Is there a future for 3D Vision? (the hardware version)
  3 / 9    
[quote="bo3b"] Very hard to say, 3D has little 'hype' to offer at this point, and hype seems to be the only currency that hardware makers pay attention to. [/quote] Put many glasses-free 3D TVs/ monitors in your favorite store, and let people see what is a game in 3D (or a 3D movie for non-gamers): hype will be there. 100% sure. If prices are not too high, every single panel sold will be stereoscopic-content compatible. We all know here that 3D gaming is awesome. If 3Dvision is a fail, it is simply because people in stores can't try the tech, because of these damned glasses.
bo3b said:
Very hard to say, 3D has little 'hype' to offer at this point, and hype seems to be the only currency that hardware makers pay attention to.



Put many glasses-free 3D TVs/ monitors in your favorite store, and let people see what is a game in 3D (or a 3D movie for non-gamers): hype will be there. 100% sure.

If prices are not too high, every single panel sold will be stereoscopic-content compatible.

We all know here that 3D gaming is awesome. If 3Dvision is a fail, it is simply because people in stores can't try the tech, because of these damned glasses.

#31
Posted 10/15/2015 04:42 PM   
[quote="helifax"][quote="mindw0rk"]3D vision will die out when VR becomes main stream, which is about 2 years away. But its not a bad thing since VR makes experience even more immersive. [/quote] Hmm...no it doesn't and I can actually bet money 3D Vision will still be around. Also, VR will never be mainstream...unless all the developers suddenly decide to make ONLY 1st person games... They defo learned from the 3D Vision/3D Monitor launch...not to RUSH the time to market, to make proper PR and Marketing so people get used to the idea and to think they will want one... And come on, everyone moaned about wearing glasses but they will wear countless hours straight a 2Kg+ helmet? Things just don't add up, but then again it all comes down to marketing and "how you can foul the consumer" into buying your thing ;))[/quote] Completely agree Helifax... VR is only for 1prs games - so VR and 3D Vision dosn't compete, they complement each other....
helifax said:
mindw0rk said:3D vision will die out when VR becomes main stream, which is about 2 years away. But its not a bad thing since VR makes experience even more immersive.



Hmm...no it doesn't and I can actually bet money 3D Vision will still be around. Also, VR will never be mainstream...unless all the developers suddenly decide to make ONLY 1st person games...
They defo learned from the 3D Vision/3D Monitor launch...not to RUSH the time to market, to make proper PR and Marketing so people get used to the idea and to think they will want one...

And come on, everyone moaned about wearing glasses but they will wear countless hours straight a 2Kg+ helmet?
Things just don't add up, but then again it all comes down to marketing and "how you can foul the consumer" into buying your thing ;))


Completely agree Helifax...

VR is only for 1prs games - so VR and 3D Vision dosn't compete, they complement each other....

Win7 64bit Pro
CPU: 4790K 4.8 GHZ
GPU: Aurus 1080 TI 2.08 GHZ - 100% Watercooled !
Monitor: Asus PG278QR
And lots of ram and HD's ;)

#32
Posted 10/15/2015 05:32 PM   
Honestly don't understand why you guys are saying VR is only good for 1st person games. VR SUCKS for FPS games. If you're talking the traditional model that is. Locomotion issues make traditional first person games a horrible experience. Which is why almost nobody is developing games this way. Unless you mean 1st person (with just hands) where you don't move. Something like "Keep Talking and Nobody Explodes". But 1st person + Movement = Cold Sweats. VR is awesome for pretty much everything except that. But this is a rehashed argument here. I think VR and 3D are two sides of the same coin. Hopefully we will see 3D Vision take a 3rd Edition with glassless monitors. Because there are certain genres, like 1st person shooters, that'll always suck in VR due to locomotion issues. And a monitor is just more convenient for a short 10 minute session.
Honestly don't understand why you guys are saying VR is only good for 1st person games.

VR SUCKS for FPS games. If you're talking the traditional model that is. Locomotion issues make traditional first person games a horrible experience. Which is why almost nobody is developing games this way. Unless you mean 1st person (with just hands) where you don't move. Something like "Keep Talking and Nobody Explodes". But 1st person + Movement = Cold Sweats. VR is awesome for pretty much everything except that.

