NVIDIA Stereovision on morning news(!)

[chizow]

AT Write-Up

Goes into pretty good detail, the biggest problem with all of these reviews is there's no way they can adequately describe the 3D effect with pictures or words. Its really something you need to see with your own eyes with the proper hardware. There's certainly reason for skepticism with regards to the technology, hardware and price tag required, but simply dismissing it is foolish.

 

[MagnusTheBrewer]

" If anyone is going out of their way to buy a 120Hz LCD panel, a high end NVIDIA graphics card and a $200 bundle of active shutter glasses, they are not going to be happy when told to reduce any quality settings."
That pretty much sums it up for me. I'll check back this time NEXT year.

 

[CP5670]

There is also the iZ3D system I linked to earlier, which has been available for several months now at a fairly reasonable price. I am still not sure how this Nvidia version is any different from that. They both work well in some games and fail in others.

 

[AmberClad]

Originally posted by: chizow
AT Write-Up

Goes into pretty good detail, the biggest problem with all of these reviews is there's no way they can adequately describe the 3D effect with pictures or words. Its really something you need to see with your own eyes with the proper hardware. There's certainly reason for skepticism with regards to the technology, hardware and price tag required, but simply dismissing it is foolish.

From the review:

"We do also need to note that, while no one got an instant headache, everyone who tested our setup felt a little bit of eye strain and slight pressure between the eyes after as little as 15 minutes of play. One of our testers reported nausea following the gaming session, though she happens to suffer from motion sickness so this may have played a part in it. Of course, that's also very relevant information as no one wants to take dramamine before gaming."

So we're getting differing reports from the reviewers as far as whether it causes eyestrain. The motion sickness could just as easily be due to the person not being used to FPSs though.

 

[chizow]

Originally posted by: AmberClad
So we're getting differing reports from the reviewers as far as whether it causes eyestrain. The motion sickness could just as easily be due to the person not being used to FPSs though.

Ya I'd imagine there'd be some eye-strain as the glasses are actively shuttering at 60Hz and blocking vision for alternating frames. From the article it sounds as if its similar to LCD technology with the louvres opening/closing similar to on/off state for LCDs as they block light. It sounds like the "slight pressure between the eyes" could very well be caused by the design of the glasses. Wonder why they didn't use polarized glasses instead of shuttering glasses for the stereoscopic effect. Also for the skeptics, I'd highly recommend checking out something like "My Bloody Valentine 3D" to see how far 3D has come since the silly red/blue glasses of the past.

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: SunnyD
This thread definitely went the way I expected it to, purely a free PR/Marketing thread for nvidia.

Rollo:
- "This is the best thing since sliced bread!"
- "It's not expensive... it's an immersive gaming experience!"
- "What? Oh god no, I never ever *cough* said performance was #1 in video... it's all about IQ!"
- "I'd buy this no matter the cost! (But since I don't have to...)"

Everybody else:
- "Oh gee, those really are kindof expensive."
- "Wow, not many current setups out there can support this..."
- "Wow... the performance ... it sucks..."

Shutter glasses went out when Elsa tanked. The newer 3D technologies that don't require 13,000 additional dongles and are cheaper than what nvidia wants us to pay are far... FAR more attractive options to date.

Not "Everybody Else" SunnyD- you're kind of leaving out all the reviewers who are saying the same things I did.

Derek/AT's review was the most mixed of any I've seen, and even that said a lot of good things about it and just noted the experience across games isn't uniform.

OTOH, all the other reviews I've posted quotes from love it, and here's another:

The Nvidia Geforce 3D Vision system is far ahead of the the old 3D technology that we all grew to know and some to love. It offers a new level of immersion to keep you interested while adding that next dimension to your gaming experience.

And here's another:

If you are a serious gamer and are looking for a more immersive experience, I would totally recommend the Nvidia GeForce 3D Vision.

And another;

NVIDIA's GeForce 3D Vision glasses are not for everyone. But should you be in the market for such a product, NVIDIA's solution is about as good as they come. Getting 40 hours of use between charges is great, and the on-the-fly 3D depth adjustment makes getting acclimated to the effect relatively easy on the eyes. The fact that 3D just works with hundreds of games right out of the box is the icing on the cake.

