[quote="Blacksmith56"]Paul33993 said:
I'd love to play a Starcraft where you had a huge table in front of you and you controlled your vast toy army with motion controls
That's exactly what allready I do, when I'm playing Starcraft..
I have a large 3D screen in front of me and a mouse for motion control...
And I'm still able to answer a question from my son - even without pulling of my glasses :)[/quote]
I think you havent really thought how these games will look in vr, just think i little bit more and try to picture. FPS games will be nice but RTS, third person and side scrolling will also look amazing. In an rts wherever you look you will see the map, the immersion will be amazing and the fact that you move the camera with your head will also add to the gameplay, your hand is free to do other stuff. A side scrolling like Ori, you would see the entire map, look up and you see what is waiting for you up there. I think the games we expect to be the least impressive will actually be the best. Like in 3D side scrolling games like Trine and Ori look just amazing and most people would think fps would be the best.
Blacksmith56 said:Paul33993 said:
I'd love to play a Starcraft where you had a huge table in front of you and you controlled your vast toy army with motion controls
That's exactly what allready I do, when I'm playing Starcraft..
I have a large 3D screen in front of me and a mouse for motion control...
And I'm still able to answer a question from my son - even without pulling of my glasses :)
I think you havent really thought how these games will look in vr, just think i little bit more and try to picture. FPS games will be nice but RTS, third person and side scrolling will also look amazing. In an rts wherever you look you will see the map, the immersion will be amazing and the fact that you move the camera with your head will also add to the gameplay, your hand is free to do other stuff. A side scrolling like Ori, you would see the entire map, look up and you see what is waiting for you up there. I think the games we expect to be the least impressive will actually be the best. Like in 3D side scrolling games like Trine and Ori look just amazing and most people would think fps would be the best.
EVGA GTX 1070 FTW
Motherboard MSI Z370 SLI PLUS
Processor i5-8600K @ 4.2 | Cooler SilverStone AR02
Corsair Vengeance 8GB 3000Mhz | Windows 10 Pro
SSD 240gb Kingston UV400 | 2x HDs 1TB RAID0 | 2x HD 2TB RAID1
TV LG Cinema 3D 49lb6200 | ACER EDID override | Oculus Rift CV1
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/J0hnnieW4lker Screenshots: http://phereo.com/583b3a2f8884282d5d000007
[quote="J0hnnieW4lker"][quote="Blacksmith56"]Paul33993 said:
I'd love to play a Starcraft where you had a huge table in front of you and you controlled your vast toy army with motion controls
That's exactly what allready I do, when I'm playing Starcraft..
I have a large 3D screen in front of me and a mouse for motion control...
And I'm still able to answer a question from my son - even without pulling of my glasses :)[/quote]
I think you havent really thought how these games will look in vr, just think a little bit more and try to picture. FPS games will be nice but RTS, third person and side scrolling will also look amazing. In a RTS wherever you look you will see the map, the immersion will be amazing and the fact that you move the camera with your head will also add to the gameplay, your hand is free to do other stuff. A side scrolling like Ori, you would see the entire map, look up and you see what is waiting for you up there. I think the games we expect to be the least impressive will actually be the best. Like in 3D side scrolling games like Trine and Ori look just amazing and most people would think fps would be the best.[/quote]
Blacksmith56 said:Paul33993 said:
I'd love to play a Starcraft where you had a huge table in front of you and you controlled your vast toy army with motion controls
That's exactly what allready I do, when I'm playing Starcraft..
I have a large 3D screen in front of me and a mouse for motion control...
And I'm still able to answer a question from my son - even without pulling of my glasses :)
I think you havent really thought how these games will look in vr, just think a little bit more and try to picture. FPS games will be nice but RTS, third person and side scrolling will also look amazing. In a RTS wherever you look you will see the map, the immersion will be amazing and the fact that you move the camera with your head will also add to the gameplay, your hand is free to do other stuff. A side scrolling like Ori, you would see the entire map, look up and you see what is waiting for you up there. I think the games we expect to be the least impressive will actually be the best. Like in 3D side scrolling games like Trine and Ori look just amazing and most people would think fps would be the best.
EVGA GTX 1070 FTW
Motherboard MSI Z370 SLI PLUS
Processor i5-8600K @ 4.2 | Cooler SilverStone AR02
Corsair Vengeance 8GB 3000Mhz | Windows 10 Pro
SSD 240gb Kingston UV400 | 2x HDs 1TB RAID0 | 2x HD 2TB RAID1
TV LG Cinema 3D 49lb6200 | ACER EDID override | Oculus Rift CV1
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/J0hnnieW4lker Screenshots: http://phereo.com/583b3a2f8884282d5d000007
[quote="J0hnnieW4lker"][quote="J0hnnieW4lker"][quote="Blacksmith56"]Paul33993 said:
I'd love to play a Starcraft where you had a huge table in front of you and you controlled your vast toy army with motion controls
That's exactly what allready I do, when I'm playing Starcraft..
I have a large 3D screen in front of me and a mouse for motion control...
And I'm still able to answer a question from my son - even without pulling of my glasses :)[/quote]
I think you havent really thought how these games will look in vr, just think a little bit more and try to picture. FPS games will be nice but RTS, third person and side scrolling will also look amazing. In a RTS wherever you look you will see the map, the immersion will be amazing and the fact that you move the camera with your head will also add to the gameplay, your hand is free to do other stuff. A side scrolling like Ori, you would see the entire map, look up and you see what is waiting for you up there. I think the games we expect to be the least impressive will actually be the best. Like in 3D side scrolling games like Trine and Ori look just amazing and most people would think fps would be the best.[/quote][/quote]
Believe me,I do know how they look - and it's amazing and impressive - but I haven't any real Desire for it.
Keywords in Starcraft is Cozy, challenging and absorbing gameplay IMO
And no imersion is needed here, looking at toyificated soldiers and Buildings from above, is in it's nature NOT imersive, not with glasses nor helmets of any kind.
When I play Fallout 4, keywords is imersion, challenging gunfights and exploration IMO
And the imersion with 3DV is great and will be even greater with VR.
It's all about imersion when we play 1st person games, even in 2D, we can feal our muscles tighten when we are approching an enemy.
In 3rd person games Theres a lack of imersion, our brain don't really think we are there in the gameworld, and there's none of this in RTS and Adventures, nore should there be..
So.. IMO VR's soley purpose is imersive 1st person gameplay :)
Blacksmith56 said:Paul33993 said:
I'd love to play a Starcraft where you had a huge table in front of you and you controlled your vast toy army with motion controls
That's exactly what allready I do, when I'm playing Starcraft..
I have a large 3D screen in front of me and a mouse for motion control...
