I first started playing TES games with Morrowind. I picked it up about a year after it came out. Played on a PC with a 17" CRT monitor and Stereo sound Morrowind was an order of magnitude more game then anything I'd played on a PC before. While I never did finish it, I was impressed with the graphics and all the unique artwork of the different villages and cities.

I had gotten away from gaming until last year when I picked up a 3D TV and 5.1 audio system for my living room. I wondered if modern games had progressed to where I could play on the big screen in the living room in Stereoscopic 3D with suround sound? Heck YES!!

If you want to experience the next level of gaming "Immersion" you simply have to experience Skyrim in Stereoscopic 3D with suround sound!

Skyrim in 3D on the PC creates a window into another world in which engulfs the player. I sit in a sand chair placed 5' in front of a 43" plasma. When I push the 360 controler to turn the sound turns with it! The sound of NPC's that were talking in front of me move with the screen - to the side and then behind me - just like if I was there! Dragons fly over head - from one side to the other - from the front to the rear.

The investment to do this might be a little daunting for the faint of heart (and wallet). I built a fairly highend PC to play games in Stereoscopic 3D, the 3DTV and sound system serves double duty as a home theater.

Over the last year I've played a dozen or more games on the PC and PS3 in 3D. I stopped playing them all after Skyrim was released.

Skyrim probably looks good in 2D but I've never seen it.

Playtime/cost - Skyrim has got to be my all time favorite!

(+250hrs of playtime and counting)

3d is bad for your eyes...
I hope this 3d gimmick will disappear as soon as it did in the 80s

It doesn't hurt your eyes any more than watching a TV does.

It's the OLD 3D tech that caused damage.

not really, the new 3d use a distortion of you point of view that can result in viewing problems, obviously if abused.
http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/entertainment&id=7278834

The only bad thing about playing games in stereoscopic 3d is you have to focus on one thing or another (like in real-life), so it's easier to miss things going on in your peripheral vision, whereas in 2D everything is in focus.

hey im having a problem i cant get my mehrunes razor out of a dager rack in windhelm please reply

You are the 1%.

Fallout 3 and New vegas looked outstanding in 3D as well, unfortunatly I only tried out the NVIDIA 3D discover with the anaglyph glasses but they still looked decent. And it was free, exept the cheap glasses to try it out.

Salt will kill you if abused. The lethal dose is a good spoon full btw.

3D? Kill it with fire!

You ought to know that stereoscopic 3D and anaglyph 3D can't really even be compared. They're not even similar. Though I guess apples and oranges are both fruit...

- "its bad for your eyes" - a myth if there ever was one. Your eyes SEE in stereoscopic 3D naturally. Active shutter glasses simply enable one image for each eye so that your using only 1 screen. (less than 10% of the population simply CAN'T SEE in 3D and get headaches while watching)

- "you can only focus on one thing" - the entire FOV in the game is in focus - just like the people playing in 2D but with DEPTH and POPOUT!

- Stereoscopic 3D gives you the full range of colors (unlike colored glasses/anaglyth) just like what you see in 2D

- "its a fad" - No. Its the next step in immersion for gaming.

Get up and go look out a window. Move to the left and right while looking. See how the window frame moves in the inverse direction of what your moving (the frame moves right while your moving left) but objects outside ( > than a few feet away) move to the left with you? This is what we see when playing in stereoscopic 3D, objects on the screen move naturally with the movement of our heads and bodies - thus turning our TV's and monitors into Windows into TES world instead of watching a 'painting' - 2D - FLAT image.

I find myself ducking while walking/riding under trees - blinking my eyes while an NPC strikes me with their weapon - realisim that simply can't be had in 2D!

I'm using the Nvidia 3DPlay solution and 2x570's. Other are playing on much less hardware.

Stereoscopic gaming - truely a beautiful experience to behold.

As long as there is a need for silly glasses it's going to be a fad like in the 50's and the 80's.

I'm going to have to try that!

Oh Lord, cheer up would you people? Why so much cynicism and negativity on this board? I don't have a 3D TV but if I had t opportunity to play on one without spending all the money I'd absolutely be interested, I can't imagine many if any of the people trashing it wouldn't be.

That's what they said last time.

Reload an earlier save and don't put it in a rack. Hjerim racks are usually bugged anyway, I had similar problems.
PS. Start a new thread next time, please. It's easier for people to find your question and answer it.

Untrue. You don't see in "stereoscopic 3D" as it is used in the technology. You see an actual 3-dimensional image based on how far stuff is away from you. 3D movies/games are simulating that effect just like a movie is simulating seeing something.
And 10% cannot "not see 3D", because in that case around 700000000 people would be running against walls constantly. They just don't adapt to the simulation eg. due to the frequency with which the images update.



You will have a nice pukefest.
Disclaimer: I take no resposibility!

Correct. With real 3D as your eyes see it, the 3D image is produced by the brain in response to different images seen by each eye, AND by calculating the focal point of your eyes to determine distance. The artificial 3D produced by a 3D monitor only uses the former.

Well, 3d is a bit more complex than that, but I'm no biologist.

Is that like by itself or something? Because, I put (easily) a tablespoon of salt in my macaroni and cheese and I'm not dead yet. I figure it will kill me later on when I have the massive coronary but, a box of macaroni and a spoon of salt does not a lethal combination make.

Back to the topic: I wish I could have the experience of the OP. I would love to have all that stuff. I must admit, I am jealous. Even if it is bad for you, that wouldn't stop me.

Actually, NOT having to shift focus is exactly the problem with current 3d tech; objects that LOOK farther away are in fact just images that are exactly as close to your eye as the ones that are "jumping out of the screen", so they are equally in focus to your eyes, with no "depth of field" issues. As such, your brain gets conflicting information; the consciously estimated distance from the stereoscopic image is not in sych with what you subconscious estimates from how the lens in you eye is focusing.

For most people, this is a minor nuisance at best, or isn't at all perceptible. For a minority, it causes raging motion sickness or migraines.

I don't get you guys who are against 3D. If it's done properly it is amazing and brings the game to life in a way that isn't possible on a flat 2D screen. It's just that the old ways of producing it were horrible. The new tech isn't perfect but it's coming. I'm all for it. The jump from 2D to 3D to me is like going from a side scroller to a first person game. It changes the entire perspective on the gaming experience. The game world becomes more immersive and realistic feeling. I believe there will come a time when some form of 3D will become common place in most homes especially where gaming is concerned.

[censored]. it's 0.45g/lb of body weight

Salt = 3D

Well... sort of right. Actually, accommodation (using the focal point as a guide to distance) is only effective for distances less than about 6 feet. Further away than that and the eye/brain rely on divergence and parallax - which is what stereoscopic 3D use. A lot of the visual problems can be reduced by sitting well back from a big screen; something that wasn't really an option for most people the last time S-3D was touted as the next big thing.

Other problems that bedevilled S-3D (and still can) are having the divergence setting of the two images wrong for the size of screen and how far away you are from it (and ideally you'd also take into account how far apart your eyes are), and low refresh rates causing imperceptible flicker that causes eyestrain or nausea. Getting the right settings is a matter of making the proper adjustments, and reducing flicker is... tricky. Even high refresh rate LCD monitors and TVs are pretty low compared to the CRT solutions I was using with S-3D years back. Perhaps the ideal solution is to use a TV that uses passive glasses (not active shutter ones) and has alternate lines on the display with different polarisation.

I'm sure there are other issues, but a huge amount of the problems people have are due to sitting too close to small screens, having the separation and image depth set up wrong, and being sensitive to flicker.