So tell me SunnyD, why should anyone give much thought to the opinions of people who have never seen this when all the people who have say it adds a whole new level of immersion and fun to the games it works well on?

Because guys like you "think" it must not be true?

LOL

 

[Denithor]

Originally posted by: chizow
Its really something you need to see with your own eyes with the proper hardware. There's certainly reason for skepticism with regards to the technology, hardware and price tag required, but simply dismissing it is foolish.

I'm not dimissing it out of hand, I'm just in the position of having bought a $700 27" LCD recently and not wanting to replace it with a 22" 120Hz model just yet. Add to that the need for at least a GTX 280 + $200 glasses and...no, not right now.

Originally posted by: AmberClad
From the review:

"We do also need to note that, while no one got an instant headache, everyone who tested our setup felt a little bit of eye strain and slight pressure between the eyes after as little as 15 minutes of play."

So we're getting differing reports from the reviewers as far as whether it causes eyestrain. The motion sickness could just as easily be due to the person not being used to FPSs though.

Wonder if these glasses will cause people to go cross-eyed like the Opti-Grab from the movie The Jerk. :laugh:

 

[SunnyD]

Originally posted by: nRollo
So tell me SunnyD, why should anyone give much thought to the opinions of people who have never seen this when all the people who have say it adds a whole new level of immersion and fun to the games it works well on?

Because guys like you "think" it must not be true?

LOL

I never said anything regarding the "quality" of the experience. I simply noted that this thread has gone 100% as expected. You are marketing and defending this product and technology in an evangelical fashion, and are doing your best to misdirect people from "the man behind the curtain" (price, performance). That's all.

By the way, you left off a crucial part of the hothardware quote: At $199, in addition to the cost of a suitable monitor if necessary, NVIDIA's GeForce 3D Vision glasses are not for everyone. Selective editing, the true mark of a PR op.

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: SunnyD

Originally posted by: nRollo
So tell me SunnyD, why should anyone give much thought to the opinions of people who have never seen this when all the people who have say it adds a whole new level of immersion and fun to the games it works well on?

Because guys like you "think" it must not be true?

LOL

I never said anything regarding the "quality" of the experience. I simply noted that this thread has gone 100% as expected. You are marketing and defending this product and technology in an evangelical fashion, and are doing your best to misdirect people from "the man behind the curtain" (price, performance). That's all.

By the way, you left off a crucial part of the hothardware quote: At $199, in addition to the cost of a suitable monitor if necessary, NVIDIA's GeForce 3D Vision glasses are not for everyone. Selective editing, the true mark of a PR op.

Nuts. The jig is up.

SunnyD, no one tells me what to post, and I don't work for NVIDIA. I get excited about what I like, I post about the rest.

Compare what I've posted about PhysX to what I've posted about this.

I like PhysX, and I think it's a direction the industry needs to go in, and I'm glad NVIDIA is bringing it to us. I think PhysX adds to the level of immersion.

I love this. I think this really adds to the level of immersion. I'm excited about this, that would be my opinion of it if I worked for ATi.

TBH, I haven't been gaming as much lately, haven't finished a game since Bioshock. This lit a fire under me, and I've been gaming more. When I start playing a game with this to test it, I don't want to turn it off. It's just really cool to look at, and I didn't even try to look for the faults because I was having so much fun gaming.

That's what this really comes down to for me, it takes the fun to another level.

Yes, my 3007WFPHC is a "better" monitor, and gaming at 25X16 at 100fps with one of my high end video solutions is pretty great.

Things aren't mutually exclusive though- it's also fun to play the PhysX levels of UT3 and see a more interactive environment.

It's a lot of fun to fire up and old game like GTA Vice City in 3d and see the women actually look stacked, and the characters look like battling action figures.

There's no denying that I would have sounded pretty much just like you guys a year ago- higher res, higher AA, bigger screen, faster fps- what else is there?

Now there are other things that add immersion in a different way, and IMO, it's about freaking time.

