Rise of the Tomb Raider 2016 - 3D Vision Fix
  10 / 50    
Update: Clean install of 362.00 drivers (restore original nvidia profile) followed by the importing of the NIP and install of fix did the trick... it appears that complete removal of profile followed by import of this NIP is not sufficient. (Assuming importing is an amend procedure and not a profile replacement...) Apologies and thanks again for your time/efforts. -Bri
Update: Clean install of 362.00 drivers (restore original nvidia profile) followed by the importing of the NIP and install of fix did the trick... it appears that complete removal of profile followed by import of this NIP is not sufficient. (Assuming importing is an amend procedure and not a profile replacement...)

Apologies and thanks again for your time/efforts.

-Bri

Posted 03/03/2016 03:19 AM   
Once again, I am astonished at the abilities and effort put forth by this group of 3D Vision gurus! Another game I can play in lush vivid 3D Surround thanks to you guys. I even stopped playing it until you finished the fix, and it is much better than the developers fix of course. Thanks to Helifax for the trick of adding the 4800x900 resolution option. It added enough FPS to make it much more playable (but still looks very good). I had no idea I could add that resolution that way. I really thought that SLI 970s would have less problems with 3D Surround when I purchased them. Anyway, thanks for all the work guys!
Once again, I am astonished at the abilities and effort put forth by this group of 3D Vision gurus! Another game I can play in lush vivid 3D Surround thanks to you guys.

I even stopped playing it until you finished the fix, and it is much better than the developers fix of course.

Thanks to Helifax for the trick of adding the 4800x900 resolution option. It added enough FPS to make it much more playable (but still looks very good). I had no idea I could add that resolution that way. I really thought that SLI 970s would have less problems with 3D Surround when I purchased them.

Anyway, thanks for all the work guys!

Posted 03/03/2016 03:36 AM   
I am about to restart the game actually in 3d vision glory.
I am about to restart the game actually in 3d vision glory.

Intel Core i9-9820x @ 3.30GHZ
32 gig Ram
2 EVGA RTX 2080 ti Gaming
3 X ASUS ROG SWIFT 27 144Hz G-SYNC Gaming 3D Monitor [PG278Q]
1 X ASUS VG278HE
Nvidia 3Dvision
Oculus Rift
HTC VIVE
Windows 10

Posted 03/03/2016 04:00 AM   
[quote="helifax"] I AM YET TO SEE A PROPRIETARY 3D RENDERER that DOES PROPER STEREO 3D!!!![/quote] The out of box 3D with Battlefield 3 is very good, also the out of box 3D in Metro and Metro 2033 are really good.
helifax said:
I AM YET TO SEE A PROPRIETARY 3D RENDERER that DOES PROPER STEREO 3D!!!!


The out of box 3D with Battlefield 3 is very good, also the out of box 3D in Metro and Metro 2033 are really good.

Posted 03/03/2016 08:03 AM   
[quote="CyberVillain"]The out of box 3D with Battlefield 3 is very good, also the out of box 3D in Metro and Metro 2033 are really good.[/quote] I believe, that's not really what Helifax meant. Of course some games used to have good 3D Vision support when they shipped but only because the developers took the time to fix the shaders to correctly support stereoscopic rendering. What Helifax implies is, that he is waiting for a game engine, which after developing the game, without even caring nor coding for 3D Vision, the game still is looking fine in 3D. This most probably no longer is possible unless the game uses no shaders at all, which since DX9, basically no game does. Shader-programs nowadays are complex and developers tend to add a lot of optical tricks which fool the eye in 2D, making it look like it was a 3D scene, but in reality most shaders do only calculate a 2D effect on top of the rendered image. Those shaders obviously will look wrong in 3DV and need to be perspective-corrected.
CyberVillain said:The out of box 3D with Battlefield 3 is very good, also the out of box 3D in Metro and Metro 2033 are really good.


I believe, that's not really what Helifax meant. Of course some games used to have good 3D Vision support when they shipped but only because the developers took the time to fix the shaders to correctly support stereoscopic rendering.

What Helifax implies is, that he is waiting for a game engine, which after developing the game, without even caring nor coding for 3D Vision, the game still is looking fine in 3D. This most probably no longer is possible unless the game uses no shaders at all, which since DX9, basically no game does.

Shader-programs nowadays are complex and developers tend to add a lot of optical tricks which fool the eye in 2D, making it look like it was a 3D scene, but in reality most shaders do only calculate a 2D effect on top of the rendered image. Those shaders obviously will look wrong in 3DV and need to be perspective-corrected.

