3D gaming monitor

[PZ]

Does anyone know anything about this 3D gaming monitor combo?  This is the first time I've encountered anything like this:  newegg

[JRD]

No... never heard anything about it...
Looks impressive... a good headset and those goggles should keep you awake for hours in a row...


But be sure to sneak it into your house withou Mrs. PZ catch you... you are risking a lot my friend ;D ;D ;D ;D

[Art Blade]

Don't know about the monitor, but read about those 3D glasses. Briefly, you need a 120Hz monitor for the 3D glasses, so those two match. Works with polarisation filters, each glass = 1/2 monitor frequency, hence 120=2x60, 60Hz being normal TFT. Should w@&k fairly well with a lot of applications, games that is. I wouldn't buy it now because it is too new, there will be bugs. The monitor itself seems alright.

[PZ]

Interesting info Art, thanks for the reply.  I too saw the 120 hz refresh and thought that was excellent.  As to the response time, is 2 ms about as fast as it comes these days?  I read somewhere that the response time is the single most important feature of a monitor to ensure that the play is the smoothest possible.

You're correct JRD, I'd better not even think too loudly on this one!  (Although my wife did ask why I didn't get a monitor... maybe that's a way in as long as she doesn't see the word "gaming")  ;D

[Art Blade]

the response time of monitors is partly a lie. Of course is a fast response (refresh rate) better. Thing is, you find infos that have no common ground, if manufacturer A says 2ms doesn't mean it is 2ms, or the same 2ms manufacturer B says it is: they time how long it takes for a pixel to change from black to white. Only it isn't white at once, it takes time until a pixel reaches its maximum brightness. They use "overdrive" functions that sort of force a quick response, yet it takes a while until the b/w change is stable. what you get is ghost images (looks like white outlines) that can be disturbing during a fast change of direction (ie aim quickly). 2ms is more likely a myth, usually it takes longer. The only way to make sure is to actually SEE what you get, test a monitor in a shop. only where can you do that... just buy what seems worth the money and hope it's ok, or get used to what you got :)

[PZ]

Good to know - thanks again for the valuable information.

[Dweller_Benthos]

I remember I tried out 3D glasses ages ago in a game called Hexen - anyone remember that one? It was pretty cool, the game was tied into the headset so that you didn't need a mouse, wherever you moved your head to look - up, down, left, right, etc - the game looked that direction too. Along with the 3D effect, it was neat. It was low res though, since the headset had two small LCD monitors in them, kinda like the ones in a camcorder viewfinder, and they only went, at the time, to maybe 640x480. You looked a right geek wearing them, too. Probably why they didn't catch on.

Anyway, I think PC Gamer had a review of these 3D specs a while ago, and I think they were luke warm on the idea. Nice, but not really worth the dough.

[Art Blade]

that's about the same I read. And yeah, I remember Hexen(II). Back in the day I had 3D-glasses by Elsa (a German company that no longer exists). I think it was a shutter version (darkened one glass at the time in turns). The problem then was, you had to adjust the damn thing to your eye base (interpupillary distance) which was very tricky... results were either too much of 3D or none at all... took time to get it right. And I used to get headaches. Bloody expensive trial and error then :)

[PZ]

Man, I don't need any more headaches that I already have... however, the 120 hz monitor is not a bad idea, correct?

[Art Blade]

true... but if you buy a "3D-ready" means you pay for technology you're never going to use (polarisation screen...) Get one if it supports high Hz but doesn't sport "3D-ready" unless you want to... hehe  ;D

[PZ]

nah, sounds like the 3D thing is a fad!