Is there anyone here who can really get excited about the "breakthrough" of 8X MSAA being available pretty widely now? Not me- I was doing 16X four or five years ago on my 6800GT SLi.

Or the slightly better AA and lighting of DX10.1, with some more frames?

This is the kind of thing that makes a BIG difference- and I swear on my kid's life that it excited me more than anything I've seen on the screen in years.

 

[apoppin]

Well it reads like the fake overdone paid testimonial that i watch on TV

i like it but i am holding back also on buying it

it is new tech and i praised it since i saw it - unchanged from what you guys have also been seeing for a short time.
- it is something one must *experience* for themselves to decide .. and clearly the forums have always been used to persuade people

it is something that will continue to get better - remember no games are programmed for 3D yet
- this is SO primitive .. but it is a good beginning; early adopters may spur further development more quickly


You also need to think how many 3D movies you really think are well done or are "gimicky"
- it is also like this in gaming imo

i wonder how many people will *LOVE* this after 6 months of living with the glasses and other little issues the reviewers mention?

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: apoppin
Well it reads like the fake overdone paid testimonial that i watch on TV

i like it but i am holding back also on buying it

it is new tech and i praised it since i saw it - unchanged from what you guys have also been seeing for a short time.
- it is something one must *experience* for themselves to decide .. and clearly the forums have always been used to persuade people

it is something that will continue to get better - remember no games are programmed for 3D yet
- this is SO primitive .. but it is a good beginning; early adopters may spur further development more quickly


You also need to think how many 3D movies you really think are well done or are "gimicky"
- it is also like this in gaming imo

i wonder how many people will *LOVE* this after 6 months of living with the glasses and other little issues the reviewers mention?

I guess that will be the test and speak louder than anything I can say.

If the 3007 is still sitting unused in 6 months, we'll know that (for me at least) this tech has staying power.

 

[apoppin]

well .. that IS what i am looking for

i am just now getting used to 19x12

 

[SSChevy2001]

Why does everyone keep calling this new tech?

Heck the first pair of shutter glasses I had were for my sega master system back in 1987. ( SegaScope 3-D ) Here we are 22 years later still needing glasses to view 3D.

 

[thilanliyan]

That was pretty anti-climactic. I was thinking about trying this but after reading the AT review I think I'll pass.

 

[Avalon]

Well I've got a 22" Trinitron that can do 120hz @ 1280x960...which is fine since I game at low resolution anyway and looks like L4D will be able to handle that. If I find someone who purchases this, I'll give it a shot. I'm not going to fork over $200 for one, and I'm certainly not getting a 120hz LCD. The gaming store on campus will probably have some of these, maybe I can convince the owner to loan me a store display (I'm assuming they'll have one on display), since I know him personally.

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: SSChevy2001
Why does everyone keep calling this new tech?

Heck the first pair of shutter glasses I had were for my sega master system back in 1987. ( SegaScope 3-D ) Here we are 22 years later still needing glasses to view 3D.

I call it new tech because it doesn't feel like someone pounded a 6" nail through the bridge of my nose when I look at it.

Another glowing review:

http://www.businessweek.com/ma...w_this+week%27s+column]http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/09_03/b4116065157690.htm?chan=technology_tech+maven+page+-+new_this+week%27s+column[/URL]

So far we have:

CBS news, ABC news, BusinessWeek reporting on this. The first time I've ever seen anything like this in I don't know how long in PC Gaming.

All of the reviews except the one on this site pretty much love it, and even the one here is decidedly mixed.

I agree at $600 entrance, 3D vision won't be in 95% of the PCs out there tomorrow, but if you have the bucks to spare, its a very fun toy.

 

[CP5670]

My display should work with this (CRT that does 120hz at 1600x1200), but I would not pay $200 for it even though I like the concept. The performance hit will mainly restrict this to older games but its benefits are highly variable even in the games that AT tested, and it's hard to gauge how comfortable these stereo vision setups are over a long period without trying them out personally. Of course, there is also a practical issue of needing a variant that can fit over normal glasses.

 

[kekewons]

This is very welcome news for me 'cause stereo is my "thing."

