Vision / Oculus VR
is apples / oranges.
Oculus can turn out to be next big thing. I've pre-ordered DK2 and own DK1[covered in dust]. But my expectations are realistic. Certain games just aren't meant for it. Games that don't have developer integration are extremely unlikely to ever function at a playable level and this is practically limited to First person games. There are MANY games just not meant for it. Most genre's of games are not meant for VR. So basically it might be great but you are giving up on ALOT of games/genres.
If 3D were to "die" I would be a bit stranded. Since if you were to ask me which games off the top of my head I am most excited for I'd easily say Dragon Age: Inquistion/ Mass Effect[?]/ Witcher 3. There is just no room for VR in those games.[/quote]
Yeah and strategy games like stacraft 2, age of mythology that i played and they look awesome on 3d, No VR room for those games
eqzitara said:Pretty much, I have no complaints about depth buffer besides breaking existing patches. Though people used my thread as a platform to protest depth buffer/fake 3D I have no personal problem with it. Some games work with it decently / some don't.
The facts remain that Nvidia can't patch games. Legally or realistically.
Though tbh while I have no problem with depth buffer/fake 3D. I would rather time going into contacting Tridef about granting necessary improvements in order for 3D vision to function to better on the software [frame packed/ sli]
-----------------------------
Comparing 3D Vision / Oculus VR
is apples / oranges.
Oculus can turn out to be next big thing. I've pre-ordered DK2 and own DK1[covered in dust]. But my expectations are realistic. Certain games just aren't meant for it. Games that don't have developer integration are extremely unlikely to ever function at a playable level and this is practically limited to First person games. There are MANY games just not meant for it. Most genre's of games are not meant for VR. So basically it might be great but you are giving up on ALOT of games/genres.
If 3D were to "die" I would be a bit stranded. Since if you were to ask me which games off the top of my head I am most excited for I'd easily say Dragon Age: Inquistion/ Mass Effect[?]/ Witcher 3. There is just no room for VR in those games.
Yeah and strategy games like stacraft 2, age of mythology that i played and they look awesome on 3d, No VR room for those games
On the comment about raising the default depth level:
I agree with this and was about to make a big post in support of it, but i just realized one major problem with it, which is that you don't want maximum separation to be wider than IPD, a potential pitfall for new users. That said, i think maybe a better solution might be to built a more thorough and educational set up process, with an audio explanation and keeping in mind that a good explanation of how it all works is key since many experts agree that people tend to learn better when they fully understand the concepts being presented and you can build on solid foundations of knowledge. This instead of trying to memorize hazily understood guidelines. This will help them not only learn how 3D works, but depending on the quality of the scene, will demonstrate the real potential of 3D, immediately.
What im picturing is a cool 3D scene with mainly non-moving element which are common objects from the real world like cars and buildings, doors, streets, trees, etc. Like a scene from a city, or to get more interesting, a city street from a zombie apocalypse, ie LEGEND (the movie), or whatever. Then verbal dialogue part of the set-up process (with skipable dialogue) start taking the user through how to set depth and convergence, mentioning how the angle of the eyes makes the difference, ie how your eyes are crossed staring at a butterfly on your nose vs. staring off at a far mountain, and things like how you don't want to go over your IPD, how convergence can change the physical size of things, and how that might be a problem or a good thing depending on your preferences, etc.
Now that i have an understanding of how 3D vision and 3D in general works, i've streamlined how I adjust my 3D with a simple process: First i adjust the depth so objects in the distance match my IPD, then adjust convergence so things in front of me look the right size, done.
Lastly, i wanted to mention one thing related to why i assumed the depth level was so low, which is to reduce headaches. There is a theory out there that suggests that headaches may be caused in part by constant camera convergence shift, rather than just from the vergence/accommodation conflict. This might be due to the fact that your brain is constantly trying to make sense of the dimensions of spaces in your view. I don't know for sure though, but no one gets a headache while looking at my games or game recordings in 3D with 6.25cm of depth separation (all adults). The point is that it could be possible i suppose that 3D discomfort might be related more to improper 3D adjustment for what the brain knows of reality. I know it hurts like hell [or used to, i have 2000+ of 3D now] when i adjusted the convergence.