[Art Blade]

Not sure yet... I hear the movie industry and gaming industry is working on it (as they have for 20 years LOL)

[Dweller_Benthos]

Yeah, 3D would be cool, and if implemented right, can be awesome. I really liked that 3D headset I tried way back when, it was especially cool that you moved your head to look where you wanted, no mouse needed. The new 3D stuff doesn't do that as far as I know. But, yeah, go for a decent 60hz monitor. I have the Samsung SyncMaster 226 BW and I like it a lot. Only thing is I wish it went higher than 1680x1050, though it's pretty nice at that resolution, but the next step up, what is it, 1900x1200 would be even better and that's more than enough for HD TV. But the 226BW has a super fast response time, 2 milliseconds, which is great for fast stuff like gaming and a 3000:1 contrast ratio which means a lot of head room from ultra bright to very dark. The open desert areas in FC2 during the day, around noon, are almost too bright to look at and I have to reduce the brightness and gamma in the game to make it comfortable to view.

So, those are the specs I would look for first, high res, fast response and high contrast ratio. They are pretty much all 60hz, and if you can get a 120hz model for not much more, go ahead, who knows, the 3D thing might get the bugs worked out of it eventually and you'd be ready.

[PZ]

Thanks for the info D_B; I feel like a more informed purchaser now.

[Art Blade]

Just a remark: What I like about this site, what ever questions come up, all replies make sense and are quality, and so far no questions unanswered and no problems unsolved :)

[DKM2]

I'm pretty sure you can only use a few select monitors, all 120Hz, as 60Hz is too slow a
refresh for each eye from a review I read a few months ago, but can't find now, but here's a few others.

http://www.legitreviews.com/article/889/1/
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2009/01/09/nvidia-geforce-3dvision-review/1
http://techreport.com/articles.x/16313
http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/nvidia_3d_vision/

[PZ]

Thanks DKM2 - as always you and several of the others offer great advice.

I completely agree, Art - when I have visited other forums and often see questions that go unanswered, I feel really bad for the poster.  Whenever I can, I will respond, even if only to acknowledge that the post has been fairly treated.

One in particular comes to mind - a person that was obviously excited about FC2 had posted a question that I can't even recall now, but the people that responded should be ashamed of themselves as human beings.  Here was a person new to the forums, asking a simple question, and rather than answer in a courteous manner, two regular members immediately responded with sarcastic remarks about searching the forums.  If I could have, I'd have slapped them up-side-of-the-head to try to knock some courtesy into them.  In fact, it was so obviously bad that a forum moderator stepped in and told them to give the guy a break.  I'll bet the attitude of those two fools encouraged the new guy to post again [dripping with sarcasm].

In any case, I realize that people (myself included) post things that have been covered before in other places, but in defense, the number of posts on our site have become numerous enough so that a search might not easily turn them up.  So what if a person asks a question that has been addressed before - why not just point them in the correct direction, or just answer their question.  It is my opinion that members should enjoy themselves on our site, and not have to worry about what I perceive as ridiculous Internet forums etiquette (some of those forums people need to get a life in the real world).

It is my sincere hope that any new people reading this post feel secure in the fact that all of us at openworldgames.org will not tolerate that kind of sarcastic  bad behavior under any circumstances.

[sorry, bad behavior is a sore subject with me - now off my ranting soapbox...]

[spaceboy]

that's ok PZ, we all agree and that attitude has made this site a refreshing place on the internet.  To add to this discussion, I was on another forum for inFamous the other night reading and posting a bit, and there was what I thought a funny/intelligent question about the hero's electrical power and his rumored negative reaction to water...a lot of people were posting funny and/or intelligent responses and a few people posted something like "geez it's only a game"  I thought wow, that's the point.  We could just play these games, but having a good time discussing our crazy thoughts and gameplay makes these games an experience beyond playing them.  I guess that poster wouldn't like our sense of immersion with Far Cry 2...to each his own, but I'm glad our like-minded members have found our site.

[TheFishlord]

iirc this product is the same thing that HumanSolution is selling as TrackIR only a shitload more expensive, along with a monitor. Just buy TrackIR, it's 6 directions, this one is only four...