And I'm still able to answer a question from my son - even without pulling of my glasses :)
I think you havent really thought how these games will look in vr, just think a little bit more and try to picture. FPS games will be nice but RTS, third person and side scrolling will also look amazing. In a RTS wherever you look you will see the map, the immersion will be amazing and the fact that you move the camera with your head will also add to the gameplay, your hand is free to do other stuff. A side scrolling like Ori, you would see the entire map, look up and you see what is waiting for you up there. I think the games we expect to be the least impressive will actually be the best. Like in 3D side scrolling games like Trine and Ori look just amazing and most people would think fps would be the best.
Believe me,I do know how they look - and it's amazing and impressive - but I haven't any real Desire for it.
Keywords in Starcraft is Cozy, challenging and absorbing gameplay IMO
And no imersion is needed here, looking at toyificated soldiers and Buildings from above, is in it's nature NOT imersive, not with glasses nor helmets of any kind.
When I play Fallout 4, keywords is imersion, challenging gunfights and exploration IMO
And the imersion with 3DV is great and will be even greater with VR.
It's all about imersion when we play 1st person games, even in 2D, we can feal our muscles tighten when we are approching an enemy.
In 3rd person games Theres a lack of imersion, our brain don't really think we are there in the gameworld, and there's none of this in RTS and Adventures, nore should there be..
So.. IMO VR's soley purpose is imersive 1st person gameplay :)
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 ;)
[quote="Blacksmith56"][quote="J0hnnieW4lker"][quote="J0hnnieW4lker"][quote="Blacksmith56"]Paul33993 said:
I'd love to play a Starcraft where you had a huge table in front of you and you controlled your vast toy army with motion controls
That's exactly what allready I do, when I'm playing Starcraft..
I have a large 3D screen in front of me and a mouse for motion control...
And I'm still able to answer a question from my son - even without pulling of my glasses :)[/quote]
I think you havent really thought how these games will look in vr, just think a little bit more and try to picture. FPS games will be nice but RTS, third person and side scrolling will also look amazing. In a RTS wherever you look you will see the map, the immersion will be amazing and the fact that you move the camera with your head will also add to the gameplay, your hand is free to do other stuff. A side scrolling like Ori, you would see the entire map, look up and you see what is waiting for you up there. I think the games we expect to be the least impressive will actually be the best. Like in 3D side scrolling games like Trine and Ori look just amazing and most people would think fps would be the best.[/quote][/quote]
Believe me,I do know how they look - and it's amazing and impressive - but I haven't any real Desire for it.
Keywords in Starcraft is Cozy, challenging and absorbing gameplay IMO
And no imersion is needed here, looking at toyificated soldiers and Buildings from above, is in it's nature NOT imersive, not with glasses nor helmets of any kind.
When I play Fallout 4, keywords is imersion, challenging gunfights and exploration IMO
And the imersion with 3DV is great and will be even greater with VR.
It's all about imersion when we play 1st person games, even in 2D, we can feal our muscles tighten when we are approching an enemy.
In 3rd person games Theres a lack of imersion, our brain don't really think we are there in the gameworld, and there's none of this in RTS and Adventures, nore should there be..
So.. IMO VR's soley purpose is imersive 1st person gameplay :)[/quote]
So you agree it is amazing and impressive, but no good for you? :D
Imersion does not really mean you need to think you are the protagonist, like in 1st person.
You can very well be a sort of god controlling everything from above or behind helping the protagonist.
What will give you imersion is actually looking around and being part of that world, much better than looking at a flat screen in front of you and have your attention caught from your son, by the way thats why i dont have kids hahahah :D
Anyway i think we are a bit far from getting VR to work well on current games. It seems it will need a bloody powerful machine to run at 90fps. Nvidia will need to come up with a very good graphic card, i dont want to have to do SLI and spend $$$ lots of money.
Blacksmith56 said:Paul33993 said:
I'd love to play a Starcraft where you had a huge table in front of you and you controlled your vast toy army with motion controls
That's exactly what allready I do, when I'm playing Starcraft..
I have a large 3D screen in front of me and a mouse for motion control...
And I'm still able to answer a question from my son - even without pulling of my glasses :)
I think you havent really thought how these games will look in vr, just think a little bit more and try to picture. FPS games will be nice but RTS, third person and side scrolling will also look amazing. In a RTS wherever you look you will see the map, the immersion will be amazing and the fact that you move the camera with your head will also add to the gameplay, your hand is free to do other stuff. A side scrolling like Ori, you would see the entire map, look up and you see what is waiting for you up there. I think the games we expect to be the least impressive will actually be the best. Like in 3D side scrolling games like Trine and Ori look just amazing and most people would think fps would be the best.
Believe me,I do know how they look - and it's amazing and impressive - but I haven't any real Desire for it.
Keywords in Starcraft is Cozy, challenging and absorbing gameplay IMO
And no imersion is needed here, looking at toyificated soldiers and Buildings from above, is in it's nature NOT imersive, not with glasses nor helmets of any kind.
When I play Fallout 4, keywords is imersion, challenging gunfights and exploration IMO
And the imersion with 3DV is great and will be even greater with VR.
It's all about imersion when we play 1st person games, even in 2D, we can feal our muscles tighten when we are approching an enemy.
In 3rd person games Theres a lack of imersion, our brain don't really think we are there in the gameworld, and there's none of this in RTS and Adventures, nore should there be..
So.. IMO VR's soley purpose is imersive 1st person gameplay :)
So you agree it is amazing and impressive, but no good for you? :D
Imersion does not really mean you need to think you are the protagonist, like in 1st person.
You can very well be a sort of god controlling everything from above or behind helping the protagonist.
What will give you imersion is actually looking around and being part of that world, much better than looking at a flat screen in front of you and have your attention caught from your son, by the way thats why i dont have kids hahahah :D
Anyway i think we are a bit far from getting VR to work well on current games. It seems it will need a bloody powerful machine to run at 90fps. Nvidia will need to come up with a very good graphic card, i dont want to have to do SLI and spend $$$ lots of money.
EVGA GTX 1070 FTW
Motherboard MSI Z370 SLI PLUS
Processor i5-8600K @ 4.2 | Cooler SilverStone AR02
Corsair Vengeance 8GB 3000Mhz | Windows 10 Pro
SSD 240gb Kingston UV400 | 2x HDs 1TB RAID0 | 2x HD 2TB RAID1
TV LG Cinema 3D 49lb6200 | ACER EDID override | Oculus Rift CV1
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/J0hnnieW4lker Screenshots: http://phereo.com/583b3a2f8884282d5d000007
I own 3D Vision and DK2.......
They are apples and oranges....
