I actually tried the 3D vision in VR mod last night, it worked surprisingly well, although you have to have a keyboard at hand at all times because if you alt-tab out of the game you have to re-enable it when you go back into the game.

Not sure if I'd use it regularly though, there seemed to be a rather large penalty hit to performance, not to mention the drop in resolution, and in the end you're still sitting down looking at a representation of a 2D screen with unmovable 3D depth perception-it's nice and better than nothing, but I think I'd rather just use a normal 3D monitor, although I don't own one so...

GinRummy wrote on Mar 11, 2019, 13:16:
Since I don't have any VR hardware I always did custom nvidia driver installs to un-select the two 3Dvision driver files when doing updates. So making them separate for VR owners just simplifies things for most people. Not sure what it will take to make VR become mainstream, maybe some kind of monitor display that you don't have to wear on your head?

Installing 3D drivers alongside the normal ones, drivers that cause no issues if you don't want to use them, is less simple than making users install separate downloads? What're you smoking my man, it must be good.

VR is not mainstream yet, but there are LOTS of good games for it already, and honestly you're missing out.

GinRummy wrote on Mar 11, 2019, 13:16:
Since I don't have any VR hardware I always did custom nvidia driver installs to un-select the two 3Dvision driver files when doing updates. So making them separate for VR owners just simplifies things for most people. Not sure what it will take to make VR become mainstream, maybe some kind of monitor display that you don't have to wear on your head?

that's the best post I ever read absolutely unbelievable.

I'm gonna send a screenshot of this to nVidia marketing department.

Since I don't have any VR hardware I always did custom nvidia driver installs to un-select the two 3Dvision driver files when doing updates. So making them separate for VR owners just simplifies things for most people. Not sure what it will take to make VR become mainstream, maybe some kind of monitor display that you don't have to wear on your head?

Mordecai Walfish wrote on Mar 11, 2019, 07:02:
I've had a 3D vision monitor for 6 years now and never used it once for that, but after reading this thread am torn between buying the glasses or just putting that money towards a vr headset in the future, if that can do 3d vision just as well. Wish the glasses weren't so expensive, and theyre probably just going to go up in price now with the feature being discontinued and glasses/monitors not being made anymore. vr is maybe the more appealing option of the two because it doesnt need the combination of a monitor that supports it and goggles, just the headset has it all, and newly made ones can likely easily support what the current ones are doing with the 3d vision compatibility stuff.

Just to play devil's advocate, there are advantages to a monitor over an HMD. Those in favor of the former would cite higher resolutions and better refresh rates over an HMD. There are also some games that aren't playable in SBS mode, meaning you can't play them in 3D on an HMD. Finally, it takes a lot of processing power to run SBS 3D on a virtual screen--so depending on the game, better frame rates playing 3D games on a traditional monitor versus an HMD.

Personally, I'm happy I went the VR route, because although all of the above points are true, VR brings other benefits to the table (one I didn't expect was the number of boxing/exercise games I'd actually get into--you can get a semi-decent workout playing some of these games.) And even just for 3D gaming, when I'm in a room looking at my monitor, I'm in a room looking at my monitor. It just isn't as immersive as having the screen floating in a black void right in front of you.

But yeah, pluses and minuses either way. Also, we haven't seen what gen two VR headsets are going to be like, but they're on their way, so if I hadn't bought one yet, I would definitely wait to see what's around the corner.

aka_STEVE wrote on Mar 11, 2019, 10:15:
DSR was just 1 example,,, try VR that they were previously putting special attention to w/ special cards & ouptuts ( dropped ),..go back another step to PhysX -> pushed hard then abandoned, never mentioned at all hardly again, -> ,, etc..etc..

Keep going back & back and you'll see the repeated history of making some new tech "the SHIT" & then abandoning it soon thereafter.

That's all I'm saying - Nvidia has a history of not supporting alot of trends that they start.... 3D vision being the latest victim.