But this is a rehashed argument here. I think VR and 3D are two sides of the same coin. Hopefully we will see 3D Vision take a 3rd Edition with glassless monitors. Because there are certain genres, like 1st person shooters, that'll always suck in VR due to locomotion issues. And a monitor is just more convenient for a short 10 minute session.

#33
Posted 10/15/2015 07:36 PM   
VR is not only for FPS games. Experience is more immersive if you look at the world like its from character eyes. But it doesnt mean you cant control character in third person inside VR. VR is just more advanced technology then 3D Vision and more immersive. The big problem is that you HAVE to make games with VR in mind for it to work. Which means inventing new types of interfaces, controls, systems. You cant just run old games in VR and expect them to work. In this regard 3D Vision has a major plus.
VR is not only for FPS games. Experience is more immersive if you look at the world like its from character eyes. But it doesnt mean you cant control character in third person inside VR.

VR is just more advanced technology then 3D Vision and more immersive. The big problem is that you HAVE to make games with VR in mind for it to work. Which means inventing new types of interfaces, controls, systems. You cant just run old games in VR and expect them to work. In this regard 3D Vision has a major plus.

i5 2500K/16gb/GTX 970/Asus VG278H + Sony HMZ-T1

#34
Posted 10/15/2015 10:25 PM   
And one of the reasons people shy away from 3dvision is the hardware and requirement to wear glasses. Pretty certain this will just be even more compounded with the VR headset thing which is even less convenient.
And one of the reasons people shy away from 3dvision is the hardware and requirement to wear glasses.
Pretty certain this will just be even more compounded with the VR headset thing which is even less convenient.

i7-4790K CPU 4.8Ghz stable overclock.
16 GB RAM Corsair
EVGA 1080TI SLI
Samsung SSD 840Pro
ASUS Z97-WS
3D Surround ASUS Rog Swift PG278Q(R), 2x PG278Q (yes it works)
Obutto R3volution.
Windows 10 pro 64x (Windows 7 Dual boot)

#35
Posted 10/16/2015 06:27 AM   
I think we all hope VR becomes a mainstay simply because it's SOME form of 3D. I don't have any plans to buy a VR headset until they DO become mainstay and the kinks are sorted out and the support is there. But I'm with others here: Why would VR stick around if 3D Vision couldn't make it? It just seems so weird to me that the same people who shoot down 3D Vision are the ones going crazy about VR. Why?? Is the feeling of more immersion enough to overcome the hardware, compatibility and comfort issues? It doesn't add up to me. I feel like Glasses-less stereo vision WILL hit the market someday, whether Nvidia is behind it or not. I also feel like it will be a bigger deal than VR for the mainstream consumer. I look forward to that day.
I think we all hope VR becomes a mainstay simply because it's SOME form of 3D. I don't have any plans to buy a VR headset until they DO become mainstay and the kinks are sorted out and the support is there. But I'm with others here: Why would VR stick around if 3D Vision couldn't make it? It just seems so weird to me that the same people who shoot down 3D Vision are the ones going crazy about VR. Why?? Is the feeling of more immersion enough to overcome the hardware, compatibility and comfort issues? It doesn't add up to me.

I feel like Glasses-less stereo vision WILL hit the market someday, whether Nvidia is behind it or not. I also feel like it will be a bigger deal than VR for the mainstream consumer. I look forward to that day.

|CPU: i7-2700k @ 4.5Ghz
|Cooler: Zalman 9900 Max
|MB: MSI Military Class II Z68 GD-80
|RAM: Corsair Vengence 16GB DDR3
|SSDs: Seagate 600 240GB; Crucial M4 128GB
|HDDs: Seagate Barracuda 1TB; Seagate Barracuda 500GB
|PS: OCZ ZX Series 1250watt
|Case: Antec 1200 V3
|Monitors: Asus 3D VG278HE; Asus 3D VG236H; Samsung 3D 51" Plasma;
|GPU:MSI 1080GTX "Duke"
|OS: Windows 10 Pro X64

#36
Posted 10/16/2015 12:53 PM   
There's no reason to compare VR and 3Dvision. I use both, and it's definitely 2 complete different ways of playing game. The only common point is sterescopic rendering. So 3D panels are not supposed to be replaced by VR headset, it is a nonsense. But the truth is: if VR can handle every kind of games, and not only FPS (which is the case considering the Rift CV1 line-up at launch with many 3rd person games), then having a 3D monitor beside a VR headset might be a bit pointless (excepted to play old games in 3D of course, but even for this, a VR headset might technically replace a monitor). The gain in immersion with VR is so big, so intense, than the hype will be there, sooner or later. Saying that 3D vision has failed so VR will fail is a big mistake. It's like saying "Kinect has failed so VR will fail". From the founder of Epic Games himself: ”I think it’s going to be most revolutionary change that’s happened in the history of computing.” I can only agree. And more and more people will agree in the next couple of years.
There's no reason to compare VR and 3Dvision. I use both, and it's definitely 2 complete different ways of playing game. The only common point is sterescopic rendering.