On the comment about raising the default depth level:
I agree with this and was about to make a big post in support of it, but i just realized one major problem with it, which is that you don't want maximum separation to be wider than IPD, a potential pitfall for new users. That said, i think maybe a better solution might be to built a more thorough and educational set up process, with an audio explanation and keeping in mind that a good explanation of how it all works is key since many experts agree that people tend to learn better when they fully understand the concepts being presented and you can build on solid foundations of knowledge. This instead of trying to memorize hazily understood guidelines. This will help them not only learn how 3D works, but depending on the quality of the scene, will demonstrate the real potential of 3D, immediately.
What im picturing is a cool 3D scene with mainly non-moving element which are common objects from the real world like cars and buildings, doors, streets, trees, etc. Like a scene from a city, or to get more interesting, a city street from a zombie apocalypse, ie LEGEND (the movie), or whatever. Then verbal dialogue part of the set-up process (with skipable dialogue) start taking the user through how to set depth and convergence, mentioning how the angle of the eyes makes the difference, ie how your eyes are crossed staring at a butterfly on your nose vs. staring off at a far mountain, and things like how you don't want to go over your IPD, how convergence can change the physical size of things, and how that might be a problem or a good thing depending on your preferences, etc.
Now that i have an understanding of how 3D vision and 3D in general works, i've streamlined how I adjust my 3D with a simple process: First i adjust the depth so objects in the distance match my IPD, then adjust convergence so things in front of me look the right size, done.
Lastly, i wanted to mention one thing related to why i assumed the depth level was so low, which is to reduce headaches. There is a theory out there that suggests that headaches may be caused in part by constant camera convergence shift, rather than just from the vergence/accommodation conflict. This might be due to the fact that your brain is constantly trying to make sense of the dimensions of spaces in your view. I don't know for sure though, but no one gets a headache while looking at my games or game recordings in 3D with 6.25cm of depth separation (all adults). The point is that it could be possible i suppose that 3D discomfort might be related more to improper 3D adjustment for what the brain knows of reality. I know it hurts like hell [or used to, i have 2000+ of 3D now] when i adjusted the convergence.
I am usually watching from the distance not taking direct part in the discussions but this time i feel i have to say something.
I am happy that Nvidia have some dedicated resources just for a 3d vision but i think it goes to the wrong place. I think that most people prefer 120hz butter smooth graphic over 60hz (per eye) fake 3d. You saying that this mode is not for a "forum" people, so for who is it? Is it for people that don't know 3d to push them away for good? I doubt that they will ask for more of "this".
I think that this resources should be directed to fix one game at a time. Big blockbusters: Watchdogs, then ... then ... then ... .
If someone see a proper 3d game and is blown away by a look of it, but have a low fps, this person will probably invest in top end graphic card, like most of people in this forum. I doubt it will be the case with fake 3d impressions.
[u]IT IS A PROFIT DEAL[/u]!!!!
You are finally doing something with 3d vision, it's fantastic. But please, do it in the right place and we will all benefit from it.
I am usually watching from the distance not taking direct part in the discussions but this time i feel i have to say something.
I am happy that Nvidia have some dedicated resources just for a 3d vision but i think it goes to the wrong place. I think that most people prefer 120hz butter smooth graphic over 60hz (per eye) fake 3d. You saying that this mode is not for a "forum" people, so for who is it? Is it for people that don't know 3d to push them away for good? I doubt that they will ask for more of "this".
I think that this resources should be directed to fix one game at a time. Big blockbusters: Watchdogs, then ... then ... then ... .
If someone see a proper 3d game and is blown away by a look of it, but have a low fps, this person will probably invest in top end graphic card, like most of people in this forum. I doubt it will be the case with fake 3d impressions.
IT IS A PROFIT DEAL!!!!