[RedRaven]

ref reply 14&16. its refreshing to see a site such as this where there is a good mix of intelligence, humour, advice and a real sense of community, have noticed on other forums the behavior mentioned by PZ, its not big and its not clever - that kind of elitist / cliquey attitude spoils things for people, pretty new to using forums and very new to being active in posting etc, but this forum does nothing but encourage cooperation (which am sure thats what internet is for). every one who i`ve communicated with thru this site has been very friendly and helpful. so glad i found it and signed up, and look forward to the future of this forum and the new boards relating to the new games due out. as for the actual topic does the 3d thing actually w@&k ? many people have tried to convince me that surround sound and 5 speaker set ups is the best way to experince audio but have found it artificial, decent headphones are far more realistic in my experience, we only have to ears and our brains are pretty damned good at using them, wondered if the 3d thing would be life like or obviously fake. soz if post a bit random, been awake almost 30 hours :D

[spaceboy]

I've got no experience with 3D monitors, but if it's anything like the new 3D movies - definitely take a test drive before buying.  It nearly made me ill watching Journey to the Center of the Earth last year. Just very artificial looking I guess.   As for your other comments dke58, I couldn't agree more.

[Art Blade]

does the 3d thing actually w@&k ?

3D is something that depends on your sense organs. As for view, the interpupillary distance plays a role. Because of that, at least some 3D-goggles have a way of fine-tuning them, either hard- or software side. If you use a wrong setup, you will experience problems ranging from viewing "only" 2D, disproportionate 3D, headaches, nausea up to epileptic seizure.

That means, a monitor needs either a way of adjusting it, or it will be using a "default" setup, which may not be satisfactory to you.

many people have tried to convince me that surround sound and 5 speaker set ups is the best way to experince audio but have found it artificial

That depends on how audio 3D is created. It will likely sound artificial if the sources are artificial or computed, respectively. If a proper setup of various microphones is used for live 3D recording, and the recordings merged properly on a sound track, you will be surprised at how natural it can sound.

Also it depends on how far away and where you place your speakers. Even one slightly misplaced speaker may cause a bad sound experience, let alone misplacing all of them :)

decent headphones are far more realistic in my experience

"Decent" headphones are nothing but a set of tiny speakers close to your ears, yet properly arranged :)

we only have to ears and our brains are pretty damned good at using them

If you visualise an ear, you'll think of its outer shape (somewhat like a kidney) and something that resides inside the visual outer shape the looks like a maze, channels, or alike. All that stuff is actually used for directing sound to the inside of your ear ("into the head"). It also modulates or enhances/changes frequencies, respectively the the sound you hear.

There is a 2D and a 3D aspect to hearing.

2D is simple to test: play a sound, ie a single continuous tone (hospital flat line monitor springs to mind hehe) and put the source (a speaker this time) in front of your face, so it will be "between" your ears. Now slowly lower your head until your chin touches your chest (or as close as possible without breaking your neck). The position should be that the speaker "looks" at the top of your head. You should notice that the very same tone seems to change. When I do that, I hear a more brilliant, clearer, higher sound if the speaker "faces" the top of my head, and it dampens and lowers a little if I lift my head so the speaker "faces my face".

That is part of how the brain works out the 3D effects, it calculates the time delay of a tone when it reaches one ear til it reaches the other ear. Also it determins differences in frequencies. Both add up to finally locate the source. This process is almost as fast as bloody lightspeed :)

All in all, we will experience differently how something sounds and looks. That's why it is important to check what is best for you.

[PZ]

Thanks for the detailed information Art - clears up the questions on the challenges of 3D!   :-X

[Art Blade]

welcome :)

By the way, I am looking at my brand new 26'monitor :) Fujutsu Simens, €299, just couldn't resist. When driving the jeep, the character's hands and the wheel look like 1:1 - crazy. 1900x1200 res... incredible. Looking forward to watching a DVD next hehehe

[PZ]

Outstanding, and congratz!

I'm envious, still using an old standard-sized monitor.