How long before they announce that after further review , Ray tracing is being dropped for some other newer, better tech ??

PhysX is used in a huge amount of games. It's literally built into the Unreal Engine.

Just because they stop talking about it doesn't mean it stops existing. Again, no one crows about hardware T&L because it's tablestakes and no longer a differentiator.

aka_STEVE wrote on Mar 11, 2019, 10:15:
DSR was just 1 example,,, try VR that they were previously putting special attention to w/ special cards & ouptuts ( dropped ),..go back another step to PhysX -> pushed hard then abandoned, never mentioned at all hardly again, -> ,, etc..etc..

Keep going back & back and you'll see the repeated history of making some new tech "the SHIT" & then abandoning it soon thereafter.

That's all I'm saying - Nvidia has a history of not supporting alot of trends that they start.... 3D vision being the latest victim.

How long before they announce that after further review , Ray tracing is being dropped for some other newer, better tech ??

Everything you mentioned is still supported, cards still support VR and PhysX is still a thing, though it's no longer ONLY for Nvidia cards. Seriously, you need to do some research.

DSR was just 1 example,,, try VR that they were previously putting special attention to w/ special cards & ouptuts ( dropped ),..go back another step to PhysX -> pushed hard then abandoned, never mentioned at all hardly again, -> ,, etc..etc..

Keep going back & back and you'll see the repeated history of making some new tech "the SHIT" & then abandoning it soon thereafter.

That's all I'm saying - Nvidia has a history of not supporting alot of trends that they start.... 3D vision being the latest victim.

How long before they announce that after further review , Ray tracing is being dropped for some other newer, better tech ??

Yup, DSR is used by most AAA games these days. It's kind of like how we don't hear about hardware T&L anymore.

aka_STEVE wrote on Mar 11, 2019, 07:47:
Since some didn't quite understand my comments, I will elaborate.

Look back at Nvidia's 'groundbreaking' tech announcements over the past 20 years and see how overall they push it solid for a few years then quietly stop supporting it ( but not officially of course ) forever whilst they move on to the next big great thing...

let's just look back at the latest one as an example, from just 4 years or so ago...- DSR , Dynamic SUper Resolution.

"" Dynamic Super Resolution (DSR) will have largest impact, enhancing any game that supports resolutions above 1920x1080. What does DSR do? Simply put, it renders a game at a higher, more detailed resolution and intelligently shrinks the result back down to the resolution of your monitor, giving you 4K, 3840x2160-quality graphics on any screen. ""

you couldn't swing a dead cat around without hearing about how this will change gaming clarity on PC games for their life and their kids lives or generations to come..

Yet now, they still have it on their site & drivers but has anyone heard Nvidia pushing this lately ?? NO , they don't even mention it anymore after just a few years...

I'm just a tad upset that they keep this circle of marketing push on tech then for the most part abandon it by the wayside shortly after... Ray Tracing being the latest of which we are supposed to be falling for... ... enough is enough for me.

Whats there to push about it? It's super sampling, and I use it for games all the time still, as do many other people. Makes a lot of games look better than they ever could without it because of limited features. GTA IV comes to mind, with its lack of real AA. You cannot get better image quality in that game if you decided to play it today on a 1080 or 1440 screen, than with using DSR. (4x with 0-10% smoothing) People know this. They use it. What does Nvidia need to put money in to advertising it for? It's part of the common experience already and people are familiar with it.

aka_STEVE wrote on Mar 11, 2019, 07:47:
Since some didn't quite understand my comments, I will elaborate.

Look back at Nvidia's 'groundbreaking' tech announcements over the past 20 years and see how overall they push it solid for a few years then quietly stop supporting it ( but not officially of course ) forever whilst they move on to the next big great thing...

let's just look back at the latest one as an example, from just 4 years or so ago...- DSR , Dynamic SUper Resolution.