You are finally doing something with 3d vision, it's fantastic. But please, do it in the right place and we will all benefit from it.
A lot of the negative comments revolve around the assumption that Nvidia as well could "fix" games the way Helix has (and others have) done. I simply don't know about that. I mean, it seems plausible that there might be legal problems with such fixes, on the other hand I'm not convinced those couldn't be avoided or circumvented, if Nvidia really were commited to the cause (but are they?). But, as I said, I don't really know ...
---
Compatibility Mode FOR ME is definitely preferable over 2D in AC4/BF, and probably would be so in ACIII. So I would appreciate it if anyone totally disliking it just speaks for himself rather than claiming to speak for every 3d enthusiast.
That said, since I already played ACIII 2 times (in "broken 3D"..), at the moment I will rather wait some more for a REAL fix before trying it in "fake" mode. Because I actually agree with all those people pointing out that "fake 3D" is much inferior to the real thing.
And I also doubt that "fake 3D" is suitable to impress anyone not yet convinced of 3D Vision's qualities.
Nonetheless - Nvidia doing something with regard to 3D is still better than doing nothing (imo).
A lot of the negative comments revolve around the assumption that Nvidia as well could "fix" games the way Helix has (and others have) done. I simply don't know about that. I mean, it seems plausible that there might be legal problems with such fixes, on the other hand I'm not convinced those couldn't be avoided or circumvented, if Nvidia really were commited to the cause (but are they?). But, as I said, I don't really know ...
---
Compatibility Mode FOR ME is definitely preferable over 2D in AC4/BF, and probably would be so in ACIII. So I would appreciate it if anyone totally disliking it just speaks for himself rather than claiming to speak for every 3d enthusiast.
That said, since I already played ACIII 2 times (in "broken 3D"..), at the moment I will rather wait some more for a REAL fix before trying it in "fake" mode. Because I actually agree with all those people pointing out that "fake 3D" is much inferior to the real thing.
And I also doubt that "fake 3D" is suitable to impress anyone not yet convinced of 3D Vision's qualities.
Nonetheless - Nvidia doing something with regard to 3D is still better than doing nothing (imo).
@SteveK Hey steve any news about a fix for the diablo 3 profile? it is now broken since reaper of souls came out, the shadows are broken and also how about a in depth rendered mouse?
@SteveK Hey steve any news about a fix for the diablo 3 profile? it is now broken since reaper of souls came out, the shadows are broken and also how about a in depth rendered mouse?
MOBO: GIGABYTE GA-M68MT-S2 CPU: AMD FX 4100 RAM: 8GB 1600HZ DDR3 HDD: 1TB WD (MASTER) 500GB WD (SLAVE) GRAPHICS: GTX750SC MONITOR: ASUS VG248QE 3D VISION KIT 2
I have noticed that using the monitor size reg hack can enhance the depth of the 3D Compatibility mode quite nicely. Have successfully done this with pCars by attaching pCars to the AC4 profile. Default max depth looked a little flat / stubby using 3D Compatibility mode, but once I did the monitor size hack, it looked pretty good (similar depth to default 3D vision).
I have noticed that using the monitor size reg hack can enhance the depth of the 3D Compatibility mode quite nicely. Have successfully done this with pCars by attaching pCars to the AC4 profile. Default max depth looked a little flat / stubby using 3D Compatibility mode, but once I did the monitor size hack, it looked pretty good (similar depth to default 3D vision).
[quote="SteveK@NVIDIA"]Hello,
In driver 334.89 NVIDIA introduced a new proprietary rendering mode for 3D Vision that enables us to improve the 3D experience for many key DirectX 10 and 11 games. This mode is now called “3D Compatibility Mode”. We have continued to iterate on this feature in beta driver 337, increasing game support and adding a toggle key to enable/disable the mode.
[/quote]
Thanks for at least trying to come up with a DX10/11/12 S3D solution for us S3D gamers and (as evidenced through actions) lending an ear and listening to your S3D community.
