The 3D re-relase of Terminator 2 was released on blu-ray recently. Unfortunately it wasn't made available to the US, but no matter - I bought a copy from Amazon UK (www.amazon.co.uk). It was region-coded for region B (so it wouldn't play in my player), but I found a piece of software called AnyDVD HD that can rip an ISO and remove region coding. I did so and burned the resulting ISO to a BD-R, and it plays in my player. AnyDVD has a registration fee, but it has a fully-functional trial period which works for a limited time.

I watched a few minutes of it last night (it was late, so I haven't watched the whole thing yet), but from what I saw, the 3D conversion looks fairly good for 2D-3D conversion.

This was one of my favorite sci-fi movies, and I think the 3D adds a fairly cool effect (though of course it's a great movie without the 3D). I think it's a bummer that the 3D home movie market has tanked in the US and they apparently aren't selling any more 3D movies in the US. I was reading an article about why home 3D failed in the US, and it sounds like one of the reasons was bad timing. I didn't know TV manufacturers started making 3D TVs in 2010, which was right after the US converted from analog to digital over-the-air TV broadcasting - A lot of people probably bought new TVs around that time (though I know at least several people just bought a digital TV tuner box with one of the gov't-provided coupons, making the box essentially free). If I had just bought a new TV then, I could see probably not waning to buy yet another TV for 3D. Any new technology is expensive at first though.. I suppose there probably just weren't enough buyers when they were launched in the US. Perhaps the home 3D movie market will do better abroad, and if so, perhaps they'll re-introduce 3D TVs and home movies back in the US.

Nightfox

On Tuesday, December 19th Nightfox muttered...

The 3D re-relase of Terminator 2 was released on blu-ray recently.

I loooove T1 and T2, but 3D... meh. You seem to like it a lot, so I won't hate on it too much... but I'm glad that market tanked - it was really just a money grab.



--- ENiGMA 1/2 v0.0.8-alpha (linux; x64; 6.11.3)
* Origin: Xibalba -+- xibalba.l33t.codes:44510 (46:1/173)

on 12/19/17, Nightfox said...

and they apparently aren't selling any more 3D movies in the US. I was reading an article about why home 3D failed in the US, and it sounds
like one of the reasons was bad timing. I didn't know TV manufacturers

Yeah, right. 3D movies failed for the same reason 3D gaming is failing: it doesn't add anything useful to the experience. Having shit jump out at you is only interesting the first five times it happens, but after that what are you left with? What does the 3D element add to the ability to tell a story? Zero. Zip. Nada. It's a gimmick and people picked up on that pretty quickly.

Short of someone making a holodeck you're not going to see much advancement beyond the 2D serials we have now.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A27 (Windows)
* Origin: d i s t o r t i o n // d1st.org (46:1/145)

Re: RE: Terminator 2 3D
By: NuSkooler to Nightfox on Tue Dec 19 2017 08:16 pm

The 3D re-relase of Terminator 2 was released on blu-ray recently.

I loooove T1 and T2, but 3D... meh. You seem to like it a lot, so I won't hate on it too much... but I'm glad that market tanked - it was really just a money grab.

I think 3D is pretty cool, though certainly not required for a movie. I figured that we see in 3D, so why do we watch so many movies in 2D? It gives you a little more depth of the scene, like you're actually there. But honestly I don't always feel like getting out 3D glasses to watch a movie, and sometimes I feel like it gives me a bit of a headache..

Nightfox

Re: Terminator 2 3D
By: Digital Avatar to Nightfox on Wed Dec 20 2017 01:01 am

Yeah, right. 3D movies failed for the same reason 3D gaming is failing: it doesn't add anything useful to the experience. Having shit jump out at you

I don't think it's about having stuff jump out at you.. That would get boring fairly quick. It's more about having the depth that we see in real life. We see in 3D, why not movies too? Would you say 3D doesn't add anything useful to real life?