I've used shutterglasses with both a 21" CRT (1600x1200 @120Hz) and with LIFESIZE stereo projection, and I can certainly say it "rocks" unlike anything you've ever seen when you get it set up "right."

Stereo is just unbelievably good when seen lifesize. I've used it most recently with a DLP projector here (close range, large image), and even though the image was somewhat pixelated (even at 1024x768), the experience was still shockingly good.

I use it primarily with driving sims, although flightsimming has real potential too, IMO.

I've used it too with at least one FPS game (Call of Duty 2). It's just SO different from playing on a monitor that words can't even describe it*.

[*Sniping is really different when the "view circle" is three feet across.... ]

----------

IMO, the biggest news here lies not with the Nvidia shutterglasses but instead with the introduction of new 120Hz refresh LCD monitors by both Samsung and ViewSonic.**

[**Samsung's 2233RZ and ViewSonic VX2265wm are the two models I'm aware of--both 22" widescreens, 1680x1050@120Hz]

And not because 3D is all that hot when seen on a monitor (to my mind, it really isn't) but because of the potential to strip down one of these new displays and use the bare LCD to build a large format DIY stereo projector.

!!!

THAT would truly be fantastic, and I intend to try it myself at the earliest opportunity


k

 

[kekewons]

Drawbacks:


IMO, stereo 3D has a problem when seen less than lifesize--most likely because our own eyes are typically used to seeing stereo images in LIFESIZE (and nothing else).

I can recall the first time I saw stereo driving on my 21" CRT. Underwhelming to say the least.

Yes, the image DID truly seem stereographic...but because the field of view was so large it felt like I was driving a quarter-scale model, and not a real, lifesized car.

Thankfully, some driving sim designers have become aware of this issue, and have made the necessary tools available to experimenters like me (rFactor, for example, at "rFactor.net.")

So today, I am able to set things up so that the image ahead of me is TRULY LIFESIZE...and it really makes all the difference, IMO. Halfsize...might be close enough to fool the brain a bit...but LIFESIZE truly does "pop" out at you.

And though one might assume it's just a matter of having a bigger image, this is not quite the case either. When seen lifesize, it becomes obvious, in many cases, that the current state of 3D modeling can really be quite crude indeed.

In simracing, for example: A typical "guardrail" is often just a single (flat) texture applied to a vertical, flat wall. So when you come up close against it in your Porsche, it becomes rather obvious that the quality of the 3D modeling is of a lower quality than you might expect...and so the sense of immersion can fade a bit.

[Cure: Use a few more trapezoids in your track modeling]

Hopefully you won't crash because of it, but it can certainly be a problem if you are expecting something else.

[As time goes on, this will become less and less of a problem, I'm sure, because 3D modelers will fit themselves better into reality, simply in terms of using more trapezoids]

-------

Color shimmer: I mentioned I've used a DLP projector--in my case I've used a NEC LT180 in my case, a projector which put out rather a large image at closer screen range than do many other models.

"Color Shimmer" is my own term for a "disconnect"...between what one eye sees and what the other eye sees.

When driving, for example, I might see a bright yellow billboard out of one eye, but only a dirty brown billboard out of the other eye.

The two eyes will agree on the relative position of said billboard in the 3D space, but they won't agree on the color, so, collectively, the brain sees this as "color shimmer--an indeterminate color.

This was very much a part of the lifesize projection I referred to above, but I, for my part, did NOT find it hugely objectionable. A problem? Yes,

A real stumbling block? No.

---------

Once again, I expect this block could be removed anyway using one of these new LCD's in a DIY projector.


k

 

[dug777]

Very innovative, but that AT review suggests I need this like a need a hole in the head

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: dug777
Very innovative, but that AT review suggests I need this like a need a hole in the head

Every other review on the internet suggests you need this like a very fun high end toy.

To each their own, but you should probably test it at a store before you decide you don't need it based on the only mixed review on the internet.

 

[Creig]

Originally posted by: nRollo

Originally posted by: dug777
Very innovative, but that AT review suggests I need this like a need a hole in the head

Every other review on the internet suggests you need this like a very fun high end toy.