I'm looking forward to seeing your solution evolve into being something as good or better than the Tridef+AMD solution for us dedicated S3D gamers.
(performing/scaling well with SLI while looking as good or better than Tridef's solution would be a big plus!)
In driver 334.89 NVIDIA introduced a new proprietary rendering mode for 3D Vision that enables us to improve the 3D experience for many key DirectX 10 and 11 games. This mode is now called “3D Compatibility Mode”. We have continued to iterate on this feature in beta driver 337, increasing game support and adding a toggle key to enable/disable the mode.
Thanks for at least trying to come up with a DX10/11/12 S3D solution for us S3D gamers and (as evidenced through actions) lending an ear and listening to your S3D community.
I'm looking forward to seeing your solution evolve into being something as good or better than the Tridef+AMD solution for us dedicated S3D gamers.
(performing/scaling well with SLI while looking as good or better than Tridef's solution would be a big plus!)
A lot of people have been mentioning Tridef in this thread & usually the word bad performance is mentioned.
When I use Tridef on my Asus VG278H I do get bad performance. Essentially whenever 3d vision & Tridef run at the same time the performance sucks.
However if you run Tridef on a Samsung TV or another monitor that doesn't require 3d vision the performance is very good. The problem is it usually has to be run in Side by side or Top Bottom resulting in lower image quality. Also its worth mentioning ghosting is a issue whenever I use my Tridef non 3d vision displays.
A lot of people have been mentioning Tridef in this thread & usually the word bad performance is mentioned.
When I use Tridef on my Asus VG278H I do get bad performance. Essentially whenever 3d vision & Tridef run at the same time the performance sucks.
However if you run Tridef on a Samsung TV or another monitor that doesn't require 3d vision the performance is very good. The problem is it usually has to be run in Side by side or Top Bottom resulting in lower image quality. Also its worth mentioning ghosting is a issue whenever I use my Tridef non 3d vision displays.
The facts remain that Nvidia can't patch games. Legally or realistically.
Though tbh while I have no problem with depth buffer/fake 3D. I would rather time going into contacting Tridef about granting necessary improvements in order for 3D vision to function to better on the software [frame packed/ sli]
-----------------------------
Comparing 3D Vision / Oculus VR
is apples / oranges.
Oculus can turn out to be next big thing. I've pre-ordered DK2 and own DK1[covered in dust]. But my expectations are realistic. Certain games just aren't meant for it. Games that don't have developer integration are extremely unlikely to ever function at a playable level and this is practically limited to First person games. There are MANY games just not meant for it. Most genre's of games are not meant for VR. So basically it might be great but you are giving up on ALOT of games/genres.
If 3D were to "die" I would be a bit stranded. Since if you were to ask me which games off the top of my head I am most excited for I'd easily say Dragon Age: Inquistion/ Mass Effect[?]/ Witcher 3. There is just no room for VR in those games.
Co-founder of helixmod.blog.com
If you like one of my helixmod patches and want to donate. Can send to me through paypal - eqzitara@yahoo.com
I find tridef terrible in most of the games I tried it with, its slow, doesn't support NVidia SLI, a lot of the games have broken features (2D gun models in MW3 seriously???!!!)and the Power mode is just the same fake 3D as we are seeing now in some recent NVidia drivers.
Most of the games I tried it with are the ones that are broken for NVidia 3D Vision, and were also just as broken in Tridef, or Tridef couldn't/wouldn't launch them in 3D at all. I assume its different if you have an ATI card, but seeing as most of us here are NVidia users it seems beside the point...
I would rather play 2D than be forced to rely on Tridef. The only title I played for any length of time was Rift, and it ran at barely playable framerates with my SLI 670 setup.
i7 4790k @ 4.6 - 16GB RAM - 2x SLI Titan X
27" ASUS ROG SWIFT, 28" - 65" Samsung UHD8200 4k 3DTV - Oculus Rift CV1 - 34" Acer Predator X34 Ultrawide
Old kit:
i5 2500k @ 4.4 - 8gb RAM
Acer H5360BD projector
GTX 580, SLI 670, GTX 980 EVGA SC
Acer XB280HK 4k 60hz
Oculus DK2
You guys keep mentioning legality, but nobody can explain how Tridef is operating as a business. How could they operate an illegal business because they are definitely modifying game code.