Posted 03/03/2016 08:43 AM   
Ah, yeah, 2D tricks have been used since day one of 3D engines. Probably will stay that way until we have real time Ray tracing edit: I use Unity with Oculus Rift DK2 and all built in shaders work with 3D plus all custom ones that I have downloaded also work. But could be because they are pretty simple compared to the Triple A stuff in games like ROTTR
Ah, yeah, 2D tricks have been used since day one of 3D engines. Probably will stay that way until we have real time Ray tracing

edit: I use Unity with Oculus Rift DK2 and all built in shaders work with 3D plus all custom ones that I have downloaded also work. But could be because they are pretty simple compared to the Triple A stuff in games like ROTTR

Posted 03/03/2016 09:03 AM   
[quote="CyberVillain"]edit: I use Unity with Oculus Rift DK2 and all built in shaders work with 3D plus all custom ones that I have downloaded also work. But could be because they are pretty simple compared to the Triple A stuff in games like ROTTR[/quote] I don't think that the complexity of the shaders has anything to do with it, rather how the stereoscopic rendering is performend (toe-in vs off-axis). Our local shadergurus most certainly have more insight in this issue than myself. 3D Vision uses the correct SS implementation (off-axis) which skews (aka-lens correction) both left and right images resulting in a smoother, better looking and less eye-straining 3D image but unfortunately needs additional (shader) corrections. AKAIK, the initial Rift support implementations used the "cheaper", wrong toe-in rendering which mostly doesn't need any additional corrections to the shaders for it to work (but results in distorted 3D towards the borders of the image and an overall more fatigue-inducing 3D effect. The latest Rift SDK as also the UnityVR supplements use the correct off-axis implementation and both kits help the developers to avoid the typical SS issues before they appear. Anyway I will stop here, as this is not really the subject of this thread...
CyberVillain said:edit: I use Unity with Oculus Rift DK2 and all built in shaders work with 3D plus all custom ones that I have downloaded also work. But could be because they are pretty simple compared to the Triple A stuff in games like ROTTR


I don't think that the complexity of the shaders has anything to do with it, rather how the stereoscopic rendering is performend (toe-in vs off-axis). Our local shadergurus most certainly have more insight in this issue than myself.

3D Vision uses the correct SS implementation (off-axis) which skews (aka-lens correction) both left and right images resulting in a smoother, better looking and less eye-straining 3D image but unfortunately needs additional (shader) corrections.

AKAIK, the initial Rift support implementations used the "cheaper", wrong toe-in rendering which mostly doesn't need any additional corrections to the shaders for it to work (but results in distorted 3D towards the borders of the image and an overall more fatigue-inducing 3D effect. The latest Rift SDK as also the UnityVR supplements use the correct off-axis implementation and both kits help the developers to avoid the typical SS issues before they appear.

Anyway I will stop here, as this is not really the subject of this thread...

Posted 03/03/2016 09:49 AM   
[quote="helifax"] I explained above why you are seeing better results with their "cheaty" engine in SBS... That is not PROPER SBS mode... but HALF Width SBS mode... [/quote] Hi Helifax :) I'm not sure to understand why you called it not proper (cheaty) SBS mode as for me it seems that "Half with SBS mode" is The Way SBS or TB should be rendered on screen. It exactly rendered the pixels that are on the screen (2x 960 x1080 for SBS and 2 x 1920 x540 for TB) and not rendered twice the pixels shown in the screen like the new SBS and TB 3Dmogoto mode (it calculated 2 x 1080 x1920 and show only half in the screen so a huge loose of perf for nothing (like our 4k interlieved mode works too)
helifax said:

I explained above why you are seeing better results with their "cheaty" engine in SBS... That is not PROPER SBS mode... but HALF Width SBS mode...


Hi Helifax :)

I'm not sure to understand why you called it not proper (cheaty) SBS mode as for me it seems that "Half with SBS mode" is The Way SBS or TB should be rendered on screen.
It exactly rendered the pixels that are on the screen (2x 960 x1080 for SBS and 2 x 1920 x540 for TB) and not rendered twice the pixels shown in the screen like the new SBS and TB 3Dmogoto mode (it calculated 2 x 1080 x1920 and show only half in the screen so a huge loose of perf for nothing (like our 4k interlieved mode works too)

http://photos.3dvisionlive.com/chtiblue/album/530b52d4cb85770d6e000049/3Dvision with 55" LG OLED EG920 interlieved 3D (3840x2160) overide mode, GTX 2080 Ti XC Ultra EVGA, core i5 @4.3GHz, 16Gb@2130, windows 7&10 64bit, Dolby Atmos 5.1.4 Marantz 6010 AVR