So 3D panels are not supposed to be replaced by VR headset, it is a nonsense. But the truth is: if VR can handle every kind of games, and not only FPS (which is the case considering the Rift CV1 line-up at launch with many 3rd person games), then having a 3D monitor beside a VR headset might be a bit pointless (excepted to play old games in 3D of course, but even for this, a VR headset might technically replace a monitor).

The gain in immersion with VR is so big, so intense, than the hype will be there, sooner or later. Saying that 3D vision has failed so VR will fail is a big mistake. It's like saying "Kinect has failed so VR will fail".

From the founder of Epic Games himself: ”I think it’s going to be most revolutionary change that’s happened in the history of computing.”

I can only agree. And more and more people will agree in the next couple of years.

#37
Posted 10/16/2015 02:03 PM   
Immersion is all about when you feel that you actually are there in a virtual World.. I don't want to Wear a helmet when I play Anno 1404 - because I dont go after immersion in such games but pretty 3D Graphics. I don't have a camera behind me in the real World aka 3rd person games, where is the immersion in that - so if I have a choice - I will prefer playing such games on a 3DV / or even better glasses free 3D monitor.
Immersion is all about when you feel that you actually are there in a virtual World..

I don't want to Wear a helmet when I play Anno 1404 - because I dont go after immersion in such games but pretty 3D Graphics.
I don't have a camera behind me in the real World aka 3rd person games, where is the immersion in that - so if I have a choice - I will prefer playing such games on a 3DV / or even better glasses free 3D monitor.

Win7 64bit Pro
CPU: 4790K 4.8 GHZ
GPU: Aurus 1080 TI 2.08 GHZ - 100% Watercooled !
Monitor: Asus PG278QR
And lots of ram and HD's ;)

