Spring RTS Engine

Would spring work with S3D drivers such as those by nvidia? Aegis told me that he's tried with spring and it crashes, possibly due to SDL. I don't know what SDL is. Can this be fixed? S3D is possibly going to awaken from its slumber very soon, even for consoles.

(My only understanding on the subject is that opengl can be modified at the source and thus driver support for it is more difficult to pin down.)

Are you talking Anaglyph(Red/Blue(orGreen)) or Stereo Pair 3D(handled by a polarized light system, 3D video supporting headset, or other methods)?


I'm not going to be any help answering the question, I'm just curious.

SinbadEV wrote:Are you talking Anaglyph(Red/Blue(orGreen))

Don't even utter those words.

Are you talking Anaglyph(Red/Blue(orGreen))

haha i wonder if one of our resident wizards could code this up as a shader :) or if such a thing already exists. headache factor 9000+, but still would be hilarious and novel.

How do you feel about wireless-synced shutter glasses (I think they are calling it DLP)?

We really should already have 1080p Capable 3D (aka each eye gets a different picture) Headsets on the market now at reasonable prices... But unfortunately the market doesn't really seem all that interested.

It's all anyone over 30's fault for not playing more 3D Goggle video games back when they came out(I'm only 28, I lacked discretionary income or else I would have)

SinbadEV wrote:How do you feel about wireless-synced shutter glasses (I think they are calling it DLP)?

I bought a pair a few years ago and tried it with three different monitors. Surprisingly it worked better with my LCD than my CRT. It was too much of a hassle and driver support was poor, and worst of all was irritating to my eyeballs. I returned them.

I am looking at a passive solution, such as this monitor which is really cheap now at about $280. This is low enough to justify purchasing it as a second monitor in a dual setup since I already have a 22". They used to be much much more expensive (Dell still sells it for $800, go fig). This is what got me talking with aegis about spring.

P.S. DLP is just a technology for very large screen televisions using projection and mirrors inside the box. It's got a very high refresh rate so is suitable for shutterglasses, which is why there is some buzz about it. Most people don't own a DLP and I hate the shutterglasses anyway.

CarRepairer wrote:this monitor.

OMG, I always assumed you could polarize the light emitted from an LCD, glad someone acctually did it... Awesome, and the $280 price range is freaking high, but a lot lower then I expected.

SinbadEV wrote:OMG, I always assumed you could polarize the light emitted from an LCD, glad someone acctually did it.

That is actually how an LCD screen works.

Peet wrote:

SinbadEV wrote:OMG, I always assumed you could polarize the light emitted from an LCD, glad someone acctually did it.

That is actually how an LCD screen works.

Sorry, what I meant to say was, since an LCD screen already polarizes light... I had always assumed it would be possible to polarize it on two different wave-angles (not sure of the technical term) such that a pair of glasses, similarly polarized, could differentiate between said wave-angles and provide two separate images from one screen.

I occasionally get on stereogram kicks and I always wonder why nobody ever goes really old school and just shows two slightly different views of the same scene side by side. Example of what I mean. No weird colors, no expensive glasses, and if your eyes get tired, just focus on one side or the other and play in mono.

If Zalman's 3D monitor failed any harder it would cease to exist.

The good kind is called IZ3D. And they're coming out with a 24" one soon, I think. Works on the same principle as the Zalman, only with less failure.

http://www.iz3d.com/

troycheek wrote:Example of what I mean.

Why do they always make it so eyes have to diverge? It's so much easier to squint.

Is this style effectively halving the vertical resolution?

If not, then i haven't really understood how it works.

How does this passive 3d technology compare to a 120Hz monitor combined with active 3d glasses?

I'd really like to try 3d gaming, it will revolutionize the gaming as much as 3d gfx cards once the technology matures enough.

edit: vertical, not horizontal D:

it interlaces the image, so, on any given frame, each eye is seeing halve the vertical resolution.

Caydr wrote:If Zalman's 3D monitor failed any harder it would cease to exist.

The good kind is called IZ3D. And they're coming out with a 24" one soon, I think. Works on the same principle as the Zalman, only with less failure.

http://www.iz3d.com/

Except this one has abundant issues with crosstalk (often incorrectly referred to as ghosting), while the Trimon is free of it. They don't work on the same principle at all. Trimon uses alternate horizontal lines of circular polarized film so each eye sees half the vertical resolution, while the iz3d uses on the fly elliptical polarization so each eye sees each pixel. But the technology is not mature enough yet as mentioned.

Related thread:
http://springrts.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=19840