I do agree though 3D Vision is dead and VR is the new future with a more solid enthusiast base and future longevity on a much more mass scale.
Asus Maximus X Hero Z370
MSI Gaming X 1080Ti (2100 mhz OC Watercooled)
8700k (4.7ghz OC Watercooled)
16gb DDR4 3000 Ram
500GB SAMSUNG 860 EVO SERIES SSD M.2
[quote="clammy"]I own 3D Vision and DK2.......
They are apples and oranges....
I do agree though 3D Vision is dead and VR is the new future with a more solid enthusiast base and future longevity on a much more mass scale.
[/quote]
I'm sorry to say it - but I think you will be much wiser in a couple of years...
It has been said many times before - 3D vision is not dead !!
If you can show me a list of VR compatible games, with the same amount of games as on the Helix blog, lets say in 2020 I'l buy you a round...
But we will just have to wait and see what the future brings :)
I do agree though 3D Vision is dead and VR is the new future with a more solid enthusiast base and future longevity on a much more mass scale.
I'm sorry to say it - but I think you will be much wiser in a couple of years...
It has been said many times before - 3D vision is not dead !!
If you can show me a list of VR compatible games, with the same amount of games as on the Helix blog, lets say in 2020 I'l buy you a round...
But we will just have to wait and see what the future brings :)
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 ;)
What disturbs me is that VR might get exclusive games that I would like to play normally on the PC.
If you look at some of the VR Demos like Bullet Train for example, the way they are implementing hands, doesn't lend itself to normal PC gaming.
While I hope VR prospers, I just hope that it doesn't vitiate normal PC gaming.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DmaxmnPzMWE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kIskZmv1aY0
[quote="Blacksmith56"]
I'm sorry to say it - but I think you will be much wiser in a couple of years...
It has been said many times before - 3D vision is not dead !!
If you can show me a list of VR compatible games, with the same amount of games as on the Helix blog, lets say in 2020 I'l buy you a round...
But we will just have to wait and see what the future brings :)[/quote]
I feel 3D Vision is dead as in...there will never be a 3D Vision 3 Kit and new software that fixes the damn CPU bottlenecks.
I'm not talking about anything that has to do what Helix....what a non Nvidia employee does to fix and make new titles more compatible with our old 3D Vision hardware on his spare time.
Get over it this is dead end tech for Nvidia....
I'm sorry to say it - but I think you will be much wiser in a couple of years...
It has been said many times before - 3D vision is not dead !!
If you can show me a list of VR compatible games, with the same amount of games as on the Helix blog, lets say in 2020 I'l buy you a round...
But we will just have to wait and see what the future brings :)
I feel 3D Vision is dead as in...there will never be a 3D Vision 3 Kit and new software that fixes the damn CPU bottlenecks.
I'm not talking about anything that has to do what Helix....what a non Nvidia employee does to fix and make new titles more compatible with our old 3D Vision hardware on his spare time.
Asus Maximus X Hero Z370
MSI Gaming X 1080Ti (2100 mhz OC Watercooled)
8700k (4.7ghz OC Watercooled)
16gb DDR4 3000 Ram
500GB SAMSUNG 860 EVO SERIES SSD M.2
[quote="clammy"]
[quote="Blacksmith56"]
I'm sorry to say it - but I think you will be much wiser in a couple of years...
It has been said many times before - 3D vision is not dead !!
If you can show me a list of VR compatible games, with the same amount of games as on the Helix blog, lets say in 2020 I'l buy you a round...
But we will just have to wait and see what the future brings :)[/quote]
3D Vision is dead as in...there will never be a 3D Vision 3 Kit and new software that fixes the damn CPU bottlenecks.
I'm not talking about anything that has to do what Helix....a non Nvidia employee does to fix and make new titles more compatible with our old 3D Vision hardware.
Get over it this is dead end tech for Nvidia....
[/quote]
I'm actually hoping someone enterprising over at Nvidia can work some driver magic and eventually piggyback 3D support onto any kind of VR support that individual titles have, but you're pretty much right about it being dead. Still, it would be a reductive process to do the above and not difficult at all considering VR already renders a standard 3D image then warps it for the lens and for head movement, however actually doing the work would take time and effort and may involve a conflict of interest with Oculus/Facebook and other VR vendors.
I'm sorry to say it - but I think you will be much wiser in a couple of years...
It has been said many times before - 3D vision is not dead !!
If you can show me a list of VR compatible games, with the same amount of games as on the Helix blog, lets say in 2020 I'l buy you a round...
But we will just have to wait and see what the future brings :)
3D Vision is dead as in...there will never be a 3D Vision 3 Kit and new software that fixes the damn CPU bottlenecks.
I'm not talking about anything that has to do what Helix....a non Nvidia employee does to fix and make new titles more compatible with our old 3D Vision hardware.
Get over it this is dead end tech for Nvidia....
I'm actually hoping someone enterprising over at Nvidia can work some driver magic and eventually piggyback 3D support onto any kind of VR support that individual titles have, but you're pretty much right about it being dead. Still, it would be a reductive process to do the above and not difficult at all considering VR already renders a standard 3D image then warps it for the lens and for head movement, however actually doing the work would take time and effort and may involve a conflict of interest with Oculus/Facebook and other VR vendors.
[quote="aeliusg"][quote="clammy"]
[quote="Blacksmith56"]
I'm sorry to say it - but I think you will be much wiser in a couple of years...
It has been said many times before - 3D vision is not dead !!
If you can show me a list of VR compatible games, with the same amount of games as on the Helix blog, lets say in 2020 I'l buy you a round...
But we will just have to wait and see what the future brings :)[/quote]
3D Vision is dead as in...there will never be a 3D Vision 3 Kit and new software that fixes the damn CPU bottlenecks.
I'm not talking about anything that has to do what Helix....a non Nvidia employee does to fix and make new titles more compatible with our old 3D Vision hardware.
Get over it this is dead end tech for Nvidia....
[/quote]
I'm actually hoping someone enterprising over at Nvidia can work some driver magic and eventually piggyback 3D support onto any kind of VR support that individual titles have, but you're pretty much right about it being dead. Still, it would be a reductive process to do the above and not difficult at all considering VR already renders a standard 3D image then warps it for the lens and for head movement, however actually doing the work would take time and effort and may involve a conflict of interest with Oculus/Facebook and other VR vendors.[/quote]
I would be happy with just that from Nvidia...a core usage fix.
Yes Nvidia working with Oculus would be great...because right now the 3D geometries in my DK2 look like crap compared to 3D Vision
I'm sorry to say it - but I think you will be much wiser in a couple of years...
It has been said many times before - 3D vision is not dead !!