#38
Posted 10/16/2015 02:28 PM   
[quote="Laast"]There's no reason to compare VR and 3Dvision. I use both, and it's definitely 2 complete different ways of playing game. The only common point is sterescopic rendering. So 3D panels are not supposed to be replaced by VR headset, it is a nonsense. But the truth is: if VR can handle every kind of games, and not only FPS (which is the case considering the Rift CV1 line-up at launch with many 3rd person games), then having a 3D monitor beside a VR headset might be a bit pointless (excepted to play old games in 3D of course, but even for this, a VR headset might technically replace a monitor). The gain in immersion with VR is so big, so intense, than the hype will be there, sooner or later. Saying that 3D vision has failed so VR will fail is a big mistake. It's like saying "Kinect has failed so VR will fail". From the founder of Epic Games himself: ”I think it’s going to be most revolutionary change that’s happened in the history of computing.” I can only agree. And more and more people will agree in the next couple of years.[/quote] Until they put that helmet on and THEN the bitching will commence .. I can see it all now, "Honey, the girls are coming over tonight to play bridge, you know what that means right?" "Yes dear, if I want to get my game on, I must not allow myself to be seen with that thing on my head" "That's right, and?" (as she taps her feet) "Oh yeah, I am not allowed to go near that 'Virtual Vixen,' because of the noises and the mess I made that time, right?" 'Yup' - and if you do, our 'Virtual Marriage Counselor' will file a 'De-Pixelization' motion that will effectively encrypt any and all access to what are deemed to be 'Virtually Immoral." These steps are absolute, should it bleed over into reality' Or More Simply, "That thing is 'ATROCIOUS' and I will NOT have it in my home" "It's either 'Virtual Reality' by yourself, or 'Actual Reality' with me, your loving wife." -- On second thought, this might have a use after all! But seriously: I agree completely with HeliFax: 'And come on, everyone moaned about wearing glasses but they will wear countless hours straight a 2Kg+ helmet? Things just don't add up, but then again it all comes down to marketing and "how you can fool the consumer" into buying your thing ;)) ' That alone puts it out to pasture as mainstay, at least into the foreseeable future. That AND the fact that the game MUST be designed from the ground up with VR in mind. Now, imagine if this rule applied to 3Dvision from the get go... NO amount of marketing is gonna make this an easier, better, and more sustainable alternative OR counterpart to/from Nvidia's 3Dvision. Why? Because WHO or WHAT group of consumers is likely to even give this a shot early on? You guessed it, US - WE ARE THE MORONS THAT WILL BUY INTO THIS with all that we are (especially those that are desperate to escape the lack of support, lack of appreciation, hell, even the lack of proper communication that NVidia has so finely cultivated these last few years), and this goes beyond 3DVision in terms of 'specialty' parts needed as well the currently perceived level of difficulty to achieve even a mediocre experience with convincing enough graphics. Don't get me wrong, I am all for it as competition and progress. My issue is that I try to learn from life experiences. If we can agree that the best manufacturer of GPU's on the planet couldn't make relatively affordable 3D gaming a household staple, even AFTER it had consolidated their considerable knowledge and experience along with all the best parts from all the best 3D techs tried over the years; into a refined, even semi-stylish, semi-easy to use package WITH an existing wealth of titles that would easily hook the average consumer, then I think it's a relatively safe bet to say that this tech, 'VR' as it exists in the here and now, WILL NEVER BE a long term solution (or even addition) to the 'Problem' that we, the current gen of passionate 3D gamers, have come to face in MANY iterations these last few years. It's almost like, from the outside, we are seen as a 'cult,' a bunch of fanatics that for some reason are simply not 'satisfied' with 2D gaming. Last I looked I had 2 eyes, and most of the things I can do and manipulate in ACTUAL REALITY surely DEPENDS on that very fact. No, I WILL NOT ALLOW myself to be suckered into a 'game changing scenario' only to have to fight and scrimp and scavenge to continue using what I paid good money for in the first place. Let's be honest, if VR DOESN'T take off, do you HONESTLY think dev's will keep dev'ing games specifically for VR if it's NOT mainstream? It seems to me you can't 'FIX' a game to work in VR if it wasn't CODED that way in the first place. So, if this one dies, it DIES! It's almost comical how backwards this all is, whoever above said something like this was on the right track: How can you convince someone that something is better than something else if they NEVER tried that something else in the first place? If these 'people' were smart, they would actively PROMOTE and DEMO the existing 3D Solutions, alongside the upcoming 'VR' solutions, highlighting the pros and cons, they need to see HOW and WHY it's better, it needs to be affordable and easy to use.. VR WILL BE NONE OF THOSE - It will then suffer the same, or worse, end that the average consumer seems all too happy to see happen, you've seen it, they get all giddy when they proclaim '3D is just a gimmick' - They have that proud look in their eye, like they have, in some way, outsmarted some evil corporation that is hell-bent on trying to trick them into spending their money on something that simply won't deliver the goods. Ignorance isn't a disease, but it sure spreads like one. We are the immune, but no amount of reasoning or yelling, or even PROOF can convince the masses to see the truth, when the lie is so much easier to agree with, week minded individuals easily led to the slaughter. Man that's kinda scary huh? If people simply refused to try NV's version of 3D, no amount of 'PR' or 'HYPE' is gonna convince the average gamer. That's what this is really all about, 'the average gamer,' people like you and I are not the issue, we are the 'niche' crowd, the 'early adopters' spending the big bucks to have the latest and greatest.' But, we are now suffering from a lack of general consumer acceptance and therefore long term growth and development won't and CAN'T happen. ARGGHH! ~Nutz
Laast said:There's no reason to compare VR and 3Dvision. I use both, and it's definitely 2 complete different ways of playing game. The only common point is sterescopic rendering.

So 3D panels are not supposed to be replaced by VR headset, it is a nonsense. But the truth is: if VR can handle every kind of games, and not only FPS (which is the case considering the Rift CV1 line-up at launch with many 3rd person games), then having a 3D monitor beside a VR headset might be a bit pointless (excepted to play old games in 3D of course, but even for this, a VR headset might technically replace a monitor).

The gain in immersion with VR is so big, so intense, than the hype will be there, sooner or later. Saying that 3D vision has failed so VR will fail is a big mistake. It's like saying "Kinect has failed so VR will fail".