Also I wasn't really aware 3D gaming was failing.. Seems like it has been all the rage just recently. I suppose I haven't seen much talk about it like there was recently, but I figured that was because it's old news now.

Nightfox

it doesn't add anything useful to the experience. Having shit jump out
at you is only interesting the first five times it happens, but after
that what are you left with? What does the 3D element add to the ability to tell a story? Zero. Zip. Nada. It's a gimmick and people picked up on that pretty quickly.

I don't feel its gimmicky at all. Movies very rarely ever try to do pop out, at least none that I own do. Extreme pop-out just doesn't look good from a technical perspective but also because its just simply not used for that.

I think it adds a level of depth and immersion that you cannot even get close to in a standard version. The screen sets "back" into itself to add depth, clarity, and immersion (assuming decent hardware) not pop out with gimmicky crap like you're describing.

For me, all I had to do was see Avatar in 3D IMax vs standard and I was sold. I left the 3D showing in awe, and I couldn't believe that 3 hours went by that fast. I was completely encapsulated by the movie's environments in a way that no movie had ever done before. The 2D experience I had afterwards didn't even come close in comparison.

What I think made it fail was that earlier passive home 3DTV experiences weren't able to reproduce a 3D IMAX-like experience or even close to it. Even early active 3D at home wasn't great. Only in its latest iterations was it becoming good, but it was already taking its dying breaths by then.

Not sure if its failing in gaming. 3D for sure, but I think VR has potential based on my experiences playing a handful of VR games. When its done well its mind blowing... But just like 3DTV we need better hardware first, and I worry that bringing it to the market premature like we did with 3DTV will be VR's downfall.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A37 2017/12/19 (Windows/32)
* Origin: Sector 7 [Mystic BBS WHQ] (46:1/127)

Hello Nightfox,

On Tue Dec 19 2017 22:35:40, Nightfox wrote to Digital Avatar:

Yeah, right. 3D movies failed for the same reason 3D gaming is
failing: it doesn't add anything useful to the experience. Having
shit jump out at you

I don't think it's about having stuff jump out at you.. That would
get boring fairly quick. It's more about having the depth that we see
in real life. We see in 3D, why not movies too? Would you say 3D
doesn't add anything useful to real life?

The only problem is that the 3D glasses may give you a sense of 3D, it's definitely not what we see in real life. Or at least I don't see that many lines and blurrs around an object. The reason is failed is probably because it's not realistic. Sure it may look 3D, but from what I remember, it was always blurry and/or things had auras around them.

Also I wasn't really aware 3D gaming was failing.. Seems like it has
been all the rage just recently. I suppose I haven't seen much talk
about it like there was recently, but I figured that was because it's
old news now.

Not so much 3D gaming, but virtual reality gaming (which I suppose is a form of
3D, except much more immersive) is quite the rage these days.

Regards,
Nick

... "Не знаю. Я здесь только работаю."
--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20170303
* Origin: thePharcyde_ distribution system (Wisconsin) (46:1/100)

Hello g00r00,

On Wed Dec 20 2017 12:56:26, g00r00 wrote to Digital Avatar:

Not sure if its failing in gaming. 3D for sure, but I think VR has potential based on my experiences playing a handful of VR games. When
its done well its mind blowing... But just like 3DTV we need better hardware first, and I worry that bringing it to the market premature
like we did with 3DTV will be VR's downfall.

I've finally jumped on the bandwagon, and will see for myself this Christmas. I
got the kids (oh, and I get to use it too!) a PS4 Pro and a PSVR with some games. I'll be setting it up on a 65" 4K Samsung TV, so all of the hardware should be up to par (ie: TV supports 4K, PS4 Pro supports 4K gaming, etc). So I'm staying hopeful. ;)

Regards,
Nick

... "Не знаю. Я здесь только работаю."
--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20170303
* Origin: thePharcyde_ distribution system (Wisconsin) (46:1/100)

Re: Terminator 2 3D
By: Accession to Nightfox on Wed Dec 20 2017 09:15 pm

Not so much 3D gaming, but virtual reality gaming (which I suppose is a form of 3D, except much more immersive) is quite the rage these days.