If you can show me a list of VR compatible games, with the same amount of games as on the Helix blog, lets say in 2020 I'l buy you a round...
But we will just have to wait and see what the future brings :)
3D Vision is dead as in...there will never be a 3D Vision 3 Kit and new software that fixes the damn CPU bottlenecks.
I'm not talking about anything that has to do what Helix....a non Nvidia employee does to fix and make new titles more compatible with our old 3D Vision hardware.
Get over it this is dead end tech for Nvidia....
I'm actually hoping someone enterprising over at Nvidia can work some driver magic and eventually piggyback 3D support onto any kind of VR support that individual titles have, but you're pretty much right about it being dead. Still, it would be a reductive process to do the above and not difficult at all considering VR already renders a standard 3D image then warps it for the lens and for head movement, however actually doing the work would take time and effort and may involve a conflict of interest with Oculus/Facebook and other VR vendors.
I would be happy with just that from Nvidia...a core usage fix.
Yes Nvidia working with Oculus would be great...because right now the 3D geometries in my DK2 look like crap compared to 3D Vision
Asus Maximus X Hero Z370
MSI Gaming X 1080Ti (2100 mhz OC Watercooled)
8700k (4.7ghz OC Watercooled)
16gb DDR4 3000 Ram
500GB SAMSUNG 860 EVO SERIES SSD M.2
[quote="Blacksmith56"]Paul33993 said:
I'd love to play a Starcraft where you had a huge table in front of you and you controlled your vast toy army with motion controls
That's exactly what allready I do, when I'm playing Starcraft..
I have a large 3D screen in front of me and a mouse for motion control...
And I'm still able to answer a question from my son - even without pulling of my glasses :)[/quote]
I've played Starcraft with 3D Vision too (and with toyification cranked up). It's just not the same as tabletop with VR. Toybox Turbo, which admittedly has pretty poor default VR camera positions, is just pretty unique if you hack your default VR camera position. It can be made to really excel while standing. And it really does feel like you're hoving and moving about this large warehouse with an amazing model toy world.
I've kind of backed away from this thread because I don't want to make it seem like I'm just being argumentative. It really doesn't matter what my opinion is or whether I'm right or wrong. I'm simply pointing out two points: That on a personal level, yes, I'm a big VR believer. But on a much more important level, all of these initiatives serve a single purpose: Marketing for Nvidia to sell hardware. And whether anyone agrees with it or not, it's fairly clear at this point that Nvidia has shifted resources to supporting VR. Because they believe it has the potential to help their bottom line more than 3D Vision ever did.
I don't really see how this is in doubt. I'm looking at the latest Driver thread that just appeared on the front page here, and it's mostly about major additions to NVidia's VR driver suite. And then for 3D Vision updates, it has zero profile updates for this driver. I'll admit I've stopped updating my Nvidia drivers very often, but it's the first time I've ever seen a major driver update with zero 3D Vision profile updates. I think it's further proof of what's going on here.
Blacksmith56 said:Paul33993 said:
I'd love to play a Starcraft where you had a huge table in front of you and you controlled your vast toy army with motion controls
That's exactly what allready I do, when I'm playing Starcraft..
I have a large 3D screen in front of me and a mouse for motion control...
And I'm still able to answer a question from my son - even without pulling of my glasses :)
I've played Starcraft with 3D Vision too (and with toyification cranked up). It's just not the same as tabletop with VR. Toybox Turbo, which admittedly has pretty poor default VR camera positions, is just pretty unique if you hack your default VR camera position. It can be made to really excel while standing. And it really does feel like you're hoving and moving about this large warehouse with an amazing model toy world.
I've kind of backed away from this thread because I don't want to make it seem like I'm just being argumentative. It really doesn't matter what my opinion is or whether I'm right or wrong. I'm simply pointing out two points: That on a personal level, yes, I'm a big VR believer. But on a much more important level, all of these initiatives serve a single purpose: Marketing for Nvidia to sell hardware. And whether anyone agrees with it or not, it's fairly clear at this point that Nvidia has shifted resources to supporting VR. Because they believe it has the potential to help their bottom line more than 3D Vision ever did.
I don't really see how this is in doubt. I'm looking at the latest Driver thread that just appeared on the front page here, and it's mostly about major additions to NVidia's VR driver suite. And then for 3D Vision updates, it has zero profile updates for this driver. I'll admit I've stopped updating my Nvidia drivers very often, but it's the first time I've ever seen a major driver update with zero 3D Vision profile updates. I think it's further proof of what's going on here.
I wouldn't read anything into there not any new 3D being profiles in that driver release.
The driver addressed a few huge ongoing issues that they had, the VR portion is more of a side note imo.
[quote="D-Man11"]I wouldn't read anything into there not any new 3D being profiles in that driver release.
The driver addressed a few huge ongoing issues that they had, the VR portion is more of a side note imo.[/quote]
Same conclusion, but different reason- this driver has no game support it in, not a game day driver. It's specifically to support VR, and the Oculus SDK 1.0. It includes support for SLI in OpenGL for example, specifically for the VR path.
So using it as a metric for the demise of 3D Vision would be an error.
[quote="Paul33993"]I've kind of backed away from this thread because I don't want to make it seem like I'm just being argumentative. It really doesn't matter what my opinion is or whether I'm right or wrong. I'm simply pointing out two points: That on a personal level, yes, I'm a big VR believer. But on a much more important level, all of these initiatives serve a single purpose: Marketing for Nvidia to sell hardware. And whether anyone agrees with it or not, it's fairly clear at this point that Nvidia has shifted resources to supporting VR. Because they believe it has the potential to help their bottom line more than 3D Vision ever did.[/quote]
It's interesting to me that people have concluded that VR has already succeeded, before it's even shipped. Everyone is assuming it's going to be a wild success and clearly the future, but the market has yet to make that judgment.
I think that the drawback of the scuba mask is going to put a serious dent in the adoption, along with the requirement for more computer than 90% of the people own. PS4 has the best chance of success here, with the VR add-on. Maybe the Samsung Gear, but you start getting into more feeble experiences that aren't really VR.
NVidia is naturally going to put engineering effort into it, as it might succeed. If it does, it will be a big win, they sell more hardware. If it doesn't, you can expect a slow decay, just like 3D. If you think back- 3D Vision and 3D in general had huge momentum 4 years ago. We'll find out at some point, just speculation at this point.
I can't see it making any sort of a dent in the couch gaming crowd, consoles will still be the primary gaming platform that I can see. But I guess it really depends upon how you define 'success.'
D-Man11 said:I wouldn't read anything into there not any new 3D being profiles in that driver release.
The driver addressed a few huge ongoing issues that they had, the VR portion is more of a side note imo.