From the founder of Epic Games himself: ”I think it’s going to be most revolutionary change that’s happened in the history of computing.”

I can only agree. And more and more people will agree in the next couple of years.


Until they put that helmet on and THEN the bitching will commence ..

I can see it all now,

"Honey, the girls are coming over tonight to play bridge, you know what that means right?" "Yes dear, if I want to get my game on, I must not allow myself to be seen with that thing on my head" "That's right, and?" (as she taps her feet) "Oh yeah, I am not allowed to go near that 'Virtual Vixen,' because of the noises and the mess I made that time, right?" 'Yup' - and if you do, our 'Virtual Marriage Counselor' will file a 'De-Pixelization' motion that will effectively encrypt any and all access to what are deemed to be 'Virtually Immoral." These steps are absolute, should it bleed over into reality'

Or More Simply,

"That thing is 'ATROCIOUS' and I will NOT have it in my home" "It's either 'Virtual Reality' by yourself, or 'Actual Reality' with me, your loving wife." -- On second thought, this might have a use after all!

But seriously:

I agree completely with HeliFax:

'And come on, everyone moaned about wearing glasses but they will wear countless hours straight a 2Kg+ helmet?
Things just don't add up, but then again it all comes down to marketing and "how you can fool the consumer" into buying your thing ;)) '


That alone puts it out to pasture as mainstay, at least into the foreseeable future.

That AND the fact that the game MUST be designed from the ground up with VR in mind.

Now, imagine if this rule applied to 3Dvision from the get go...

NO amount of marketing is gonna make this an easier, better, and more sustainable alternative OR counterpart to/from Nvidia's 3Dvision. Why? Because WHO or WHAT group of consumers is likely to even give this a shot early on? You guessed it, US - WE ARE THE MORONS THAT WILL BUY INTO THIS with all that we are (especially those that are desperate to escape the lack of support, lack of appreciation, hell, even the lack of proper communication that NVidia has so finely cultivated these last few years), and this goes beyond 3DVision in terms of 'specialty' parts needed as well the currently perceived level of difficulty to achieve even a mediocre experience with convincing enough graphics.

Don't get me wrong, I am all for it as competition and progress.
My issue is that I try to learn from life experiences.

If we can agree that the best manufacturer of GPU's on the planet couldn't make relatively affordable 3D gaming a household staple, even AFTER it had consolidated their considerable knowledge and experience along with all the best parts from all the best 3D techs tried over the years; into a refined, even semi-stylish, semi-easy to use package WITH an existing wealth of titles that would easily hook the average consumer, then I think it's a relatively safe bet to say that this tech, 'VR' as it exists in the here and now, WILL NEVER BE a long term solution (or even addition) to the 'Problem' that we, the current gen of passionate 3D gamers, have come to face in MANY iterations these last few years. It's almost like, from the outside, we are seen as a 'cult,' a bunch of fanatics that for some reason are simply not 'satisfied' with 2D gaming. Last I looked I had 2 eyes, and most of the things I can do and manipulate in ACTUAL REALITY surely DEPENDS on that very fact.

No, I WILL NOT ALLOW myself to be suckered into a 'game changing scenario' only to have to fight and scrimp and scavenge to continue using what I paid good money for in the first place. Let's be honest, if VR DOESN'T take off, do you HONESTLY think dev's will keep dev'ing games specifically for VR if it's NOT mainstream? It seems to me you can't 'FIX' a game to work in VR if it wasn't CODED that way in the first place. So, if this one dies, it DIES!

It's almost comical how backwards this all is, whoever above said something like this was on the right track:

How can you convince someone that something is better than something else if they NEVER tried that something else in the first place?

If these 'people' were smart, they would actively PROMOTE and DEMO the existing 3D Solutions, alongside the upcoming 'VR' solutions, highlighting the pros and cons, they need to see HOW and WHY it's better, it needs to be affordable and easy to use.. VR WILL BE NONE OF THOSE - It will then suffer the same, or worse, end that the average consumer seems all too happy to see happen, you've seen it, they get all giddy when they proclaim '3D is just a gimmick' - They have that proud look in their eye, like they have, in some way, outsmarted some evil corporation that is hell-bent on trying to trick them into spending their money on something that simply won't deliver the goods.

