3D moniters/games?

NeilF

NeilF

NeilF

Soldato
Joined
15 Nov 2003
Posts
14,473
Location
Marlow
For me 3D TV seems a little bit of a waste of time. I can't imagine sitting in a lounge with glasses on etc etc...

But we are already seeing 3D monitor coming out and fairly reasonable costs and it would certainly make a game more engrossing. Imagine L4D in 3D? Could be amazing!

But the problem would be, almost certainly, playing in 3D would be put you at a disadvantage compared to playing in 2D? 2D would give you a clearer image and faster response rate...

So it's going to be interesting to see how successful 3D is for gaming...
 
Sleepery said:
There you go :)

http://www.nvidia.com/object/3D_Vision_Main.html
Click to expand...

There you go what? :confused:

This is the kind of kit I was talking about. It certainly hasn't been mainsteam technology for 'several years' as 'starfighter' suggested?


Anyway, the point at hand is, will it take off or not? I'd imagine in a few years the technology could be in monitors and video cards as standard, if demand merits it!
 
m4cc45 said:
Doubt it will take off for a while. 3D is certainly not a new invention it's just that companies are trying to find more ways of making money and the current buzz word, probably due to Avatar, is 3D.

I just can't imagine gaming whilst wearing glasses.



M.
Click to expand...

I can imagine wearing glasses while gaming, more than I can imagine it while watching TV in my lounge.

For example, I put headphones with a mic on in my study, so glasses isn't much more of a step :)


From a gameplay point of view though, single player adventure/FPS games I can imagine benefitting from the immersion. But the moment multiplayer gets involved 2D would have the advantage (clarity/speed), so there's a problem there!
 
starfighter said:
The thing is it doesn't really need any kind of special hardware on the PC, Games are already made in 3D, nVidia graphics cards support it, you don't need a special monitor so it is just glasses and software.
Click to expand...

Ummm.... Nahhh... Not unless you're thinking of those daft glasses 10yrs ago with an LCD display for each lens! :rolleyes:
 
Squark said:
Id rather have this than 3D

samsungsyncmastermd230e.jpg
Click to expand...

Umm... Why not that WITH 3D too :)
 
starfighter said:
Yes, you might be right, for the new nVida system you need a 120hz display it seems after a bit of investigation and the new glasses. So I think perhaps you are correct, you will probably need a new monitor.

I don't think it will take off until you don't need glasses tbh but I am hoping it does reasonably well so the support is there once real 3D monitors appear in a couple of years. While fudzilla thinks thay are rubbish they also seem to think the next gen will be better.
Click to expand...

Any system not using glasses will be a fudge, whose results are far inferior to those systems using glasses. Personally, I suspect most people would go for the cheaper solution, with better results, and wear the glasses.

Think for one second how a flat screen can send different images to each of your eyes? Basically impossible... Until we can produce holographic projections in true 3D I'm afraid glasses are here to stay (IMHO) :)
 
starfighter said:
It works like those holograms, a corrugated piece of card with different images at a different angle. One for each eye but is LCD obviously rather than paper, it only works if you stand near the middle but for PC users or people with big screens that isn't a problem.

I can't be sure they will perfect the tech for a while but we will see in a couple of years, it looks quite promising to me, I do think we will have glasses less 3D before another resolution increase (SuperHD or whatever they call it) and with the speed screens are increasing in size other than 3D what else is there?
Click to expand...

Too messy and contrived. Sit or lean 2-3 inches out of position and the whole system falls apart, as your eyes are in the 'wrong place'.

How is a TV going to beam distinct images to each of your eyes, when your head (eyes) can be in any number of locations?
 
Evilsod said:
3D glasses always make my eyes hurt after a while and i'm pretty sure i'm not alone in that regard. Besides, does it really offer anything? I wouldn't be surprised if Crysis 3 incorporates full 3d rendering just to give those people who stroke themselves the moment a new screenshot is released something to talk about. But in general? Why bother? All it does is make it look better, it won't help you aim or have more awareness, no more or less than a bigger FoV would.
Click to expand...

Fair points... If it adds to the immersion/fun, then that's what it's all about. As the article above said, those folks who tried Left 4 Dead in 3D seems to come away impressed!
 
starfighter said:
3D games are already as 3D as you can get, it is only your crappy 2D screen that makes them 2D. It isn't like a film where the camera is also 2D so it needs to be "made" 3D or use a 3D camera.
Click to expand...

That doesn't really seem to make any sense?

3D games are not already in 3D? They are no more 3D than if I draw a picture on a piece of paper - which in your analogy is the monitor?

If we assume at the end of the day a 3D film is shot such that we have two views (one for each eye), and software (a game) is written such that is can render two views (one for each eye), then from there the technology/obstacles are the same. ie: A TV/monitor with glasses are required for example in order to project those two images to each eye. Having/producing two images is not a big issue, it's getting those images into each eye that's the problem.
 
Evilsod said:
Sorry, i meant to say it'd 'feel' better, as in more realistic if it was 3d. If the Crysis 2 screenshots, however post-processed, are anything to go by then isn't that the level of graphics the future holds for 2d? Jumping into 3d is unlikely to be a benefit to anything in terms of gameplay or graphics. If anything its going to be a downgrade.
Click to expand...

I don't know... I think we'd need to see it... But surely a FPS in clear 3D must be more involving/immersive than (unrealistic) 2D?

Anyone here tried one of the current 3D offereings Can you comment?
 
Evilsod said:
We would but you're still looking at a monitor... until gaming progresses to VR type immersion theres really not going to be a difference. A set of 2d screens in a 180 degree circle around you would be more immersive than 3d on a flat screen in front of you i'd imagine. Besides, at the end of the day, immersion is down to the developer. You can't be immersed in something that sucks.
Click to expand...

Very different scenarios and effects.

With screen(s) all arround you (g: 180 degree arc), your eyes would tell you all the objects you can see on that screen(s) are X feet away. ie: The image is flat. So the illusion is broken somewhat.

Now do the same thing, but put some glasses on, and every object on the screen(s) appears to be the correct distance away. That fly buzzing around seems to be only a couple of feet away, while those trees seem sever hundred feet away... The illusion would most lilely be far more immersive.
 
Evilsod said:
I would be very surprised if the glasses worked correctly at all angles. Its quite likely it would be more immersive as 3d, but its unlikely to make a difference in online play. Offline play i'm sure you could be drawn into the game a lot better. At the end of the day you're still required to wear the glasses which is by far the biggest problem. The question is, would your average developer bother with such a thing?
Click to expand...

Not work in online play? I'm sure Star Trek Online could be nice in 3D? :) I suspect it's more down to game style? RTS? Probably no benefit (possibly the opposite). First person type game (not versus)? Probably help/nice.

Would your average developer bother? I suspect it'll soon be so bound into DirectX that they'd hardly have to worry much about it... It's just be available almost as a side effect.
 
starfighter said:
A game is already 3D!

Yes you need some software support to allow it to send out the 3D images (or 2x 2D images) and an appropriate video card to send these images to the screen but a bit of software isn't the same as going back in time and refilming a 2D movie in 3D or remastering it in 3D, chucking all your old bluerays/DVDs and players away and buying new 3D versions which is what is required to get a 3D cinema experience.
Click to expand...

What are you on about? You brought films/movies into this thread (for some reason), and didn't mention anything about converting old media to 3D then, which of course is a fairly tricky & convolute task?

I'm confused? I fail to see what it has to with the OP - Can we just stick to the topic at hand? Games in 3D?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom