News Nvidia launches 3D Vision 2

Plus you would have to be a muppet to use such a device if you new you had light sensitive epilepsy also im pretty sure it would be im some form of small print somewhere so there is not really a problem.

 

If possible you want to go a lot higher than 120Hz...
The experience gets better the higher the frequency.

 

poor nVidia always buying tech and trying to make it propitiatory and then they end up shooting themselves in the foot, now that more companies are working on glasses free 3d thats where it at not these over priced glasses bs.

 

The Nvidia 3D glasses come with different fixings that allow them to be worn over ordinary glasses which I do so no problem there.

 

I think light sensitive epilepsy pretty much rules out any games beyond tetris anyway. Seriously, I don't think there are any obvious medical problems with 3D. Might give some people a headache or eye strain but that should be about it.

And if they can make glasses like this:
http://www.cocoonseyewear.com/
then that should solve the problem of people wearing glasses as well.

3D is a gimmick. But the exact same thing could be said about dynamic shadows, motion blur, heck, any form of advance graphics. It can add an aspect of realism to the game when used properly but can also be horribly annoying.

 

This is true, but how do you find out you are epileptic? it's one of those things that you only find out affects you after it's too late, and while you could be perfectly ok watching tv or playing games normally staring at a screen flickering at 120 hz with glasses that also flash at high speed while your brain is trying to deal with the 3d trickery could quite possibly cause issues.

But I was more just agreeing with an earlier point that there quite possibly a few detrimental side effects to 3d that are as yet unknown and putting 2 screens centimetres from your eyes possibly isn't the most natural or healthy thing in the world.

No, it depends on the affected individual, the frequency is different for a lot of people.

 

Epilepsy is defined as the tendency to have seizures rather than than just having seizures themselves. Many things can cause seizures (drugs, psychological stress, extreme tiredness, electric shocks), mainly by lowering the 'seizure threshold' into the range of normal stimulus. Epileptics have their seizure thresholds already in that normal range.

Admittedly the tetris comment was a little glib but I don't think it's too far from the mark. Besides, from what I know of how the eye works (and admittedly, it's never been an organ I've particularly taken an interest in), I don't even think 3D would cause an seizure in a light sensitive epileptic. We can actually only "see" about 1% of our visual fields (or something there abouts). The rest is your eyes whizzing over the area and your brain storing that information to complete the picture. A classic example would be putting a hat pin in your blind spot. It will suddenly vanish. So the whole world we see is already an optical illusion played on us by our own brains. The brain would simply process 3D images as an uninterrupted image.

I'm not saying there are no health risks. I'm just saying I can't see any physiological basis for it. I honestly don't think it's any less healthy than sitting in front of a normal computer screen. Of course, if someone can provide evidence to the contrary, I'd gladly listen.

 

so no one else has anything positive to say about 3d gaming?

 

I've no complaints about 3D Vision, I think the certified games are awesome with it. Any improvements are welcome tbh. (Although I await reviews)

Might sound like a blanket statement, but ironically so do most of the comments in here; people that knock it, usually haven't tried it. At least not for a considerable length of time.

Move on...

 

There are people that have no negative effect at all, and they enjoy 3D gaming.
It works on a lot more games than you'd think (z-buffer based 3D gaming anyway), and the effect is really nice when you first use it.

I personally suffered from eyestrain and headaches after about an hour of play, and sucked at aiming a 2D crosshair in a 3D world, but that's just me.
You have to test it before you judge.

 

You're using your own subjective experience as a basis for belittling the opposition? Classy.

You might want to take a seat for this one because it's pretty shocking: many people don't enjoy wearing glasses. People with decent vision try to keep it decent to avoid them. People already prescribed glasses switch to contacts to avoid them. Even those who are currently prescribed glasses may dislike having to wear them under other eyewear (such as ski goggles, or 3D glasses). Or what I've seen more often: those with glasses may avoid them when wearing headphones and live with the blurriness.

Now tell someone they need to pay $100 for the pleasure of wearing them, in addition to the cost of a 120Hz monitor*, and it's easy to see why not everyone is sold.


*Which is effectively running as a 60Hz monitor when displaying in 3D. It's not a big issue for many, but I'd personally rather just take the 120Hz monitor and play my games at 120fps. It's supposed to be an excellent experience.

 

Sorry, but you might want to take a seat for this one. It sounds like you have aspergers?

You make a terrible argument, if you're that against glasses you might want to contact your local GP and tell him you've got problems

 

Perhaps I should have taken a tip from you. After all, every master debater knows that saying people have Aspergers is both witty and unoffensive.

"ur retard, i right"

Do I win now?

 

Sorry, I should of probably elaborated after pointing out how stupid your post was, bit silly of me.

Actually wait, I can't? Because all you talk about is glasses...

Moron

 

You know, I never thought I'd say this but your posts actually make me think feathers has well thought out and detailed arguments for 3D Vision.

Allow me to make a few arguments for you:
-Advancements such as the new 3D Vision 2 glasses reduce the drawbacks of glasses. With ever advancing technology they will only get better and better.
-Glasses free 3D is possible and with increased research and popularity may become a more feasible option. Even current problems such as poor field of view may not be a problem for a single user in front of a monitor.
-Even those who initially think "wearing glasses when I play games sounds silly" should at least try it in a store or use a friend's/neighbor's/co-worker's setup. Maybe they'll think the effect is worth it after trying it, some people in the world obviously do.

Was that so hard? I just gave you three statements countering my own post.

 

Sorry, I can't be bothered to reply to you right now. Replaying Batman AA in 3D, it's really good by the way.

 

Are you for real?

Where are the hidden cameras? Is Ashton about to come out and tell me I've been punked?

I can only hope this is some sort of joke or attempt at trolling.

 

I'm starting to get tired of everyone harping on 3D.

It has a gimmicky past yes. But what we see here is nVidia trying to improve it so eventually it wont be as gimmicky.

It is steadily (though slowly), involving into a tech that can add to the experience. Just as widescreen allowed film to give us wide screens showing vast landscapes (Lawrence of Arabia just isn't the same on a fullscreen), 3D will allow us to see more depth than we currently can mimic in 2D. Its just much harder to make 3D work and work well than it was to make a screen wider.

Harp on 3Ds past or maybe what it is right now, but at least dont diss on nVidia for making it better than what it used to be.

 

nope, we're dissing on NVidia on differentiating from a 3D-TV standart that have surpassed NVidia for less than half the dough