"" Dynamic Super Resolution (DSR) will have largest impact, enhancing any game that supports resolutions above 1920x1080. What does DSR do? Simply put, it renders a game at a higher, more detailed resolution and intelligently shrinks the result back down to the resolution of your monitor, giving you 4K, 3840x2160-quality graphics on any screen. ""

you couldn't swing a dead cat around without hearing about how this will change gaming clarity on PC games for their life and their kids lives or generations to come..

Yet now, they still have it on their site & drivers but has anyone heard Nvidia pushing this lately ?? NO , they don't even mention it anymore after just a few years...

I'm just a tad upset that they keep this circle of marketing push on tech then for the most part abandon it by the wayside shortly after... Ray Tracing being the latest of which we are supposed to be falling for... ... enough is enough for me.

They stopped pushing it because it's pretty standard in AAA these days, not because they abandoned it. It's just not called DSR in games.

Since some didn't quite understand my comments, I will elaborate.

Look back at Nvidia's 'groundbreaking' tech announcements over the past 20 years and see how overall they push it solid for a few years then quietly stop supporting it ( but not officially of course ) forever whilst they move on to the next big great thing...

let's just look back at the latest one as an example, from just 4 years or so ago...- DSR , Dynamic SUper Resolution.

"" Dynamic Super Resolution (DSR) will have largest impact, enhancing any game that supports resolutions above 1920x1080. What does DSR do? Simply put, it renders a game at a higher, more detailed resolution and intelligently shrinks the result back down to the resolution of your monitor, giving you 4K, 3840x2160-quality graphics on any screen. ""

you couldn't swing a dead cat around without hearing about how this will change gaming clarity on PC games for their life and their kids lives or generations to come..

Yet now, they still have it on their site & drivers but has anyone heard Nvidia pushing this lately ?? NO , they don't even mention it anymore after just a few years...

I'm just a tad upset that they keep this circle of marketing push on tech then for the most part abandon it by the wayside shortly after... Ray Tracing being the latest of which we are supposed to be falling for... ... enough is enough for me.

Mordecai Walfish wrote on Mar 11, 2019, 07:02:
I've had a 3D vision monitor for 6 years now and never used it once for that, but after reading this thread am torn between buying the glasses or just putting that money towards a vr headset in the future, if that can do 3d vision just as well. Wish the glasses weren't so expensive, and theyre probably just going to go up in price now with the feature being discontinued and glasses/monitors not being made anymore. vr is maybe the more appealing option of the two because it doesnt need the combination of a monitor that supports it and goggles, just the headset has it all, and newly made ones can likely easily support what the current ones are doing with the 3d vision compatibility stuff.

Honestly I'd give it a try since you're already more than halfway there. VR is great, but it's a lot more hassle than putting on a pair of shutter glasses, and being able to just sit and play regular games but in 3D games is relaxing.

I've had a 3D vision monitor for 6 years now and never used it once for that, but after reading this thread am torn between buying the glasses or just putting that money towards a vr headset in the future, if that can do 3d vision just as well. Wish the glasses weren't so expensive, and theyre probably just going to go up in price now with the feature being discontinued and glasses/monitors not being made anymore. vr is maybe the more appealing option of the two because it doesnt need the combination of a monitor that supports it and goggles, just the headset has it all, and newly made ones can likely easily support what the current ones are doing with the 3d vision compatibility stuff.

Razumen wrote on Mar 10, 2019, 23:54:

I think G.oz was being sarcastic, but if not...

Yep. I should have used the /s tag or something.

SMITE wrote on Mar 11, 2019, 02:51:

eRe4s3r wrote on Mar 11, 2019, 01:44:

What's VR got to do with 3D Vision, which is a TV standard?

There's a (relatively) new wrapper called 3DMigoto. It allows 3D Vision to be run in SBS 3D (side by side 3D). This means you can run these games on any VR system like the Rift or Vive (even, with some extra software, Google Cardboard). When you combine this with a virtual screen program like Virtual Desktop, you end up with a giant 3D screen you can curve around your head ... it really makes you feel like you're in the game. I actually like it more than many "made for VR" games. Resident Evil 2 is amazing in 3D. If you have an current or older Nvidia card, remember this if you ever pick up a VR HMD.