Same conclusion, but different reason- this driver has no game support it in, not a game day driver. It's specifically to support VR, and the Oculus SDK 1.0. It includes support for SLI in OpenGL for example, specifically for the VR path.
So using it as a metric for the demise of 3D Vision would be an error.
Paul33993 said:I've kind of backed away from this thread because I don't want to make it seem like I'm just being argumentative. It really doesn't matter what my opinion is or whether I'm right or wrong. I'm simply pointing out two points: That on a personal level, yes, I'm a big VR believer. But on a much more important level, all of these initiatives serve a single purpose: Marketing for Nvidia to sell hardware. And whether anyone agrees with it or not, it's fairly clear at this point that Nvidia has shifted resources to supporting VR. Because they believe it has the potential to help their bottom line more than 3D Vision ever did.
It's interesting to me that people have concluded that VR has already succeeded, before it's even shipped. Everyone is assuming it's going to be a wild success and clearly the future, but the market has yet to make that judgment.
I think that the drawback of the scuba mask is going to put a serious dent in the adoption, along with the requirement for more computer than 90% of the people own. PS4 has the best chance of success here, with the VR add-on. Maybe the Samsung Gear, but you start getting into more feeble experiences that aren't really VR.
NVidia is naturally going to put engineering effort into it, as it might succeed. If it does, it will be a big win, they sell more hardware. If it doesn't, you can expect a slow decay, just like 3D. If you think back- 3D Vision and 3D in general had huge momentum 4 years ago. We'll find out at some point, just speculation at this point.
I can't see it making any sort of a dent in the couch gaming crowd, consoles will still be the primary gaming platform that I can see. But I guess it really depends upon how you define 'success.'
Acer H5360 (1280x720@120Hz) - ASUS VG248QE with GSync mod - 3D Vision 1&2 - Driver 372.54
GTX 970 - i5-4670K@4.2GHz - 12GB RAM - Win7x64+evilKB2670838 - 4 Disk X25 RAID
SAGER NP9870-S - GTX 980 - i7-6700K - Win10 Pro 1607 Latest 3Dmigoto Release Bo3b's School for ShaderHackers
[color="green"]bo3b said:[/color]
[quote]
It's interesting to me that people have concluded that VR has already succeeded, before it's even shipped. Everyone is assuming it's going to be a wild success and clearly the future, but the market has yet to make that judgment.
I think that the drawback of the scuba mask is going to put a serious dent in the adoption, along with the requirement for more computer than 90% of the people own. PS4 has the best chance of success here, with the VR add-on. Maybe the Samsung Gear, but you start getting into more feeble experiences that aren't really VR.
NVidia is naturally going to put engineering effort into it, as it might succeed. If it does, it will be a big win, they sell more hardware. If it doesn't, you can expect a slow decay, just like 3D. If you think back- 3D Vision and 3D in general had huge momentum 4 years ago. We'll find out at some point, just speculation at this point.
I can't see it making any sort of a dent in the couch gaming crowd, consoles will still be the primary gaming platform that I can see. But I guess it really depends upon how you define 'success.'[/quote]
Totally agreed !
It's hardly a surprise that that Nvidia set all sails for the VR roll out..
But some of us know that it takes a lot more than that, to get a mainstream succes.
But it is time for me to withdraw from this thread, because some of the gentlemans above reads the posts like "The Devil reads the Bible".
Meaning - not actually commenting on any critically arguments, just the same VR Advertisments over and over Again from the so called VR Believers LOL
It's interesting to me that people have concluded that VR has already succeeded, before it's even shipped. Everyone is assuming it's going to be a wild success and clearly the future, but the market has yet to make that judgment.
I think that the drawback of the scuba mask is going to put a serious dent in the adoption, along with the requirement for more computer than 90% of the people own. PS4 has the best chance of success here, with the VR add-on. Maybe the Samsung Gear, but you start getting into more feeble experiences that aren't really VR.
NVidia is naturally going to put engineering effort into it, as it might succeed. If it does, it will be a big win, they sell more hardware. If it doesn't, you can expect a slow decay, just like 3D. If you think back- 3D Vision and 3D in general had huge momentum 4 years ago. We'll find out at some point, just speculation at this point.
I can't see it making any sort of a dent in the couch gaming crowd, consoles will still be the primary gaming platform that I can see. But I guess it really depends upon how you define 'success.'
Totally agreed !
It's hardly a surprise that that Nvidia set all sails for the VR roll out..
But some of us know that it takes a lot more than that, to get a mainstream succes.
But it is time for me to withdraw from this thread, because some of the gentlemans above reads the posts like "The Devil reads the Bible".
Meaning - not actually commenting on any critically arguments, just the same VR Advertisments over and over Again from the so called VR Believers LOL
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 ;)
Forte VFX-1 = Failure (1994)
Victormaxx Cybermaxx = Failure (1994)
Nintendo Virtual Boy = Failure (1995)
Atari VR = Failure (1995)
Virtual I/O I-Glasses = Failure (1995)
Sony Glasstron = Failure (1997)
New Sony Glasstron = Failure (2007)
Well, "why not does it better, to sell it now?" may be a good question. Personally, I don't think it will work... People doesn't want to put 30gr glasses on their head to watch 3D, why will they put a VR ??? It definitely won't happen, except for geeks, for just "a minute" to test it.
Why do I think, it won't come through yet:
- Pixels from phone panels are too low, and pitch to high.
- Optic lens will double edge, with wrong colors. (Chromatic aberation)
- You'll have motion sickness, 30 min after playing, if not set correctly.
- You can't see your keyboard, so will need to memorise it all.
- In all 3D VR, the format is messed up, even in 2D. The screen is 16:9 cut by half, so you see an 8:9 format, which to see a 16:9 format will lose upper and bottom pixels. For example if the screen is 1920x1080, then you'll see only 960x1080 and in movie format mode 960x540, well... Not quite good is it ?
It's almost like 3D and I'll tell you what's wrong: 3D seems gimmick to 99% of the population, like VR will (is)...
What was happening for 3D:
First 3D movie was the key product of 3D, but 3D movies are extremely low depth on monitor, low in TVs and may be correct in theaters but cost more than 2D movies to watch. To get good depth on movies you need to go to Sydney at the IMAX LG theater, where the screen is 1000m², cause bigger the screen, better is the depth, this is how 3D works.
Second the quality of 3D hardware is still extremly poor even in theaters crosstalk is always there. At home, monitors was the better way, low electronic, extremly fast TN panel, and their overdrive helps a lot, but absolutly no screen is crosstalk free. TV are all messed up, and more you pay for it less the 3D is good, too much electronics destroys 3D. Then passive may be the answer, lighter, cheaper, but then no joy again, half ligne are deleted and goes black, plus you have to be in front of the screen, not to high, not to low, and certainly not rotate your head, you have to be strictly horizontal for 3D to works, most people won't give 3D this much of confort restriction. Well don't give hope, some projectors are quite nice in 3D, if: the price, the continued fan noise, the installation and the need dedicated space, will not stop you... Passive projectors, won't give you black lines, but you'll need two aligned projectors or polarized active filter (like RealD Z-Screen or Leonis X-Filter) and of course a silvered screen for the polarization reflection... But money talks and people give up.
To to give the final knock-out, setting 3D is very hard to none motivated people, inverted 3D, good 3D mode, desactivate 2D to 3D conversion, find the good glasses that will actualy work with your hardware, for active 3D: InfraRed / Bluthooth / DLP (Light) and even then with the right transmision technology most brand are not compatible with each other... Passive glasses: linear or circular and polarisation angles may be 4 differences (0°, 45°, 90°, 135° or their negatives one), good luck with that people. But don't worry 3D is great, I swear.
Video game is the savation ! Yes truth, you can manage the 3D depth on games so screen size won't really matters ! Hum, yeah, well, when 3D is working, thanks to HelixMod, cause they are absolutly no 3D game anymore, yeah OK Trines are good. "The exception proves the rule". Nvidia says games are 3D, well fake 3D certainly, even 3DVision games like Metro are bugged, shame... And final blow, updated graphic driver will fucked all the 3D patch up. Enjoy 3D mates. To get good 3D you have to deserve it. And have the good hardware setup. How much you say? ... Don't worry, millionnaires (who deserve it) have poor 3D as well, money won't define the correct hardware.
For me, 3D is like colors, you can do without it, but...
FYI: I've tested several technology, on monitors, TVs, Theaters (RealD, Xpand, Imax) and the OR DK2.
And finally I apologies for my poor english. I thank people you have read this.
Forte VFX-1 = Failure (1994)
Victormaxx Cybermaxx = Failure (1994)
Nintendo Virtual Boy = Failure (1995)
Atari VR = Failure (1995)
Virtual I/O I-Glasses = Failure (1995)
Sony Glasstron = Failure (1997)
New Sony Glasstron = Failure (2007)
Well, "why not does it better, to sell it now?" may be a good question. Personally, I don't think it will work... People doesn't want to put 30gr glasses on their head to watch 3D, why will they put a VR ??? It definitely won't happen, except for geeks, for just "a minute" to test it.
Why do I think, it won't come through yet:
- Pixels from phone panels are too low, and pitch to high.
- Optic lens will double edge, with wrong colors. (Chromatic aberation)
- You'll have motion sickness, 30 min after playing, if not set correctly.
- You can't see your keyboard, so will need to memorise it all.
- In all 3D VR, the format is messed up, even in 2D. The screen is 16:9 cut by half, so you see an 8:9 format, which to see a 16:9 format will lose upper and bottom pixels. For example if the screen is 1920x1080, then you'll see only 960x1080 and in movie format mode 960x540, well... Not quite good is it ?
It's almost like 3D and I'll tell you what's wrong: 3D seems gimmick to 99% of the population, like VR will (is)...
What was happening for 3D:
First 3D movie was the key product of 3D, but 3D movies are extremely low depth on monitor, low in TVs and may be correct in theaters but cost more than 2D movies to watch. To get good depth on movies you need to go to Sydney at the IMAX LG theater, where the screen is 1000m², cause bigger the screen, better is the depth, this is how 3D works.
Second the quality of 3D hardware is still extremly poor even in theaters crosstalk is always there. At home, monitors was the better way, low electronic, extremly fast TN panel, and their overdrive helps a lot, but absolutly no screen is crosstalk free. TV are all messed up, and more you pay for it less the 3D is good, too much electronics destroys 3D. Then passive may be the answer, lighter, cheaper, but then no joy again, half ligne are deleted and goes black, plus you have to be in front of the screen, not to high, not to low, and certainly not rotate your head, you have to be strictly horizontal for 3D to works, most people won't give 3D this much of confort restriction. Well don't give hope, some projectors are quite nice in 3D, if: the price, the continued fan noise, the installation and the need dedicated space, will not stop you... Passive projectors, won't give you black lines, but you'll need two aligned projectors or polarized active filter (like RealD Z-Screen or Leonis X-Filter) and of course a silvered screen for the polarization reflection... But money talks and people give up.
To to give the final knock-out, setting 3D is very hard to none motivated people, inverted 3D, good 3D mode, desactivate 2D to 3D conversion, find the good glasses that will actualy work with your hardware, for active 3D: InfraRed / Bluthooth / DLP (Light) and even then with the right transmision technology most brand are not compatible with each other... Passive glasses: linear or circular and polarisation angles may be 4 differences (0°, 45°, 90°, 135° or their negatives one), good luck with that people. But don't worry 3D is great, I swear.
Video game is the savation ! Yes truth, you can manage the 3D depth on games so screen size won't really matters ! Hum, yeah, well, when 3D is working, thanks to HelixMod, cause they are absolutly no 3D game anymore, yeah OK Trines are good. "The exception proves the rule". Nvidia says games are 3D, well fake 3D certainly, even 3DVision games like Metro are bugged, shame... And final blow, updated graphic driver will fucked all the 3D patch up. Enjoy 3D mates. To get good 3D you have to deserve it. And have the good hardware setup. How much you say? ... Don't worry, millionnaires (who deserve it) have poor 3D as well, money won't define the correct hardware.
For me, 3D is like colors, you can do without it, but...
FYI: I've tested several technology, on monitors, TVs, Theaters (RealD, Xpand, Imax) and the OR DK2.
And finally I apologies for my poor english. I thank people you have read this.
I think you havent really thought how these games will look in vr, just think i little bit more and try to picture. FPS games will be nice but RTS, third person and side scrolling will also look amazing. In an rts wherever you look you will see the map, the immersion will be amazing and the fact that you move the camera with your head will also add to the gameplay, your hand is free to do other stuff. A side scrolling like Ori, you would see the entire map, look up and you see what is waiting for you up there. I think the games we expect to be the least impressive will actually be the best. Like in 3D side scrolling games like Trine and Ori look just amazing and most people would think fps would be the best.