BTW, Tridef at this point has vastly superior 3D then Nvidia (non community fixed games) I played almost all of AC4 with Tridef and it's REAL 3D and looks good. It's not perfect (some reflections, and post processing effects broken) but it works. Still, when the community fixes a game, it's best played on a 3D vision setup. That, and surround is the only reason I'm still thinking of buying next gen NVidia cards, but if they don't get on DX11 soon, then 3D vision is truly dead forever anyway. We have Flugan working on something that looks promising and maybe Helix will come back one day....
I think we all realize that 3D is a niche at this point, but how much can it really cost to have 3D implemented? We're not talking millions of dollars and hundreds of people here. I remember days when Helix would have a game fix in less then a couple of days, and thats ONE PERSON (a genius). Also, this little niche of 3D vision users spends A LOT of money on Nvidia hardware.
I don't think it's unreasonable that at the very minimum Nvidia sponsored games should have 3D Support.
@Steve, nobody here is against you BTW, and we know you just work for a HUGE company, but maybe you could just pass on our concerns to people that make the decisions or send them a link to this thread.
thanks.
Like it could be subtle, it could disable shadows, it could remove a whole friggin ocean.
I've heard stories where you can enable something like tessellation and game will say enabled but Tridef just doesnt enable it. Its literally impossible to know whats being disabled as well.
Its definetly illegal to do what we do and manually make changes to game like helixmod [when you are doing for profit]
Tridef isn't illegal but its mainly disabling;/automatic and has slight improvements over 3D vision in *some* games. TBH alot of you are comparing 3D Vision games that don't work to tridef games that work. There is a whole bucket of games that are vice versa and that is not included community mods.
---------------
Saying Tridef is better then 3D vision after comparing 1-2 games is quite silly tbh. Though I do agree we could greatly benefit from having Tridef support. I think the problem is you guys are actively looking for games that don't work and comparing instead of looking that games that "do" work.
But again, yes. We could definetly better from having full Tridef support. I really don't know why nvidia never contacted them since they'd probably do it for free since we have to pay for software.
Co-founder of helixmod.blog.com
If you like one of my helixmod patches and want to donate. Can send to me through paypal - eqzitara@yahoo.com
But even if, for argument's sake, nvidia is 100% unable to patch games for legal reasons, what's to stop them from providing those patches to the developers themselves, so that the devs can include it themselves in the next Steam patch of their game? My guess is: nothing. Nvidia probably already do this from time to time to help games get optimised for with things like physX and TXAA.
good question! Seems like a missed opportunity for both companies.
Yeah and strategy games like stacraft 2, age of mythology that i played and they look awesome on 3d, No VR room for those games
I agree with this and was about to make a big post in support of it, but i just realized one major problem with it, which is that you don't want maximum separation to be wider than IPD, a potential pitfall for new users. That said, i think maybe a better solution might be to built a more thorough and educational set up process, with an audio explanation and keeping in mind that a good explanation of how it all works is key since many experts agree that people tend to learn better when they fully understand the concepts being presented and you can build on solid foundations of knowledge. This instead of trying to memorize hazily understood guidelines. This will help them not only learn how 3D works, but depending on the quality of the scene, will demonstrate the real potential of 3D, immediately.
What im picturing is a cool 3D scene with mainly non-moving element which are common objects from the real world like cars and buildings, doors, streets, trees, etc. Like a scene from a city, or to get more interesting, a city street from a zombie apocalypse, ie LEGEND (the movie), or whatever. Then verbal dialogue part of the set-up process (with skipable dialogue) start taking the user through how to set depth and convergence, mentioning how the angle of the eyes makes the difference, ie how your eyes are crossed staring at a butterfly on your nose vs. staring off at a far mountain, and things like how you don't want to go over your IPD, how convergence can change the physical size of things, and how that might be a problem or a good thing depending on your preferences, etc.