Ah, that makes a lot more sense and actually sounds pretty awesome. Completely missed that this is even possible.

eRe4s3r wrote on Mar 11, 2019, 01:44:

What's VR got to do with 3D Vision, which is a TV standard?

There's a (relatively) new wrapper called 3DMigoto. It allows 3D Vision to be run in SBS 3D (side by side 3D). This means you can run these games on any VR system like the Rift or Vive (even, with some extra software, Google Cardboard). When you combine this with a virtual screen program like Virtual Desktop, you end up with a giant 3D screen you can curve around your head ... it really makes you feel like you're in the game. I actually like it more than many "made for VR" games. Resident Evil 2 is amazing in 3D. If you have an current or older Nvidia card, remember this if you ever pick up a VR HMD.

This comment was edited on Mar 11, 2019, 03:04.

Razumen wrote on Mar 10, 2019, 23:21:

jdreyer wrote on Mar 10, 2019, 19:51:
Played around with this a few years ago. It was pretty cool. The biggest problem was t he red-green glasses wrecked the colors of everything.

Did it even support red & green glasses? There were much better options such as shutter or polarized glasses that didn't distort colors, though brightness was sometimes an issue.

Personally I really liked the 3D effect, being able to see games with depth perception really made the whole world seem so much more real and physical. It's a shame that it was perpetually tied to the slightly awkward, and even worse, pricey glasses. Even more confusing how people attacked it when making games look better should go hand in hand with making them perceived more naturally.

Yeah, now that you mention it, I used the active glasses once. It was amazing. I didn't own a pair however, so mostly messed around with the green-red glasses.

eRe4s3r wrote on Mar 11, 2019, 01:44:

SMITE wrote on Mar 11, 2019, 00:50:

vacs wrote on Mar 10, 2019, 23:35:
Very unfortunate. After using 3D Vision for many, many years. Playing immersive games without 3D Vision really doesn't give me the kick anymore. Not sure if I will eventually stop playing video games all together.

Luckily I still have a huge backlog of 3D Vision compatible games, I need to play first, before I have to worry about the fate of 3D Vision.

You won't have to stop. There's a whole community of people dedicated to keeping 3D Vision alive, even with the loss of support from Nvidia. Thanks to them, I'm currently playing Metro: Exodus in 3D on my Rift and it's pretty damn awesome.

See here:

https://forums.geforce.com/default/board/49/

And just in case you don't know about the Helix mod fixes ...

http://helixmod.blogspot.com

EDIT: whoops. Didn't realize these were quoted in the first post. Sorry about that.

What's VR got to do with 3D Vision, which is a TV standard?

3D vision is for computers...

And if you can get a game to run in 3D, then it's pretty simple theoretically to output that image to a VR headset.

SMITE wrote on Mar 11, 2019, 00:50:

vacs wrote on Mar 10, 2019, 23:35:
Very unfortunate. After using 3D Vision for many, many years. Playing immersive games without 3D Vision really doesn't give me the kick anymore. Not sure if I will eventually stop playing video games all together.

Luckily I still have a huge backlog of 3D Vision compatible games, I need to play first, before I have to worry about the fate of 3D Vision.

You won't have to stop. There's a whole community of people dedicated to keeping 3D Vision alive, even with the loss of support from Nvidia. Thanks to them, I'm currently playing Metro: Exodus in 3D on my Rift and it's pretty damn awesome.

See here:

https://forums.geforce.com/default/board/49/

And just in case you don't know about the Helix mod fixes ...

http://helixmod.blogspot.com

EDIT: whoops. Didn't realize these were quoted in the first post. Sorry about that.

What's VR got to do with 3D Vision, which is a TV standard?