how many people here game in 3d and whats your opinion

i just got my redcyan glasses in the mail today. ironically i just pawned my 3d projector for a lousy 30 bucks, but im de going to buy it back when i get paid.

anyways i just got them glasses and bought ddd 3d program. i have never seen 3d in my life . i put on crysis and all i can say is wow. just wow every object had its own depth it was simply amazing to see 3d. and that is the old school 3d.

so my question here is, how many people game in 3d and whats your opinion of it?

also whats up with people saying 3d is simply a fad? are they just jealous?

 

It is a fad. When 3D stops being "new", content providers will stop producing 3D content because people will stop caring.

 

Jealous? Jealous of what? Overpriced hardware that offers nothing more than an "ooh neat" feature that you become entirely unimpressed by after 30 minutes.

One thing I never got tired of was my projector. Wish I had never sold it. I had a full 100% of gaming goodness, and boy was it fun. I will buy a another some day, and most likely a 1080p. Use it both for gaming and for movies.

 

Aren't 1080P Projectors SUPER expensive?

 

Not that expensive, but they keep coming down in price. I'd settle for a 720p if I had to but would much prefer 1080p. Most are 1280x800 anyhow, which is pretty decent.

You can find 1080p projectors for under $1000 though, which isn't horrible. You can easily spend that on three decent monitors.

 

3d games dont really appeal to me or my friend even though we all have 3d capable 120hz monitors.

 

So, with the Nvidia 3D Vision kit with a 560m, 485m, 580m, etc. in tow - how is the gaming experience on a 17 inch laptop screen? I notice that they now support over 350 PC games now. That's a lot of games.

I have zero real world experience with any of it. Been debating some time whether it's worth the extra bread, overall gaming experience, and hardware adjustment?

Also, I've read that there's a FPS loss when gaming in 3D. I'd imagine it varies from game to game, but as a general guesstimate how much of a dropoff is it?

 

well, you don't really get a performance drop, but you do cut the resolution in half. If you want the same resolution, you would have to render 2x as many pixels. You would get a performance drop of on the order of 1/2. You also lose pretty much all color information if you use the red/cyan glasses method.

@OP: so, you tried 3d for 5 minutes. Have you tried it for 6 minutes? That last minute really makes it clear why people aren't getting into 3D regardless of how hard the tech companies push. It doesn't work that well, it gives people headaches and eyestrain, it makes things harder to see, etc.

 

So, you'd pretty much want the best GPU that you could get within your budget - if doing a lot of 3D gaming.

Yeah, I read that the gaming experience is more darkened when gaming in 3D. Are the red/cyan glasses the default ones with the Nvidia 3D Vision kit (current)?

 

well an update. its neat but i wouldnt spend hundreds to have it. i played half life 2 with it for about a half hour and had to stop playing because freeman cant jump to A DAMN LEDGE. what i did notice was the color is washed out and the 3d is far from perfect, alot of ghosting, but its still pretty neat to see depth.

id rate the experience a 7/10 and worth the 3.95 i paid for the glasses but thats about it. im going to try and play 3d crysis for a while and see how my eyes can take it. im having fun gaming again and its been a while since i said wow. pretty cool playing through old games with 3d, makes it seem like a new experience.

i can see why some of you think its a novelty, but then a again opinions are like a holes everyones got one.

 

The nvidia method doesn't cut the resolution in half, it cuts the frame rate in half. Just fyi. They use a really weird implementation where they alternate the screen at a high frequency and then alternate darkening one eye in sync with the screen changes to push a different fluid image to each eye.

So the performance will be 1/2 in that case.

I've seen all sorts of 3d. I have not seen anything in 3d that I enjoyed looking at for more than 5 minutes.

The $4 glasses tech is a novelty for sure. Color is more interesting than washed out not-very-accurate-3d. We will need considerably better tech before we can get good 3d. The glasses are all a mess, the crazy high frequency image syncing is weird. It's just not good and not nearly ready.

We need special monitors that can display different images in different directions on their own. When we get there, I'll re-evaluate.