EVGA GTX 1070 FTW
Motherboard MSI Z370 SLI PLUS
Processor i5-8600K @ 4.2 | Cooler SilverStone AR02
Corsair Vengeance 8GB 3000Mhz | Windows 10 Pro
SSD 240gb Kingston UV400 | 2x HDs 1TB RAID0 | 2x HD 2TB RAID1
TV LG Cinema 3D 49lb6200 | ACER EDID override | Oculus Rift CV1
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/J0hnnieW4lker
Screenshots: http://phereo.com/583b3a2f8884282d5d000007
EVGA GTX 1070 FTW
Motherboard MSI Z370 SLI PLUS
Processor i5-8600K @ 4.2 | Cooler SilverStone AR02
Corsair Vengeance 8GB 3000Mhz | Windows 10 Pro
SSD 240gb Kingston UV400 | 2x HDs 1TB RAID0 | 2x HD 2TB RAID1
TV LG Cinema 3D 49lb6200 | ACER EDID override | Oculus Rift CV1
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/J0hnnieW4lker
Screenshots: http://phereo.com/583b3a2f8884282d5d000007
Believe me,I do know how they look - and it's amazing and impressive - but I haven't any real Desire for it.
Keywords in Starcraft is Cozy, challenging and absorbing gameplay IMO
And no imersion is needed here, looking at toyificated soldiers and Buildings from above, is in it's nature NOT imersive, not with glasses nor helmets of any kind.
When I play Fallout 4, keywords is imersion, challenging gunfights and exploration IMO
And the imersion with 3DV is great and will be even greater with VR.
It's all about imersion when we play 1st person games, even in 2D, we can feal our muscles tighten when we are approching an enemy.
In 3rd person games Theres a lack of imersion, our brain don't really think we are there in the gameworld, and there's none of this in RTS and Adventures, nore should there be..
So.. IMO VR's soley purpose is imersive 1st person gameplay :)
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 ;)
So you agree it is amazing and impressive, but no good for you? :D
Imersion does not really mean you need to think you are the protagonist, like in 1st person.
You can very well be a sort of god controlling everything from above or behind helping the protagonist.
What will give you imersion is actually looking around and being part of that world, much better than looking at a flat screen in front of you and have your attention caught from your son, by the way thats why i dont have kids hahahah :D
Anyway i think we are a bit far from getting VR to work well on current games. It seems it will need a bloody powerful machine to run at 90fps. Nvidia will need to come up with a very good graphic card, i dont want to have to do SLI and spend $$$ lots of money.
EVGA GTX 1070 FTW
Motherboard MSI Z370 SLI PLUS
Processor i5-8600K @ 4.2 | Cooler SilverStone AR02
Corsair Vengeance 8GB 3000Mhz | Windows 10 Pro
SSD 240gb Kingston UV400 | 2x HDs 1TB RAID0 | 2x HD 2TB RAID1
TV LG Cinema 3D 49lb6200 | ACER EDID override | Oculus Rift CV1
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/J0hnnieW4lker
Screenshots: http://phereo.com/583b3a2f8884282d5d000007
They are apples and oranges....
I do agree though 3D Vision is dead and VR is the new future with a more solid enthusiast base and future longevity on a much more mass scale.
Gaming Rig 1
i7 5820K 3.3ghz (Stock Clock)
GTX 1080 Founders Edition (Stock Clock)
16GB DDR4 2400 RAM
512 SAMSUNG 840 PRO
Gaming Rig 2
My new build
Asus Maximus X Hero Z370
MSI Gaming X 1080Ti (2100 mhz OC Watercooled)
8700k (4.7ghz OC Watercooled)
16gb DDR4 3000 Ram
500GB SAMSUNG 860 EVO SERIES SSD M.2
I'm sorry to say it - but I think you will be much wiser in a couple of years...
It has been said many times before - 3D vision is not dead !!
If you can show me a list of VR compatible games, with the same amount of games as on the Helix blog, lets say in 2020 I'l buy you a round...
But we will just have to wait and see what the future brings :)
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 ;)
If you look at some of the VR Demos like Bullet Train for example, the way they are implementing hands, doesn't lend itself to normal PC gaming.
While I hope VR prospers, I just hope that it doesn't vitiate normal PC gaming.
I feel 3D Vision is dead as in...there will never be a 3D Vision 3 Kit and new software that fixes the damn CPU bottlenecks.
I'm not talking about anything that has to do what Helix....what a non Nvidia employee does to fix and make new titles more compatible with our old 3D Vision hardware on his spare time.
Get over it this is dead end tech for Nvidia....
Gaming Rig 1
i7 5820K 3.3ghz (Stock Clock)
GTX 1080 Founders Edition (Stock Clock)
16GB DDR4 2400 RAM
512 SAMSUNG 840 PRO
Gaming Rig 2
My new build
Asus Maximus X Hero Z370
MSI Gaming X 1080Ti (2100 mhz OC Watercooled)
8700k (4.7ghz OC Watercooled)
16gb DDR4 3000 Ram
500GB SAMSUNG 860 EVO SERIES SSD M.2
I'm actually hoping someone enterprising over at Nvidia can work some driver magic and eventually piggyback 3D support onto any kind of VR support that individual titles have, but you're pretty much right about it being dead. Still, it would be a reductive process to do the above and not difficult at all considering VR already renders a standard 3D image then warps it for the lens and for head movement, however actually doing the work would take time and effort and may involve a conflict of interest with Oculus/Facebook and other VR vendors.
I would be happy with just that from Nvidia...a core usage fix.
Yes Nvidia working with Oculus would be great...because right now the 3D geometries in my DK2 look like crap compared to 3D Vision
Gaming Rig 1
i7 5820K 3.3ghz (Stock Clock)
GTX 1080 Founders Edition (Stock Clock)
16GB DDR4 2400 RAM
512 SAMSUNG 840 PRO
Gaming Rig 2
My new build
Asus Maximus X Hero Z370
MSI Gaming X 1080Ti (2100 mhz OC Watercooled)
8700k (4.7ghz OC Watercooled)
16gb DDR4 3000 Ram
500GB SAMSUNG 860 EVO SERIES SSD M.2
I've played Starcraft with 3D Vision too (and with toyification cranked up). It's just not the same as tabletop with VR. Toybox Turbo, which admittedly has pretty poor default VR camera positions, is just pretty unique if you hack your default VR camera position. It can be made to really excel while standing. And it really does feel like you're hoving and moving about this large warehouse with an amazing model toy world.
I've kind of backed away from this thread because I don't want to make it seem like I'm just being argumentative. It really doesn't matter what my opinion is or whether I'm right or wrong. I'm simply pointing out two points: That on a personal level, yes, I'm a big VR believer. But on a much more important level, all of these initiatives serve a single purpose: Marketing for Nvidia to sell hardware. And whether anyone agrees with it or not, it's fairly clear at this point that Nvidia has shifted resources to supporting VR. Because they believe it has the potential to help their bottom line more than 3D Vision ever did.