Even that's taken a dive. CCP shut down their VR department and won't release any more VR games. They were one of the first companies to create a game for the Oculus Rift, and it was fairly well received (Eve: Valkyre) just 2 years ago.

Buying the VR gear to do VR gaming is expensive as hell. The Oculus Rift is $600, and you need at least a $250 Video card to run it.

DaiTengu

... Earn cash in your spare time -- blackmail your friends
--- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
* Origin: The Sport is War, Total War - warensemble.com (46:1/193)

Re: Terminator 2 3D
By: Accession to Nightfox on Wed Dec 20 2017 09:15 pm

The only problem is that the 3D glasses may give you a sense of 3D, it's definitely not what we see in real life. Or at least I don't see that many lines and blurrs around an object. The reason is failed is probably because it's not realistic. Sure it may look 3D, but from what I remember, it was always blurry and/or things had auras around them.

Some have a bit of blur, but I think that might be due to the fact that many of the 3D movies are actually filmed in 2D and then converted to 3D post-production. Actually filming the movies in 3D probably gives better quality. I think Avatar tends to be one of the better-quality ones, which I think was actually filmed in 3D. So I think it's more a fault of the 3D production process than the medium itself.

Also, 2D isn't what we see in real life either..

Nightfox

I've finally jumped on the bandwagon, and will see for myself this Christmas. I got the kids (oh, and I get to use it too!) a PS4 Pro and a PSVR with some games. I'll be setting it up on a 65" 4K Samsung TV, so
all of the hardware should be up to par (ie: TV supports 4K, PS4 Pro supports 4K gaming, etc). So I'm staying hopeful. ;)

Nice gift! I've played a handful of games on PSVR on a Pro recently I'll
tell you about what I thought:

Some of them are really cool, and some of them just don't transfer well (imo) either because of the lack of video/cpu power/resolution or because of movement issues. Sometimes the movement is so limited as to not make you sick that its frustrating, or its not limited at all and you get sick after playing for 20-30 minutes.

On a side note, you can watch 3D movies on PSVR or use it as a regular screen for games or movies that emulates what felt to me like maybe a 120 inch screen. Not sure I would use that but its there.

I played a handful of games on a demo disk. The one that stuck out to was Moss but it was also the first one I tried. I was blown the fuck away before I even got past the title screen (first time seeing VR). It is a perfect example of how PSVR can be used to make immersive games that don't make you sick. I liked the Rez Infinite demo too.

I didn't have time to play many of the demos because I moved on to Skyrim VR for about 20 minutes. It looks like ass and it made me feel sick after only 20 or so minutes. It was still kind of cool to walk around a village and pop into a pub or see those dragons flying overhead...

But I thought Skyrim was the worst of the games I played at least when it came to demostrating VR and its strengths. Skyrim seemed to demonstrate its weaknesses instead, while games like Moss showed you how cool VR games can be.

I'd love to see VR on the PC with a 1080ti or something but I don't know
anyone who has a setup like that to try it out. I would imagine the
experience is a lot better if you invest like $2500 as opposed to $600 :)

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A37 2017/12/20 (Windows/32)
* Origin: Sector 7 [Mystic BBS WHQ] (46:1/127)

Hello DaiTengu,

On Thu Dec 21 2017 00:27:24, DaiTengu wrote to Accession:

Even that's taken a dive. CCP shut down their VR department and won't release any more VR games. They were one of the first companies to
create a game for the Oculus Rift, and it was fairly well received
(Eve: Valkyre) just 2 years ago.

I'd assume it never even had a chance to take a dive. It just never got huge because of the ridiculous price tag.

Buying the VR gear to do VR gaming is expensive as hell. The Oculus
Rift is $600, and you need at least a $250 Video card to run it.