 

ok guys i feel sick. stuff makes me dizzy. how long do most people game in 3d? 10 min

 

I like the progression here:

"Guys this is awesome you must all be jealous" ----> "Ok, this is kind of cool but not amazing" ----> "ugh, I feel sick".

Congratulations, you've also discovered exactly why 3D is a fad.

 

Doesn't impress me at all and leads to a headache in a short time. While I like 120hz screens I have zero, almost negative interest in 3D. If a machine with 3D offered "cut this wire and the 3D feature will never work again" I'd cut it the minute I got the machine.

 

While i dont have 3D equipment to play my PC games in 3D, i can onøy tell about my experiences with 3D cinemas and the 3DS.

Playing 3DS games in 3D mode while using the gyroscope is a pain.
(Ocarina of Time 3DS)
I also note that it does strain my eyes.

But after i bought some premium passive 3D glasses (not cheapo ones) i dont get the same eyestrain as when i used the cheap generic ones.
I can now watch 3D movies at my local cinema and actually enjoy it.

If done right 3D ican be a cool feature.

 

As a personal opinion I don't like it. I have only seen Avatar (Cameron's Avatar, I should say) and that was enough for me.

The cons: the natural eye strain and headaches due to the natural different focus we have to make to 'get the 3D', and currently the price.

And from a technology point of view, sincerely the only way I can see 3D as a success (like widescreens, for example) is to do it without glasses (like Nintendo and Toshiba are doing), otherwise I just feel the tech is very restrictive (and expensive at this moment).

 

I haven't gamed in 3D yet, but it's because from the get-go it was an obvious gimmick. We've had "3D" since the 60's nothing much has changed except a new-found outlet for greed and consumer exploitation. Every 3D game, movie, scene, etc - it all just looks like several 2-D cutouts placed at varying depths from the screen. It's not nearly enough to fool the eyes into creating real depth.

The only true, acceptable 3D would be:
a) full head-gear system that projects directly into the eye at short range (would be hard to fit enough pixel density into small lenses)
b) biotechnology that allows signals to be emitted directly into the ocular nerves (but by that time, games may no longer exist, and neither humans.)

 

nVidia's 3D kit is RIP OFF! Biggest rip I've seen from them. They just give these glasses with the freaking kit that costs $180 USD!!!!11!1111!!!!!!!11!!!!1! I like 3D and I think it's good, but right now, it's too expensive even to think about it.
What GPU do you have? Crysis...on 3D? That's nearly more demanding then setting the settings to max.


3D will soon vanquish. Holographic technology FTW!

EDIT:
My eyes don't get sore from watching 3D content. It's a perk I picked up from my years of playing computer games for 12 hours non stop.

Guys guys, now this is important.
To get cheap 3D just cross your eyes...but wait, even better, it works better then the usual and movie theatre 3D screens! And the best part, it's free! No cost at all!

Spoiler

Now cross your eyes and merge them together.
Now start punching yourself because you bought an expensive projector or TV and glasses.

 

As a one eyed pirate viking I have no interest in 3d.

Not sure the actual long term harm it could cause the eyes from having stereo scopic images flashed into them, maybe none but I also think the possibility is there.

Just thinking in general terms I dont think the 3d fad will do us much good.

For those that have it, it can be a substantical increase in cost for equipment to use it and run it. Its batteries and stuff to maintain. ETC

Thinking of the overall impact it could make. I think some developers may key in on the fad and put a lot of time and resources into flashy 3d effects and this will directly cut into putting those same resources into the overall game that could result in more content, better graphics, tighter debugging, better optimization.

If that happens I feel we all lose out, and it DOES happen.

I mean look how many games sucked for wii and were just sold on the concept of the motion controls alone? It was way over done and resulted in a lot of bad content.

If games go the same way, we will see a bunch of super flashy 3d titles that are little more than fancy screen savers and a waist of money.