Ignorance isn't a disease, but it sure spreads like one. We are the immune, but no amount of reasoning or yelling, or even PROOF can convince the masses to see the truth, when the lie is so much easier to agree with, week minded individuals easily led to the slaughter. Man that's kinda scary huh?

If people simply refused to try NV's version of 3D, no amount of 'PR' or 'HYPE' is gonna convince the average gamer. That's what this is really all about, 'the average gamer,' people like you and I are not the issue, we are the 'niche' crowd, the 'early adopters' spending the big bucks to have the latest and greatest.' But, we are now suffering from a lack of general consumer acceptance and therefore long term growth and development won't and CAN'T happen.

ARGGHH!

~Nutz

---- Core System Components ----

(MBD) EVGA® Classified™ (x58) E760
(CPU) Intel® i7™ '980x' (OC'd) @ 4.8Ghz
(CPU) Corsair® (CPU) Cooling™ (H50)
(MEM) Corsair® (MEM) Dominator(GT)™ 12GB @ 2000Mhz
(PSU) PC)P&C™ (PSU)'T12W' @ 1200w
(CSE) Cooler Master® Stacker™ (830)

---- (3D) Graphics Sub'Sys ----

(2x) EVGA® GTX'970 (SC) - Nvidia® SLi™
(1x) EVGA® GTX'660 (Ti) - Nvidia® PhysX™

(1x) ACER® (GN) 246(HL) - Nvidia® 3DVision™
(1x) ASUS® (VG) 248(QE) - Nvidia® 3DVision™
(1x) ACER® (GN) 246(HL) - Nvidia® 3DVision™

---- Audio & System Control ----

(1x) ASUS® - Xonar™ (HDAV1.3)
(1x) VL'Sys® - MPlay202+ 'GUI' & (RF) Remote

---- Storage (HDD's) & Media (ODD's) PB & REC ----

(1x) (SSD) Samsung® - 850(PRO) '3D'Vertical™
(1x) (2TB) Seagate® - Hybrid Series™
(4x) (2TB) W.Digital® - 'Blacks'™
(2x) (ODD) LG® BluRay™ - 'Play'n'Burn'

---- Nvidia® (WHQL) Drivers (x64) In Use ----

(NV®)DR - v347.88 (WHQL) - Primary (GTA V)
(NV®)DR - v350.12 (WHQL) - Testing (Stable)
(NV®)DR - v353.06 (WHQL) - All Other Titles

#39
Posted 10/16/2015 03:49 PM   
[quote="Blacksmith56"]Immersion is all about when you feel that you actually are there in a virtual World.. I don't want to Wear a helmet when I play Anno 1404 - because I dont go after immersion in such games but pretty 3D Graphics. [/quote] Even so, RTS / strategy games will be awesome in VR... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yYvwMd4JCIM So are 3rd person games: http://www.pcgamer.com/edge-of-nowhere-makes-a-convincing-case-for-third-person-vr-games/ or platform games: http://www.wired.com/2014/06/oculus-luckys-tale/ I'm not talking about sim games which are obviously "made" for VR. Actually, any kind of game can be mind-blowing in VR, it's up to devs to be creative and smart enough. And my guess is they are already thinking seriously about it: possibilities are endless. People should keep an open-mind regarding gaming in VR: in the next decade, we might no longer need monitors/TVs to play a game. @Nutz VR might be a new paradigm for gaming. Quite simply. A lot of gamedevs are already predicting this. If editors, devs, manufacturers (GPU,console), medias support VR, then it will happen. Simply because it works, it is awesome, and it goes beyong gaming: it can change the way people entertains themselves / learns / creates / works. A few decades ago, people were travelling on horses. It was the norm since centuries. Then, a company has made and sold cars, and more and more people bought one. Today, everyone use cars: it's simply better than horses for traveling. VR will be better than flatscreens for pretty everything. It's not a matter of ignorance, it's a matter of progress. Compared to VR and its potential, stereoscopic 3D with glasses will appear pretty anecdotic, if not ridiculous. Don't misunderstand me, I love 3Dvision, I'm an early user and supporter. I also love my plasma TV. But it's time to move on something better, bigger.
Blacksmith56 said:Immersion is all about when you feel that you actually are there in a virtual World..

I don't want to Wear a helmet when I play Anno 1404 - because I dont go after immersion in such games but pretty 3D Graphics.


Even so, RTS / strategy games will be awesome in VR...