Yeah, I try to stay away from the latest and greatest on PC. I'm not going to spend $600+ for a GTX1080ti, but I'll snag it when it's half that or less. That's why I went the PS4 route. There's already quite a few VR games, and I won't need to upgrade any hardware until I move on from the PS4 itself.

Regards,
Nick

... "Не знаю. Я здесь только работаю."
--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20170303
* Origin: thePharcyde_ distribution system (Wisconsin) (46:1/100)

Hello g00r00,

On Thu Dec 21 2017 12:51:46, g00r00 wrote to Accession:

I played a handful of games on a demo disk. The one that stuck out to
was Moss but it was also the first one I tried. I was blown the fuck
away before I even got past the title screen (first time seeing VR).
It is a perfect example of how PSVR can be used to make immersive
games that don't make you sick. I liked the Rez Infinite demo too.

I've used the Samsung VR stuff before, so I know what I'm getting myself into. It is pretty amazing, I must say.

As for games, I got Farpoint (with the gun), which at the moment is probably rated one of the best VR games for PS4. Then the PSVR comes with a "Worlds" demo disk. So far that's all I wanted to get, because I want the wife and kids to have a chance to try it out and then give feedback on what other games we should get for it.

Otherwise, I got a few non-VR for them as well.

I didn't have time to play many of the demos because I moved on to
Skyrim VR for about 20 minutes. It looks like ass and it made me feel sick after only 20 or so minutes. It was still kind of cool to walk around a village and pop into a pub or see those dragons flying overhead...

Hah. Ok, I'll definitely stay away from that one then. ;)

I'd love to see VR on the PC with a 1080ti or something but I don't
know anyone who has a setup like that to try it out. I would imagine
the experience is a lot better if you invest like $2500 as opposed to
$600 :)

That's exactly why I went the PS4 route, brutha. I wasn't about to spend that much (hell, the 1080ti is still over $600!), and just as well, the PC (while great for gaming by yourself or online with others) doesn't really seem to offer the in-house fun with friends and family type of setting, which was definitely what I'm aiming for.

Regards,
Nick

... "Не знаю. Я здесь только работаю."
--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20170303
* Origin: thePharcyde_ distribution system (Wisconsin) (46:1/100)

On Thursday, December 21st DaiTengu was heard saying...

Buying the VR gear to do VR gaming is expensive as hell. The Oculus Rift is $600, and you need at least a $250 Video card to run it.

Gaming in general is expensive. I don't think that's really what's killing it.

I have friends that have various VR systems + have tried others at some of the local gaming shops. There are a few issues I see currently:
1) First gen stuff is not mature. Game shops are still trying to figure out WTF
to do with these things
2) Seriously no one wants to game for hours with a big ol head set on their noggin and wires all over the place
3) Kind of like #1, things like movement sucks. There are FPS's and the like, but you have to click-move... kind of port. It honestly sucks.

This stuff is going places... but it's not nearly there for the masses yet.



--- ENiGMA 1/2 v0.0.8-alpha (linux; x64; 6.11.3)
* Origin: Xibalba -+- xibalba.l33t.codes:44510 (46:1/173)

As for games, I got Farpoint (with the gun), which at the moment is probably rated one of the best VR games for PS4. Then the PSVR comes

I was really interested in Farpoint too but the VR setup I was using didn't have the gun. Apparently for some reason they don't offer support for move sticks with it and that was all I had access to.

I've been tempted to pick up the whole VR bundle with gun tho... Let me know what you think when you try it.

Hah. Ok, I'll definitely stay away from that one then. ;)

I'm sure some people who really like Skyrim would love it. To be fair I didn't get too into the original Skyrim either and I only played this one for like 20 minutes.

That's exactly why I went the PS4 route, brutha. I wasn't about to spend that much (hell, the 1080ti is still over $600!), and just as well, the
PC (while great for gaming by yourself or online with others) doesn't really seem to offer the in-house fun with friends and family type of setting, which was definitely what I'm aiming for.

I hear ya. I used to try to keep a responsibly updated PC for gaming but these days I'm happy with less hassle and a PS4. I barely play games now anyway in comparison to what I used to.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A37 2017/12/21 (Windows/32)
* Origin: Sector 7 [Mystic BBS WHQ] (46:1/127)

Hello g00r00,

On Thu Dec 21 2017 18:48:20, g00r00 wrote to Accession:

I was really interested in Farpoint too but the VR setup I was using didn't have the gun. Apparently for some reason they don't offer
support for move sticks with it and that was all I had access to.

Ah ok. I noticed some games utilize the move sticks, some you can just use a controller, and then the gun which I believe is really only for Farpoint at this time. Hopefully there's more in the future. ;)

I've been tempted to pick up the whole VR bundle with gun tho... Let
me know what you think when you try it.

Will do.

I hear ya. I used to try to keep a responsibly updated PC for gaming
but these days I'm happy with less hassle and a PS4. I barely play
games now anyway in comparison to what I used to.

I still do, but definitely not the top of the line shit. I'm not going to spend
an arm and a leg for something that will be outdated in a year. The gaming PC I
have now will last me a few years, but I'll eventually have to upgrade my GPU(s), as right now I have two gtx970s in SLI, but I've noticed that when games first come out they don't support SLI very well at all, which is kind of a bummer, since it would be a lot cheaper going that route at least until it catches up with you.

Regards,
Nick

... "Не знаю. Я здесь только работаю."
--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20170303
* Origin: thePharcyde_ distribution system (Wisconsin) (46:1/100)

Re: Terminator 2 3D
By: Accession to DaiTengu on Thu Dec 21 2017 04:39 pm

less. That's why I went the PS4 route. There's already quite a few VR games, and I won't need to upgrade any hardware until I move on from the PS4 itself.

Although I like consoles, I've always tended to be a PC gamer. I figured that I already have a PC that I use for other stuff anyway, so it seemed more cost-effective to also game on my PC. PC games often seemed less expensive than console games too. I remember back in the 90s thinking I could spend a fortune on games for my N64 at $50 or more for some of the games at the time. From what I remember, PC games back in the day would often cost in the range of $20-$30, which seemed more reasonable. Sometimes a PC game would cost $50 or more, but it seemed those were rare. More recently, the PC games I've purchased are still around the $20-$30 range.

Nightfox

Ah ok. I noticed some games utilize the move sticks, some you can just
use a controller, and then the gun which I believe is really only for Farpoint at this time. Hopefully there's more in the future. ;)

I think Doom VR uses it too but I'm not entirely sure.

I still do, but definitely not the top of the line shit. I'm not going
to spend an arm and a leg for something that will be outdated in a year. The gaming PC I have now will last me a few years, but I'll eventually have to upgrade my GPU(s), as right now I have two gtx970s in SLI, but I've noticed that when games first come out they don't support SLI very well at all, which is kind of a bummer, since it would be a lot cheaper going that route at least until it catches up with you.

Yeah I have always stayed away from SLI and Crossfire because of that reason, but I just assumed it had gotten better over the years. The last time I built a system was in 2011. Do you think you'll go without SLI on your next upgrade?

I still only have a 770GTX. I almost bit on a 1070GTX because of the massive leap in the 10 series, but the truth is I end up playing on my PS4 way more than a PC. At this point it might just be worth holding off for the 11 series?

I am working from home a lot in my new job, so I am thinking about building a new system in the new year. I have a 2500K OC on water to 4.6 ghz but I do a lot of work in virtual, so the leap to an 8700K with 32 gigs of memory would probably be huge. I'll probably slap at least a 1060 or 1070 in it for GPU. My goal would be to play modern games with high/max settings in 2K. Not sure if I would need to step up to a 1080 or Ti for that or not.

I really haven't been playing PC games at all, so I don't know how much I
want to invest in a GPU either.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A37 2017/12/21 (Windows/32)
* Origin: Sector 7 [Mystic BBS WHQ] (46:1/127)

Hello,

On Fri Dec 22 2017 15:50:40 -0500, g00r00 -> Accession wrote:

I think Doom VR uses it too but I'm not entirely sure.

Ah, okay. Unfortunately, that game is a little gorey for a 10 and 7 year old. ;)

Yeah I have always stayed away from SLI and Crossfire because of that reason, but I just assumed it had gotten better over the years. The last time I built a system was in 2011. Do you think you'll go without SLI on your next upgrade?

I'll most definitely go single card from here on out. So instead of buying another matching card and going SLI when I thought I needed an upgrade, I'll just get a newer card instead. Next one I'm aiming for is the 1080ti but that won't happen until it's almost half the price it is now. Most likely when the next latest and greatest series comes out, it'll go down in price.

I still only have a 770GTX. I almost bit on a 1070GTX because of the massive leap in the 10 series, but the truth is I end up playing on my PS4 way more than a PC. At this point it might just be worth holding off for the 11 series?

I honestly have no idea what's in store for the 11xx series. I mean, what in the hell would actually need that much GPU processing power of the 10xx series?
I mean, fawk!

I am working from home a lot in my new job, so I am thinking about building a new system in the new year. I have a 2500K OC on water to 4.6 ghz but I do a lot of work in virtual, so the leap to an 8700K with 32 gigs of memory would probably be huge. I'll probably slap at least a 1060 or 1070 in it for GPU. My goal would be to play modern games with high/max settings in 2K. Not sure if I would need to step up to a 1080 or Ti for that or not.

I believe PUBG (PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds) is promoting the gtx1060 for their game as the base recommended card for 4K gaming. So no, you wouldn't need
a 1080ti unless you specifically wanted it. ;)

I did a new PC for my last birthday, coming up on a year now. I got an Asus X99
Deluxe mobo and 5930k (6-core OC'd to 4.08ghz, water cooled) with 16gb ddr4, a nice flashy case with fans everywhere, etc. Haven't had any issues. I mean, if you want to go with the latest chips, you can.. but you can save quite a bit of
money going with the 'latest before the current latest' stuff, and it'll still last you at least a good 3-5 years for any intense gaming.

I really haven't been playing PC games at all, so I don't know how much I want to invest in a GPU either.

I can still run all games so far on the highest settings with one of my 970s disabled. FPS isn't outstanding, but it's not a lagfest either. The other one just helps out when I need it.

Regards,
Nick

--- Claws Mail 3.15.0 (GTK+ 2.24.31; x86_64-w64-mingw32)
* Origin: thePharcyde_ distribution system (46:1/100)

on 12/19/17, Nightfox said...

I don't think it's about having stuff jump out at you.. That would get boring fairly quick. It's more about having the depth that we see in
real life. We see in 3D, why not movies too? Would you say 3D doesn't add anything useful to real life?

No, not really. Know what does? Interactivity and self-direction. 3D adds nothing to the movie-going experience because ultimately you're still
watching a movie. Put another way: What exactly do you think you can do in 3D that you can't do in 2D, and how does that help you tell a story? There's a reason this keeps coming up over and over and getting rejected by audiences over and over.

Also I wasn't really aware 3D gaming was failing.. Seems like it has
been all the rage just recently. I suppose I haven't seen much talk
about it like there was recently, but I figured that was because it's
old news now.

There are lots of 3D headsets and everyone's trying to cash in hoping that
this is the new big thing, but the sales still aren't there because,
honestly, 3D doesn't add anything to the experience. Yay, I can perceive
depth through stereopsis -- whooptiedoo. Does that let me do anything I couldn't do before mechanics-wise? Nope. That's the fundamental problem.

I may've said it in an earlier message, but I'm convinced that short of
having something like a holodeck where you're able to interact with virtual objects like they're absolutely real, well, you're just not going to see 3D
any time soon. THAT certainly would add the possibility of a whole new range
of mechanics to explore, but 3D itself doesn't.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A27 (Windows)
* Origin: d i s t o r t i o n // d1st.org (46:1/145)

on 12/20/17, g00r00 said...

I don't feel its gimmicky at all. Movies very rarely ever try to do pop

I do. I stand by my earlier assertion: It doesn't really help you tell a
story any better. However, you may have a point on the immersion thing. I haven't evaluated it in terms of helping people become immersed, and that's something to consider, I suppose, though I don't know that it's worth the
price tag.

Not sure if its failing in gaming. 3D for sure, but I think VR has potential based on my experiences playing a handful of VR games. When
its done well its mind blowing... But just like 3DTV we need better hardware first, and I worry that bringing it to the market premature
like we did with 3DTV will be VR's downfall.

With games I'm really not impressed, but mostly because, like I said, it
really doesn't give me any new ways to interact. CastAR was interesting in
that regard because it offered precisely that -- the potential for new ways
to interact, and hence new mechanics. It's a shame they completely screwed
the pooch.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A27 (Windows)
* Origin: d i s t o r t i o n // d1st.org (46:1/145)

Re: Terminator 2 3D
By: Digital Avatar to Nightfox on Fri Dec 22 2017 12:23 am

see in real life. We see in 3D, why not movies too? Would you say
3D doesn't add anything useful to real life?

No, not really. Know what does? Interactivity and self-direction. 3D adds nothing to the movie-going experience because ultimately you're still watching a movie. Put another way: What exactly do you think you can do in 3D that you can't do in 2D, and how does that help you tell a story? There's a reason this keeps coming up over and over and getting rejected by audiences over and over.

3D adds depth to the image so you can see it more like you're actually there. I think it helps you feel more immersed in it. I don't really see that as a bad thing..

There are lots of 3D headsets and everyone's trying to cash in hoping that this is the new big thing, but the sales still aren't there because, honestly, 3D doesn't add anything to the experience. Yay, I can perceive depth through stereopsis -- whooptiedoo. Does that let me do anything I couldn't do before mechanics-wise? Nope. That's the fundamental problem.

I remember seeing a 3D headset demo at a software store around 1995 or 1996, and they were demoing a 3D version of Descent (or Descent 2) with it. It seems it didn't take off back then, as I didn't see much for 3D gaming again until recently. I didn't really have the money for something like that back then, and to be honest I haven't invested in 3D gaming recently - but I had considered buying a 3D-capable video card & monitor next time I build a new PC.

Nightfox

Re: Terminator 2 3D
By: Nicholas Boel to g00r00 on Fri Dec 22 2017 06:14 pm

I'll most definitely go single card from here on out. So instead of buying

I'd probably go with a single graphics card as well. After I built my current desktop PC (which I built in 2011), I bought another graphics card to match what I have (I found a used one, which didn't cost an arm and a leg). For gaming, I was a bit disappointed, as I didn't really notice a difference with the games I was playing. The main reason I bought the 2nd one wasn't for gaming though, but for number crunching - I was participating in some distributed computing projects which can make use of graphics cards for additional processing power. There's a piece of software called BOINC (Berkeley Open Infrastructure for Network Computing) which provides a framework for distributed computing projects, and there are projects you can join to make use of your PC to contribute to things like cancer/medical research (computational analysis of protiens, etc.), SETI (Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence), etc.. I'm not running those right now though, since they basically use my PC fairly intensively all the time. I decided I'd probably want at least a liquid CPU cooler next time I run that kind of thing on my PC..

I eventually sold the 2nd graphics card that I had bought. Having a single video card also helps keep the PC free of clutter inside, which helps with airflow and keeps dust buildup down..

Nightfox

Re: Terminator 2 3D
By: Accession to Nightfox on Wed Dec 20 2017 09:15 pm



... Chuck Norris' hand is the only hand that can beat a Royal Flush.
--- SBBSecho 3.06-Linux
* Origin: thePharcyde_ telnet://bbs.pharcyde.org (Wisconsin) (46:1/700)