It's easy for reviewers to recommend these glasses when all they're doing is testing them and then sending them back to Nvidia when they're done. They're not spending $600-$900+ out of their own pockets. I'm sure reviewers say Ferrari's are very fun high end toys, too. But I doubt every person who gave them a positive review went out and bought one themselves.

Even the reviewers themselves are saying the investment price is too steep for most consumers.

The active shades come with a $199 entrance fee. We can guarantee you don't have the necessary monitor technology yet (as of January 2009, that is), either. And that will cost you another $399. Already you're at $600 bucks just to get in the door, assuming your PC has ample GPU muscle to drive the whole setup.

GeForce 3D Vision cannot truly succeed without some sort of embrace from game developers, and that's what we imagine Nvidia is working on right now. Until that happens, we?d be inclined to let the prices on those brand-new monitors and glasses come down a bit. The technology is remarkably novel?there?s just so much else you can do with $600 right now.

http://www.tomshardware.com/re...on-stereo,2121-10.html

When you figure in the cost of a decent 120Hz monitor though, things start to change from the point of view of an average consumer. As we said before, this is the really crippling blow for the 3DVision. Virtually everyone won?t have a compatible monitor because 99 percent of TFTs currently on the market are 60Hz (or 75Hz if you?re using VGA), not 120Hz. That means that if you want to actually use the 3DVision then you?re going to have to go out and buy a new screen too ? and those things definitely cost more than £100.

The requirement for a totally new monitor though is what knocks the legs out from underneath the 3DVision, taking it off the market for those who were after a big boys toy. As an unproven technology it needs to be cheap enough for interested parties to buy it on a whim so they can check it out and tell their friends ? and the one thing that 3D gaming still isn?t; is cheap enough for the average consumer.

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardwa...orce-3dvision-review/8

 

[AmberClad]

Some more reviews fresh off the presses:
THG (this one has benchmarks as well)
bittech
Bjorn3D

 

[SunnyD]

Originally posted by: apoppin
Well it reads like the fake overdone paid testimonial that i watch on TV

Exactly. Ron Popiel at it's finest. Now where's the spray paint hair?

See Rollo - THIS is exactly the problem I have with most of your "nvidia tech" posts... you say crap like this every single time:

Originally posted by: nRollo
Another glowing review:

You claim no one is telling you what to say. It's the semantics of that statement we probably differ on. Sure, no one is explicitly telling you what to say, but I'd be willing to wager the farm that you got a guideline packet or at least lecture when you signed on with nvidia PR. But that's neither here nor there... just ignore what I said.

Originally posted by: Creig

Originally posted by: nRollo

Originally posted by: dug777
Very innovative, but that AT review suggests I need this like a need a hole in the head

Every other review on the internet suggests you need this like a very fun high end toy.

It's easy for reviewers to recommend these glasses when all they're doing is testing them and then sending them back to Nvidia when they're done. They're not spending $600-$900+ out of their own pockets. I'm sure reviewers say Ferrari's are very fun high end toys, too. But I doubt every person who gave them a positive review went out and bought one themselves.

Very well said.

Originally posted by: nRollo
This is the kind of thing that makes a BIG difference- and I swear on my kid's life that it excited me more than anything I've seen on the screen in years.

Originally posted by: nRollo
I agree at $600 entrance, 3D vision won't be in 95% of the PCs out there tomorrow, but if you have the bucks to spare, its a very fun toy.

Wow. Granted I'm definitely no role model myself, but I think taking my son to the amusement park for a day and spending $60 on tickets, lunch, games and snacks would be a far more immersive experience. :laugh:

Originally posted by: nRollo
I call it new tech because it doesn't feel like someone pounded a 6" nail through the bridge of my nose when I look at it.

That just means it's old tech done better. It's still going to suffer the same drawbacks as the old tech did.

If nvidia really wanted to do something innovative and worth the money, they would have added stereoscopic 3D with a non-prohibitive cost. If they want something to become mainstream, they need to learn from the likes of their PhysX group... minimal cost. Speaking of, they should just port PhysX to ATI themselves... but I digress.

 

[Keysplayr]

SunnyD:

You should still take your son to the amusement park.