So are 3rd person games:

http://www.pcgamer.com/edge-of-nowhere-makes-a-convincing-case-for-third-person-vr-games/

or platform games:

http://www.wired.com/2014/06/oculus-luckys-tale/

I'm not talking about sim games which are obviously "made" for VR.

Actually, any kind of game can be mind-blowing in VR, it's up to devs to be creative and smart enough. And my guess is they are already thinking seriously about it: possibilities are endless.

People should keep an open-mind regarding gaming in VR: in the next decade, we might no longer need monitors/TVs to play a game.

@Nutz

VR might be a new paradigm for gaming. Quite simply. A lot of gamedevs are already predicting this.

If editors, devs, manufacturers (GPU,console), medias support VR, then it will happen. Simply because it works, it is awesome, and it goes beyong gaming: it can change the way people entertains themselves / learns / creates / works.

A few decades ago, people were travelling on horses. It was the norm since centuries. Then, a company has made and sold cars, and more and more people bought one. Today, everyone use cars: it's simply better than horses for traveling.

VR will be better than flatscreens for pretty everything. It's not a matter of ignorance, it's a matter of progress. Compared to VR and its potential, stereoscopic 3D with glasses will appear pretty anecdotic, if not ridiculous.

Don't misunderstand me, I love 3Dvision, I'm an early user and supporter. I also love my plasma TV. But it's time to move on something better, bigger.

#40
Posted 10/16/2015 03:58 PM   
Laast says: Even so, RTS / strategy games will be awesome in VR... You don't get it do you ? I DON'T want to play RTS games with a helmet on, and neither do alot of other people.. And if I don't want it - I go all in for new tech - what about the average gamer ? And if there's no average users of VR, there will be no Money in it, and the devs stop supporting it. The story repeats Again and Again......
Laast says: Even so, RTS / strategy games will be awesome in VR...

You don't get it do you ? I DON'T want to play RTS games with a helmet on, and neither do alot of other people..

And if I don't want it - I go all in for new tech - what about the average gamer ?

And if there's no average users of VR, there will be no Money in it, and the devs stop supporting it.
The story repeats Again and Again......

Win7 64bit Pro
CPU: 4790K 4.8 GHZ
GPU: Aurus 1080 TI 2.08 GHZ - 100% Watercooled !
Monitor: Asus PG278QR
And lots of ram and HD's ;)

#41
Posted 10/16/2015 04:42 PM   
[quote="Blacksmith56"] You don't get it do you ? I DON'T want to play RTS games with a helmet on, and neither do alot of other people.. [/quote] Ironically, that's why 3Dvision has failed: people said "I DON'T want to play games with glasses on, and neither do alot of other people..." Prejudice. Does it mean 3Dvision is not a great and better tech? Of course not. But people want to keep their mind closed and don't want to give a chance to change. A lot of users here are acting just like the "ignorant people" they blame for the 3D failure. When it will be available, you'll have to give a try to an RTS in VR. Then, you will tell us in which way you want to play an RTS. In the name of the 3Dvision users fraternity!
Blacksmith56 said:
You don't get it do you ? I DON'T want to play RTS games with a helmet on, and neither do alot of other people..



Ironically, that's why 3Dvision has failed: people said "I DON'T want to play games with glasses on, and neither do alot of other people..."

Prejudice. Does it mean 3Dvision is not a great and better tech? Of course not. But people want to keep their mind closed and don't want to give a chance to change. A lot of users here are acting just like the "ignorant people" they blame for the 3D failure.

When it will be available, you'll have to give a try to an RTS in VR. Then, you will tell us in which way you want to play an RTS. In the name of the 3Dvision users fraternity!

#42
Posted 10/16/2015 05:11 PM   
[quote="Laast"][quote="Blacksmith56"] You don't get it do you ? I DON'T want to play RTS games with a helmet on, and neither do alot of other people.. [/quote] Ironically, that's why 3Dvision has failed: people said "I DON'T want to play games with glasses on, and neither do alot of other people..." Prejudice. Does it mean 3Dvision is not a great and better tech? Of course not. But people want to keep their mind closed and don't want to give a chance to change. A lot of users here are acting just like the "ignorant people" they blame for the 3D failure. When it will be available, you'll have to give a try to an RTS in VR. Then, you will tell us in which way you want to play an RTS. In the name of the 3Dvision users fraternity![/quote] Allright - IF there ever will be an RTS with a functional hud in VR I will try it - Openminded :)
Laast said:
Blacksmith56 said:
You don't get it do you ? I DON'T want to play RTS games with a helmet on, and neither do alot of other people..