 

i have a mobility 5650.

running crysis in mainstream 3d is more demanding than enthusiast.

normally i run all enthusiast with shadows and objects set to mainstream and average 31fps. with 3d i average 18fps all medium. big hit.


my 4th take on 3d is so far im liking it alot, dizzies went away, and the depth i still pretty cool to see.

if you have not tried 3d yet, i highly recommend you do even if it the cheapest form of 3d like the redcyan im using.

it just makes things pop out.

lol because i only spent 50 bucks for the ddd and 4 dollars on glasses that dont need batteries id say going my route is a must buy if you are a true gamer geek.

 

Both Wii and NDS suffers from shovelware games, not even worth the disc they use as storage. :3

 

Red-cyan causes discomfort to most people with corrective lenses.

 

i wear corrective lenses and suffer no discomfort

 

Except for the part where you said "hurk, this is making me sick".

 

It's actually not quite that complicated. The minimum requirement is being able to project a separate color-complete image to each eye, separately, with no overlap. There are simpler solutions to this problem. In fact, Nvidia's solution is basically "hardware complete" except the glasses are annoying and expensive.

After the hardware requirements, we will need better software. Making sure we project the *precisely correct* image to each eye (no artifacts, proper depth, etc) is the next step. So far, we aren't there. Not even close.

 

lol this thread turned into whats my opinion, please read this:

how many people here game in 3d and whats your opinion

 

I think it's clear what everyone's opinion is. It's a gimmick at best.

 

A lot of people are going to say it's a gimmick. I for one am going to try it out myself before I say anything about it.

There have been many positive reviews at Amazon and Newegg regarding 3d Vision. And people at Nvidia's 3D vision forum have been happy with 3d gaming. You should check those out if you want to hear opinions from the other side (and probably from people who actually experienced 3D gaming themselves).

I did post a similar thread, and for those that posted on my thread who did do 3D gaming, really enjoyed it.

 

I had an Asus G73JW-3DE earlier this year.

3D is so over-rated in my opinion. Although I couldn't game in 3D for more than 15 minute increments without getting dizzy/sick, the experience wasn't worthy of an additional 400$ for the built-in emitter/glasses bundle..

I do have an astigmatism in my eyes, so that's one of the reasons I could not surpass the 15 minute mark.

Just not worth it right now. In a few years, maybe.

I just hope I'm alive when they invent the holodecks from Star Trek

 

3d rocks ftw

 

3D the way we do it now? Overhyped and too much hassle.
3D without glasses? Maybe.

 

that would be pretty cool to see. 3d without the glasses

 

it can be enjoyable if your software let you adjust separation and etc you can get away with no headache at all now that's if you use a passive solution aka DLP or Red Cyan
active shutter aka nvidia solution will always kill your eyes

 

The only game i play in 3D is Minecraft . And i dont need high end hardware. BFBC2 makes me feel dizzy if i play in 3D.

 

Here ya go: Qosmio F755-3D290 Laptop


Very expensive. I don't see this succeeding due to the price. If they can make it near the $1000 mark, then maybe.
However, if you want to buy and do review that would be awesome!

First of its kind. Not the same technology as Nintendo 3DS.
Watch the video to see how it works.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-20086938-1/hands-on-with-toshibas-qosmio-f755-glasses-free-3d-laptop-hitting-us-stores-this-month/

 

it doesnt do games and has a weak card

 

The card is on the weak side for a gaming laptop, but what makes you think it doesn't do games?

 

I'm in your camp.

I'd like to experience the Nvidia 3D Vision kit for myself firsthand before rendering a judgement one way or the other.

With over 350+ PC games that support it, a person certainly won't be starving for diversity. The long term health and eye strain is the main thing that concerns me about the whole shebang. At any rate, I'd like to try it to feed my curiosity.

 

Does my ATI GPU support 3D as well? I might just buy a 3D LCD Monitor for the heck of it.

 

the cnet article said the laptop cannot yet do games only 3d blu ray movies

 

yes ati can do 3d. use just need to download iz3d driver or imho the best DDD software i think its called tridef .