Posted 03/03/2016 10:09 AM   
When I came back yesterday after a long weekend I was very surprised to find two 3DVision patches for ROTTR =8O First I really felt bad for our shader hackers that have spent so much time and effort on their fix. But this changed very soon when I compared the two patches and I thought about what has happended. Indeed this was one of the most impressive and encouraging events regarding S3D in the last months or even years. In a time when everyone only tries to squeeze more pixels in 2 dimensions and the VR hype changes into VR bashing it is a real ray of hope that we have on the one hand a community of extremly talented and commited shader hackers and on the other hand developers that still care about S3D!!! I have tested both versions and it is no question for me that I will use the community fix. The official patch has still too many lighting issues. The only downside of the community patch is the performance hit on my poor gaming PC. But this is the fault of my hardware. I still prefer to reduce graphic settings in some problematic areas and get flawless S3D than having better performance but several lighting glitches. And when I have to wait some seconds/minutes longer until the level gets loaded (don't have a SSD...) I just use the time to think of the people who have spent hundreds of hours to make the fix and thank them with all my heart. THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU! Following Your diskussions about the fix and knowing the efforts it took to allow me to play the game in glorious S3D makes it really something special to play the game - and I'm sure I will do this several times :) Although I won't use the official patch I will also write a commendatory post for the developers in the steam forum and change my review on steam that praised the game but critized the lack of S3D support. It is great that there are still developers that care about S3D and we should encourage them to continue this in future game releases! Now a technical question: I would like to try some overclocking to get a better performance with the 3Dmigoto fix. I guess the fix makes use of the CPU and not the GPU? And of course I should finally buy a SSD...
When I came back yesterday after a long weekend I was very surprised to find two 3DVision patches for ROTTR =8O First I really felt bad for our shader hackers that have spent so much time and effort on their fix. But this changed very soon when I compared the two patches and I thought about what has happended. Indeed this was one of the most impressive and encouraging events regarding S3D in the last months or even years. In a time when everyone only tries to squeeze more pixels in 2 dimensions and the VR hype changes into VR bashing it is a real ray of hope that we have on the one hand a community of extremly talented and commited shader hackers and on the other hand developers that still care about S3D!!!
I have tested both versions and it is no question for me that I will use the community fix. The official patch has still too many lighting issues. The only downside of the community patch is the performance hit on my poor gaming PC. But this is the fault of my hardware. I still prefer to reduce graphic settings in some problematic areas and get flawless S3D than having better performance but several lighting glitches. And when I have to wait some seconds/minutes longer until the level gets loaded (don't have a SSD...) I just use the time to think of the people who have spent hundreds of hours to make the fix and thank them with all my heart. THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU! Following Your diskussions about the fix and knowing the efforts it took to allow me to play the game in glorious S3D makes it really something special to play the game - and I'm sure I will do this several times :)
Although I won't use the official patch I will also write a commendatory post for the developers in the steam forum and change my review on steam that praised the game but critized the lack of S3D support. It is great that there are still developers that care about S3D and we should encourage them to continue this in future game releases!

Now a technical question: I would like to try some overclocking to get a better performance with the 3Dmigoto fix. I guess the fix makes use of the CPU and not the GPU? And of course I should finally buy a SSD...

My original display name is 3d4dd - for some reason Nvidia changed it..?!

Posted 03/03/2016 10:12 AM   
My rig has 2x980ti OC SLI, but I'm using only one for this game (still some broken things in SLI). Everything max out (including Purehair), and FXAA: a really smooth experience in Siberia and Syria, but having some FPS drop in Soviet installations level. Still playable. Hopefully, next levels will be less demanding. PS: the funny thing is that I've also the same fps drop in SLI. Poor game optimisation I guess.
My rig has 2x980ti OC SLI, but I'm using only one for this game (still some broken things in SLI). Everything max out (including Purehair), and FXAA: a really smooth experience in Siberia and Syria, but having some FPS drop in Soviet installations level. Still playable.

Hopefully, next levels will be less demanding.

PS: the funny thing is that I've also the same fps drop in SLI. Poor game optimisation I guess.

Posted 03/03/2016 10:13 AM   
Same with me: good performance in small areas like caves etc. but drops in large areas like the Soviet installations. A very stupid question but just want to make sure: If I disable a fixed effect like AO in the game settings will 3Dmigoto need less perfomance as the effect is disabled or are there still routines running in the background that try to apply a fix for this effect? In the worst case I thought about switching temporarily to CM in some situations my PC just can't handle. But switching to CM during the running game (which has been started with 3Dmigoto enabled) causes some glitches. Glitches I couldn't observe when I played the game only in CM. So is there a conflict between CM and 3Dmigoto? Can I disable and enable 3Dmigoto while the game is running? BTW just going to buy a SSD ;)
Same with me: good performance in small areas like caves etc. but drops in large areas like the Soviet installations.
A very stupid question but just want to make sure: If I disable a fixed effect like AO in the game settings will 3Dmigoto need less perfomance as the effect is disabled or are there still routines running in the background that try to apply a fix for this effect?
In the worst case I thought about switching temporarily to CM in some situations my PC just can't handle. But switching to CM during the running game (which has been started with 3Dmigoto enabled) causes some glitches. Glitches I couldn't observe when I played the game only in CM. So is there a conflict between CM and 3Dmigoto? Can I disable and enable 3Dmigoto while the game is running?

BTW just going to buy a SSD ;)

My original display name is 3d4dd - for some reason Nvidia changed it..?!

Posted 03/03/2016 10:46 AM   
[quote="wickedscav"][quote="CyberVillain"]The latest Rift SDK as also the UnityVR supplements use the correct off-axis implementation and both kits help the developers to avoid the typical SS issues before they appear. Anyway I will stop here, as this is not really the subject of this thread...[/quote] I'm pretty sure its been off-axis since the first version with the new service model, 0.6 i think. Anyway, sorry for OT
wickedscav said:
CyberVillain said:The latest Rift SDK as also the UnityVR supplements use the correct off-axis implementation and both kits help the developers to avoid the typical SS issues before they appear.

Anyway I will stop here, as this is not really the subject of this thread...


I'm pretty sure its been off-axis since the first version with the new service model, 0.6 i think. Anyway, sorry for OT

Posted 03/03/2016 11:12 AM   
[quote="Laast"]My rig has 2x980ti OC SLI, but I'm using only one for this game (still some broken things in SLI). Everything max out (including Purehair), and FXAA: a really smooth experience in Siberia and Syria, but having some FPS drop in Soviet installations level. Still playable. Hopefully, next levels will be less demanding. PS: the funny thing is that I've also the same fps drop in SLI. Poor game optimisation I guess.[/quote] Same. Everyone says on forums that Soviet Installation and Geothermal Valley give poor FPS. This is on any configuration. SLI/Single GPU. Nothing to do about it... Some bugs are in SLI, but I might have a fix/workaround for the PureHair SLI glitch.
Laast said:My rig has 2x980ti OC SLI, but I'm using only one for this game (still some broken things in SLI). Everything max out (including Purehair), and FXAA: a really smooth experience in Siberia and Syria, but having some FPS drop in Soviet installations level. Still playable.

Hopefully, next levels will be less demanding.

PS: the funny thing is that I've also the same fps drop in SLI. Poor game optimisation I guess.


Same.
Everyone says on forums that Soviet Installation and Geothermal Valley give poor FPS. This is on any configuration. SLI/Single GPU. Nothing to do about it...

Some bugs are in SLI, but I might have a fix/workaround for the PureHair SLI glitch.

1x Palit RTX 2080Ti Pro Gaming OC(watercooled and overclocked to hell)
3x 3D Vision Ready Asus VG278HE monitors (5760x1080).
Intel i9 9900K (overclocked to 5.3 and watercooled ofc).
Asus Maximus XI Hero Mobo.
16 GB Team Group T-Force Dark Pro DDR4 @ 3600.
Lots of Disks:
- Raid 0 - 256GB Sandisk Extreme SSD.
- Raid 0 - WD Black - 2TB.
- SanDisk SSD PLUS 480 GB.
- Intel 760p 256GB M.2 PCIe NVMe SSD.
Creative Sound Blaster Z.
Windows 10 x64 Pro.
etc


My website with my fixes and OpenGL to 3D Vision wrapper:
http://3dsurroundgaming.com

(If you like some of the stuff that I've done and want to donate something, you can do it with PayPal at tavyhome@gmail.com)