Ironically, that's why 3Dvision has failed: people said "I DON'T want to play games with glasses on, and neither do alot of other people..."

Prejudice. Does it mean 3Dvision is not a great and better tech? Of course not. But people want to keep their mind closed and don't want to give a chance to change. A lot of users here are acting just like the "ignorant people" they blame for the 3D failure.

When it will be available, you'll have to give a try to an RTS in VR. Then, you will tell us in which way you want to play an RTS. In the name of the 3Dvision users fraternity!


Allright - IF there ever will be an RTS with a functional hud in VR I will try it - Openminded :)

Win7 64bit Pro
CPU: 4790K 4.8 GHZ
GPU: Aurus 1080 TI 2.08 GHZ - 100% Watercooled !
Monitor: Asus PG278QR
And lots of ram and HD's ;)

#43
Posted 10/16/2015 05:19 PM   
[quote="Laast"][quote="Blacksmith56"] You don't get it do you ? I DON'T want to play RTS games with a helmet on, and neither do alot of other people.. [/quote] Ironically, that's why 3Dvision has failed: people said "I DON'T want to play games with glasses on, and neither do alot of other people..." Prejudice. Does it mean 3Dvision is not a great and better tech? Of course not. But people want to keep their mind closed and don't want to give a chance to change. A lot of users here are acting just like the "ignorant people" they blame for the 3D failure. When it will be available, you'll have to give a try to an RTS in VR. Then, you will tell us in which way you want to play an RTS. In the name of the 3Dvision users fraternity![/quote] I have to agree with everything Nutz said. And I agree with Blacksmith about strategy games. The video you showed of the dude playing a strategy game with VR? Seriously? Why would ANYONE want to do that? I don't need to try that to know I would hate it. Squat down on the ground to zoom in? Are you serious? --- I understand that's simply a proof of concept video, but my point is this: You don't always have to try everything to know if it's for you or not.
Laast said:
Blacksmith56 said:
You don't get it do you ? I DON'T want to play RTS games with a helmet on, and neither do alot of other people..



Ironically, that's why 3Dvision has failed: people said "I DON'T want to play games with glasses on, and neither do alot of other people..."

Prejudice. Does it mean 3Dvision is not a great and better tech? Of course not. But people want to keep their mind closed and don't want to give a chance to change. A lot of users here are acting just like the "ignorant people" they blame for the 3D failure.

When it will be available, you'll have to give a try to an RTS in VR. Then, you will tell us in which way you want to play an RTS. In the name of the 3Dvision users fraternity!


I have to agree with everything Nutz said. And I agree with Blacksmith about strategy games. The video you showed of the dude playing a strategy game with VR? Seriously? Why would ANYONE want to do that? I don't need to try that to know I would hate it. Squat down on the ground to zoom in? Are you serious? --- I understand that's simply a proof of concept video, but my point is this: You don't always have to try everything to know if it's for you or not.

|CPU: i7-2700k @ 4.5Ghz
|Cooler: Zalman 9900 Max
|MB: MSI Military Class II Z68 GD-80
|RAM: Corsair Vengence 16GB DDR3
|SSDs: Seagate 600 240GB; Crucial M4 128GB
|HDDs: Seagate Barracuda 1TB; Seagate Barracuda 500GB
|PS: OCZ ZX Series 1250watt
|Case: Antec 1200 V3
|Monitors: Asus 3D VG278HE; Asus 3D VG236H; Samsung 3D 51" Plasma;
|GPU:MSI 1080GTX "Duke"
|OS: Windows 10 Pro X64

#44
Posted 10/16/2015 05:35 PM   
SnickerSnack said: my point is this: You don't always have to try everything to know if it's for you or not. You're right - I was just tryin to be friendly :)
SnickerSnack said: my point is this: You don't always have to try everything to know if it's for you or not.

You're right - I was just tryin to be friendly :)

Win7 64bit Pro
CPU: 4790K 4.8 GHZ
GPU: Aurus 1080 TI 2.08 GHZ - 100% Watercooled !
Monitor: Asus PG278QR
And lots of ram and HD's ;)

#45
Posted 10/16/2015 05:43 PM   
  3 / 9    
Scroll To Top