I would like to start a discussion on how the gamedev.net community feels about the looming boom in 3D Stereoscopic graphics. I personally don't think of it as a bad thing, however I don't forsee it being the massive hit that companies are foretelling. I recently tried out the nVidia 3D Vision glasses, I was sceptical at first, but was quite surprised at how good they were at doing what they needed to do. I played around for 5 minutes in a generic FPS quite enjoyed the feeling of 'depth' not so much 3D. One disappointment was text rendering. I'm assuming that this is because depth is usually rendered using an Orthographic matrix rather than a projection matrix and thus, doesn't have much of a concept of depth, or z-buffering. I have also seen a number of discussions on LinkedIn about 3DTV. There is one company, there name elludes me, that want's to provide a 3DTV standard. Full 1080 resolution for each eye. 3D Television is nothing knew, but the projects that it is being applied to, and the backing it is receiving, means that it is reaching out to more and more people than every before. As a graphics programmer in the Broadcast Industry, I am just waiting for the phone call to ask for a stereoscopic application. My question is? Should we adopt stereoscopy or stick with our humble 2D?

I suspect that it will mean nothing to me in the end.

Granted, I haven't tried the new solutions but the last time I tried using a VR headset it caused me nothing but problems as my vision is a bit wonky (left eye "works" but is mostly ignored at a neurological level due to the bad image it provides and is used to give me basic left-side motion detection) anything which enforces a left-right split doesn't work.

So, if the new technology doesn't change this and as long as we still have films/games/tv which are displayed on a normal flat screen I don't really care about it.

If it becomes common place to the extent that the majority of things are provided in that manner, well I'll just have to find other things todo with my time [smile]

I tried the 3d car demo at GDC. It was cool for maybe 5 minutes until I got a little bit dizzy. I'm not sure what text your talking about, but textures containing text like street signs, were almost impossible to read. Like I said, its cool for 5 minutes and thats all. Plus they render the scene 2 times from 2 viewports. I'd rather put all that rendering into ultra high quality graphics instead.

As a fan of IMAX, yes - I want to see more 3d Stereoscopic. I've seen this return of thesaurus or something (heh.. heh.. a pun there, I just forgot the real dinasour type). Anyway, it was awesome. I doesn't even feel dizzy. I wacthed Haunted Castle 3D, Polar Express IMAX.

Yeah. I want 3D, in moves and in games - as long as it doesn't make me dizzy, just like IMAX. And of course, the glass must not be too heavy, like IMAX.

Quote: Original post by AndyEsser
I would like to start a discussion on how the gamedev.net community feels about the looming boom in 3D Stereoscopic graphics.

I personally don't think of it as a bad thing, however I don't forsee it being the massive hit that companies are foretelling.

I recently tried out the nVidia 3D Vision glasses, I was sceptical at first, but was quite surprised at how good they were at doing what they needed to do. I played around for 5 minutes in a generic FPS quite enjoyed the feeling of 'depth' not so much 3D. One disappointment was text rendering. I'm assuming that this is because depth is usually rendered using an Orthographic matrix rather than a projection matrix and thus, doesn't have much of a concept of depth, or z-buffering.

I have also seen a number of discussions on LinkedIn about 3DTV. There is one company, there name elludes me, that want's to provide a 3DTV standard. Full 1080 resolution for each eye.

3D Television is nothing knew, but the projects that it is being applied to, and the backing it is receiving, means that it is reaching out to more and more people than every before.

As a graphics programmer in the Broadcast Industry, I am just waiting for the phone call to ask for a stereoscopic application. My question is? Should we adopt stereoscopy or stick with our humble 2D?

I think it's a quarter-step forward, not a full step. Having to wear peripherals hasn't really worked in practice. Granted, these are lighter than VR headsets, but I personally wouldn't want to use glasses all the time (though I did play through quite a few levels of Magic Carpet with the 3D glasses. Am I the only one who tried this?).

I think something like this is a bigger step forward (3:45) :
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/johnny_lee_demos_wii_remote_hacks.html