I don't really see how this is in doubt. I'm looking at the latest Driver thread that just appeared on the front page here, and it's mostly about major additions to NVidia's VR driver suite. And then for 3D Vision updates, it has zero profile updates for this driver. I'll admit I've stopped updating my Nvidia drivers very often, but it's the first time I've ever seen a major driver update with zero 3D Vision profile updates. I think it's further proof of what's going on here.
The driver addressed a few huge ongoing issues that they had, the VR portion is more of a side note imo.
Same conclusion, but different reason- this driver has no game support it in, not a game day driver. It's specifically to support VR, and the Oculus SDK 1.0. It includes support for SLI in OpenGL for example, specifically for the VR path.
So using it as a metric for the demise of 3D Vision would be an error.
It's interesting to me that people have concluded that VR has already succeeded, before it's even shipped. Everyone is assuming it's going to be a wild success and clearly the future, but the market has yet to make that judgment.
I think that the drawback of the scuba mask is going to put a serious dent in the adoption, along with the requirement for more computer than 90% of the people own. PS4 has the best chance of success here, with the VR add-on. Maybe the Samsung Gear, but you start getting into more feeble experiences that aren't really VR.
NVidia is naturally going to put engineering effort into it, as it might succeed. If it does, it will be a big win, they sell more hardware. If it doesn't, you can expect a slow decay, just like 3D. If you think back- 3D Vision and 3D in general had huge momentum 4 years ago. We'll find out at some point, just speculation at this point.
I can't see it making any sort of a dent in the couch gaming crowd, consoles will still be the primary gaming platform that I can see. But I guess it really depends upon how you define 'success.'
Acer H5360 (1280x720@120Hz) - ASUS VG248QE with GSync mod - 3D Vision 1&2 - Driver 372.54
GTX 970 - i5-4670K@4.2GHz - 12GB RAM - Win7x64+evilKB2670838 - 4 Disk X25 RAID
SAGER NP9870-S - GTX 980 - i7-6700K - Win10 Pro 1607
Latest 3Dmigoto Release
Bo3b's School for ShaderHackers
Totally agreed !
It's hardly a surprise that that Nvidia set all sails for the VR roll out..
But some of us know that it takes a lot more than that, to get a mainstream succes.
But it is time for me to withdraw from this thread, because some of the gentlemans above reads the posts like "The Devil reads the Bible".
Meaning - not actually commenting on any critically arguments, just the same VR Advertisments over and over Again from the so called VR Believers LOL
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 ;)
Victormaxx Cybermaxx = Failure (1994)
Nintendo Virtual Boy = Failure (1995)
Atari VR = Failure (1995)
Virtual I/O I-Glasses = Failure (1995)
Sony Glasstron = Failure (1997)
New Sony Glasstron = Failure (2007)
Well, "why not does it better, to sell it now?" may be a good question. Personally, I don't think it will work... People doesn't want to put 30gr glasses on their head to watch 3D, why will they put a VR ??? It definitely won't happen, except for geeks, for just "a minute" to test it.
Why do I think, it won't come through yet:
- Pixels from phone panels are too low, and pitch to high.
- Optic lens will double edge, with wrong colors. (Chromatic aberation)
- You'll have motion sickness, 30 min after playing, if not set correctly.
- You can't see your keyboard, so will need to memorise it all.
- In all 3D VR, the format is messed up, even in 2D. The screen is 16:9 cut by half, so you see an 8:9 format, which to see a 16:9 format will lose upper and bottom pixels. For example if the screen is 1920x1080, then you'll see only 960x1080 and in movie format mode 960x540, well... Not quite good is it ?
It's almost like 3D and I'll tell you what's wrong: 3D seems gimmick to 99% of the population, like VR will (is)...
What was happening for 3D:
First 3D movie was the key product of 3D, but 3D movies are extremely low depth on monitor, low in TVs and may be correct in theaters but cost more than 2D movies to watch. To get good depth on movies you need to go to Sydney at the IMAX LG theater, where the screen is 1000m², cause bigger the screen, better is the depth, this is how 3D works.
Second the quality of 3D hardware is still extremly poor even in theaters crosstalk is always there. At home, monitors was the better way, low electronic, extremly fast TN panel, and their overdrive helps a lot, but absolutly no screen is crosstalk free. TV are all messed up, and more you pay for it less the 3D is good, too much electronics destroys 3D. Then passive may be the answer, lighter, cheaper, but then no joy again, half ligne are deleted and goes black, plus you have to be in front of the screen, not to high, not to low, and certainly not rotate your head, you have to be strictly horizontal for 3D to works, most people won't give 3D this much of confort restriction. Well don't give hope, some projectors are quite nice in 3D, if: the price, the continued fan noise, the installation and the need dedicated space, will not stop you... Passive projectors, won't give you black lines, but you'll need two aligned projectors or polarized active filter (like RealD Z-Screen or Leonis X-Filter) and of course a silvered screen for the polarization reflection... But money talks and people give up.
To to give the final knock-out, setting 3D is very hard to none motivated people, inverted 3D, good 3D mode, desactivate 2D to 3D conversion, find the good glasses that will actualy work with your hardware, for active 3D: InfraRed / Bluthooth / DLP (Light) and even then with the right transmision technology most brand are not compatible with each other... Passive glasses: linear or circular and polarisation angles may be 4 differences (0°, 45°, 90°, 135° or their negatives one), good luck with that people. But don't worry 3D is great, I swear.
Video game is the savation ! Yes truth, you can manage the 3D depth on games so screen size won't really matters ! Hum, yeah, well, when 3D is working, thanks to HelixMod, cause they are absolutly no 3D game anymore, yeah OK Trines are good. "The exception proves the rule". Nvidia says games are 3D, well fake 3D certainly, even 3DVision games like Metro are bugged, shame... And final blow, updated graphic driver will fucked all the 3D patch up. Enjoy 3D mates. To get good 3D you have to deserve it. And have the good hardware setup. How much you say? ... Don't worry, millionnaires (who deserve it) have poor 3D as well, money won't define the correct hardware.
For me, 3D is like colors, you can do without it, but...
FYI: I've tested several technology, on monitors, TVs, Theaters (RealD, Xpand, Imax) and the OR DK2.
And finally I apologies for my poor english. I thank people you have read this.
i7 4790K @4.8Ghz / 2x 1080 8GB SLI @2000Mhz / 16GB @2400Mhz
Just click:
My 3D videos and crosstalk test pattern
3DVision Fixes:
HelixMod Site
Universal fix for UnrealEngine 4 Games
Universal fix for Unity Games
Universal fix for FrostBite 3 Games
Universal fix for TellTales Games
Compability Mode Unleashed
Please donate if you can:
-----> Donations to 3DVision Fixers
.