Posted 03/03/2016 12:43 PM   
[quote="chtiblue"][quote="helifax"] I explained above why you are seeing better results with their "cheaty" engine in SBS... That is not PROPER SBS mode... but HALF Width SBS mode... [/quote] Hi Helifax :) I'm not sure to understand why you called it not proper (cheaty) SBS mode as for me it seems that "Half with SBS mode" is The Way SBS or TB should be rendered on screen. It exactly rendered the pixels that are on the screen (2x 960 x1080 for SBS and 2 x 1920 x540 for TB) and not rendered twice the pixels shown in the screen like the new SBS and TB 3Dmogoto mode (it calculated 2 x 1080 x1920 and show only half in the screen so a huge loose of perf for nothing (like our 4k interlieved mode works too)[/quote] Yes, the OUTPUT resolution of SBS is 2x960x1080. 3D Vision Renders DOUBLE that cause you get FULL 2x1920x1080. Now back to SBS, their engine "cheats" cause is not rendering each frame as FULL 1080p and then Downscale it to HALF the width 960x1080. It renders it directly at 960x1080. As a Result you loose quality, but gain FPS (it's like running the game at 720p but STRETCHED at 1080p) The same principle is how Nvidia's DSR works. Frames are rendered at 4K but downscaled to 1080p;) AND YOU CAN SEE the difference no?:) The same is in their engine;) Cheat;)) (Or you can call it "Optimization" if you like that term but is not true;) )
chtiblue said:
helifax said:

I explained above why you are seeing better results with their "cheaty" engine in SBS... That is not PROPER SBS mode... but HALF Width SBS mode...


Hi Helifax :)

I'm not sure to understand why you called it not proper (cheaty) SBS mode as for me it seems that "Half with SBS mode" is The Way SBS or TB should be rendered on screen.
It exactly rendered the pixels that are on the screen (2x 960 x1080 for SBS and 2 x 1920 x540 for TB) and not rendered twice the pixels shown in the screen like the new SBS and TB 3Dmogoto mode (it calculated 2 x 1080 x1920 and show only half in the screen so a huge loose of perf for nothing (like our 4k interlieved mode works too)


Yes, the OUTPUT resolution of SBS is 2x960x1080. 3D Vision Renders DOUBLE that cause you get FULL 2x1920x1080.

Now back to SBS, their engine "cheats" cause is not rendering each frame as FULL 1080p and then Downscale it to HALF the width 960x1080. It renders it directly at 960x1080. As a Result you loose quality, but gain FPS (it's like running the game at 720p but STRETCHED at 1080p)
The same principle is how Nvidia's DSR works. Frames are rendered at 4K but downscaled to 1080p;) AND YOU CAN SEE the difference no?:) The same is in their engine;) Cheat;)) (Or you can call it "Optimization" if you like that term but is not true;) )

1x Palit RTX 2080Ti Pro Gaming OC(watercooled and overclocked to hell)
3x 3D Vision Ready Asus VG278HE monitors (5760x1080).
Intel i9 9900K (overclocked to 5.3 and watercooled ofc).
Asus Maximus XI Hero Mobo.
16 GB Team Group T-Force Dark Pro DDR4 @ 3600.
Lots of Disks:
- Raid 0 - 256GB Sandisk Extreme SSD.
- Raid 0 - WD Black - 2TB.
- SanDisk SSD PLUS 480 GB.
- Intel 760p 256GB M.2 PCIe NVMe SSD.
Creative Sound Blaster Z.
Windows 10 x64 Pro.
etc


My website with my fixes and OpenGL to 3D Vision wrapper:
http://3dsurroundgaming.com

(If you like some of the stuff that I've done and want to donate something, you can do it with PayPal at tavyhome@gmail.com)

Posted 03/03/2016 12:47 PM   
Yes we agree ;) What I meaned, it's in our 4k case (4k interlieved on Tv 3d passive owners), it would be nice to have always their "cheat" render engine to have proper SBS (2 x 2160 x1920) or even better proper TB (2 x 3840 x1080) which will look as awesome as our 4k interlieved mode ( 2 x 3840 x 1080) but with doubled FPS because our 4k interlieved mode render 4k full frame. Directly render engine in TB or SBS in all games would be a marvelous option for 3D tv :)
Yes we agree ;)
What I meaned, it's in our 4k case (4k interlieved on Tv 3d passive owners), it would be nice to have always their "cheat" render engine to have proper SBS (2 x 2160 x1920) or even better proper TB (2 x 3840 x1080) which will look as awesome as our 4k interlieved mode ( 2 x 3840 x 1080) but with doubled FPS because our 4k interlieved mode render 4k full frame.
Directly render engine in TB or SBS in all games would be a marvelous option for 3D tv :)

http://photos.3dvisionlive.com/chtiblue/album/530b52d4cb85770d6e000049/3Dvision with 55" LG OLED EG920 interlieved 3D (3840x2160) overide mode, GTX 2080 Ti XC Ultra EVGA, core i5 @4.3GHz, 16Gb@2130, windows 7&10 64bit, Dolby Atmos 5.1.4 Marantz 6010 AVR

Posted 03/03/2016 01:17 PM   
  10 / 50    
Scroll To Top