Now that i have an understanding of how 3D vision and 3D in general works, i've streamlined how I adjust my 3D with a simple process: First i adjust the depth so objects in the distance match my IPD, then adjust convergence so things in front of me look the right size, done.
Lastly, i wanted to mention one thing related to why i assumed the depth level was so low, which is to reduce headaches. There is a theory out there that suggests that headaches may be caused in part by constant camera convergence shift, rather than just from the vergence/accommodation conflict. This might be due to the fact that your brain is constantly trying to make sense of the dimensions of spaces in your view. I don't know for sure though, but no one gets a headache while looking at my games or game recordings in 3D with 6.25cm of depth separation (all adults). The point is that it could be possible i suppose that 3D discomfort might be related more to improper 3D adjustment for what the brain knows of reality. I know it hurts like hell [or used to, i have 2000+ of 3D now] when i adjusted the convergence.
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
I am happy that Nvidia have some dedicated resources just for a 3d vision but i think it goes to the wrong place. I think that most people prefer 120hz butter smooth graphic over 60hz (per eye) fake 3d. You saying that this mode is not for a "forum" people, so for who is it? Is it for people that don't know 3d to push them away for good? I doubt that they will ask for more of "this".
I think that this resources should be directed to fix one game at a time. Big blockbusters: Watchdogs, then ... then ... then ... .
If someone see a proper 3d game and is blown away by a look of it, but have a low fps, this person will probably invest in top end graphic card, like most of people in this forum. I doubt it will be the case with fake 3d impressions.
IT IS A PROFIT DEAL!!!!
You are finally doing something with 3d vision, it's fantastic. But please, do it in the right place and we will all benefit from it.
---
Compatibility Mode FOR ME is definitely preferable over 2D in AC4/BF, and probably would be so in ACIII. So I would appreciate it if anyone totally disliking it just speaks for himself rather than claiming to speak for every 3d enthusiast.
That said, since I already played ACIII 2 times (in "broken 3D"..), at the moment I will rather wait some more for a REAL fix before trying it in "fake" mode. Because I actually agree with all those people pointing out that "fake 3D" is much inferior to the real thing.
And I also doubt that "fake 3D" is suitable to impress anyone not yet convinced of 3D Vision's qualities.
Nonetheless - Nvidia doing something with regard to 3D is still better than doing nothing (imo).
Graphics Card: GTX 980 Ti; Monitor: Acer VG274H
OS: Windows 8.1
MOBO: GIGABYTE GA-M68MT-S2 CPU: AMD FX 4100 RAM: 8GB 1600HZ DDR3 HDD: 1TB WD (MASTER) 500GB WD (SLAVE) GRAPHICS: GTX750SC MONITOR: ASUS VG248QE 3D VISION KIT 2
Thanks for at least trying to come up with a DX10/11/12 S3D solution for us S3D gamers and (as evidenced through actions) lending an ear and listening to your S3D community.
I'm looking forward to seeing your solution evolve into being something as good or better than the Tridef+AMD solution for us dedicated S3D gamers.
(performing/scaling well with SLI while looking as good or better than Tridef's solution would be a big plus!)
i7-2600K-4.5Ghz/Corsair H100i/8GB/GTX780SC-SLI/Win7-64/1200W-PSU/Samsung 840-500GB SSD/Coolermaster-Tower/Benq 1080ST @ 100"
When I use Tridef on my Asus VG278H I do get bad performance. Essentially whenever 3d vision & Tridef run at the same time the performance sucks.
However if you run Tridef on a Samsung TV or another monitor that doesn't require 3d vision the performance is very good. The problem is it usually has to be run in Side by side or Top Bottom resulting in lower image quality. Also its worth mentioning ghosting is a issue whenever I use my Tridef non 3d vision displays.