Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Build Your Own: Wall-Sized 3D Gaming, Just Like Theaters Do It

Build Your Own: Wall-Sized 3D Gaming, Just Like Theaters Do It
By

When it comes to 3D, bigger is better. Forget everything anyone ever told you about the appropriate size of a TV, because 3D is a dish best served large. Let me tell you something: I have seen the future and the future is jaw-dropping, wall-sized 3D gaming, complete with full-scale cars in Burnout Paradise and man-sized zombies in Left 4 Dead. I now partake in spaceship battles so viscerally convincing that I feel as if I were traveling through the void at warp speed, lasers blazing--all of it in glorious, larger-than-life 3D. If you want to know how you can do it too, read on.

Three years ago I wrote an article called Wall-Sized 3D Displays: The Ultimate Gaming Room. Back in 2007, watching a 3D film in a theater was still somewhat of a novelty. There were no mass-market 3D displays on the horizon and if you wanted to take 3D technology home, you would expect to pay a lot of money for something that probably wouldn't work all that well. And what would you do with it? Commercial movies weren't released in a 3D format, so the best you could hope for was some 3D gaming.

What a difference three years can make in the technology industry. Avatar thrust 3D into the pop-culture mainstream and all of the major TV manufacturers have announced 3D-ready sets for the home. We are also on the brink of the commercial release of the 3D Blu-ray format. The futuristic idea of commonplace stereoscopic 3D displays in our homes has never been this close to realization.

It is in this environment that we have re-embarked on the quest for a wall-sized 3D theater in the home. With commercial adoption on the horizon, it is no longer good enough for a 3D projection system to simply work--it has to be comfortable, functional, and ultimately, desirable enough to use on a regular basis. While we did manage to get the wall-sized 3D theater to work in 2007, the limitations of this older technology were such that there were unpleasant aspects to deal with. It's easier to endure a bit of brain-numbing strobe effects when you're pioneering something that will never be viable for the average consumer, but now that 3D is about to be released to the masses, our expectations are much higher.

With the release of 3D Blu-ray, you will see more articles from us over the next few weeks and months, but we'll start at the beginning. For most of us, our first taste of 3D has been in a movie theater. There are many ways to experience a stereoscopic 3D display, but let's start by recreating the method commonly used by movie studios: a dual-projector polarized setup.

Display all 124 comments.
This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 26 Hide
    MiamiU , March 30, 2010 6:32 AM
    seems like being a hardcore gamer just keeps getting more and more expensive...
  • 23 Hide
    Icehearted , March 30, 2010 6:56 AM
    As for poor folk like me, we'll just settle for those still images where we cross our eyes, and cry because $2,565 is far away from "comfortable".
  • 12 Hide
    salgado18 , March 30, 2010 1:11 PM
    I don't know if it would be possible, but it would sure be AWESOME to see some of those games on a short gif animation in "fake" 3D! Please! (a video review would be great too!) :D 

    PLEASE people, vote me up! If you do they'll try it!
Other Comments
  • 26 Hide
    MiamiU , March 30, 2010 6:32 AM
    seems like being a hardcore gamer just keeps getting more and more expensive...
  • 23 Hide
    Icehearted , March 30, 2010 6:56 AM
    As for poor folk like me, we'll just settle for those still images where we cross our eyes, and cry because $2,565 is far away from "comfortable".
  • -3 Hide
    winner4455 , March 30, 2010 7:29 AM
    I can see this becoming main stream and the next few years... In 3d too.
  • 6 Hide
    tigerwraith , March 30, 2010 7:59 AM
    2.6k now but you know things like this keep getting cheaper and cheaper. Maybe by this time next year, the 1080p 2600 lumens will drop to 500, and the drivers will better support dual projector setups.
  • -4 Hide
    tigerwraith , March 30, 2010 8:09 AM
    But I do have a question would of mattered if you used LCD projectors?
  • 0 Hide
    gti88 , March 30, 2010 9:40 AM
    Great article! Thanx a lot.
    But as I can see, 3D stereo is not there yet.
    Almost no movies are available at 3DS, and game developers don't focus on stereo optimisation. Thus, we have some glitches and inconveniences.
  • 1 Hide
    pojih , March 30, 2010 9:59 AM
    ahh, something else to cost an arm and a leg...

    not saying that many people here don't want the fastest and most expensive....

    but it was clearly shown that many people looking at this site want something that performs for what it costs, as seen by the fermi release and the comments .....
  • 2 Hide
    skora , March 30, 2010 10:24 AM
    Whats the next price bracket up for a projector with higher res?

    I like the idea of dual projectors better than the alt-image standard, but they didn't ask me.

    Here's a wild thought, soon, everyone will have their own glasses that not only do the shutter for 3D, but will also be able to be personal monitors. Connect to any computer/phone/TV with your glasses. Displays might even become unnecessary. That will be the next wireless mainstream device. The iShades. Phone, mobile pc and display, earbud is right there. Have pants that have built in keyboard. We'll all just be sitting there with our shades on and never see the person next to us as we get lost in the cloud. And it all starts with 3D glasses. :p 
  • -1 Hide
    djab , March 30, 2010 10:31 AM
    IceheartedAs for poor folk like me, we'll just settle for those still images where we cross our eyes, and cry because $2,565 is far away from "comfortable".


    No, you can at least use red/cyan paper glasses with iz3d drivers and a normal display.
    That is not that bad!
  • 0 Hide
    manitoublack , March 30, 2010 11:05 AM
    Great article, and no doubt people ask you: "why have you got 2 projectors?" The only trouble with polarized setups is that you cant view 3D laying down, eg: Lounge Lizard style, which you can do with shutter glasses (however uncomfortable that may be.)

    Still though, for $2,500USD you've built a pretty mad setup. To those winging about price, deal with it, if you want the best you've got to be prepared to buy the best. I'd suspect that a WUXGA setup would be in the $5-6,000 range using the projectors you'd want. Well worth the buy-in price. I hope for your sake (if you payed for it, not Tomshardware) that it is compatible with yet-to-be-released BR3D.

  • 0 Hide
    mjello , March 30, 2010 11:17 AM
    manitoublackGreat article, and no doubt people ask you: "why have you got 2 projectors?" The only trouble with polarized setups is that you cant view 3D laying down, eg: Lounge Lizard style, which you can do with shutter glasses (however uncomfortable that may be.)Still though, for $2,500USD you've built a pretty mad setup. To those winging about price, deal with it, if you want the best you've got to be prepared to buy the best. I'd suspect that a WUXGA setup would be in the $5-6,000 range using the projectors you'd want. Well worth the buy-in price. I hope for your sake (if you payed for it, not Tomshardware) that it is compatible with yet-to-be-released BR3D.


    Samsung display dont work lying down
  • -4 Hide
    idisarmu , March 30, 2010 11:27 AM
    What's wrong with the old school red-green glasses? It seems like a much cheaper and convenient solution. I would hate having to recharge glasses, let alone wear them if they're going to be heavier than normal.
  • -4 Hide
    d70guy , March 30, 2010 11:27 AM
    There are a lot of issues with this. The lack of resolution, difference in brightness of the images over time (no two bulbs are identical), the less than ideal projection surface, the fact that all bluray titles will be 1080p for each eye, etc.. I mean, this *is* a fun toy, but not for a serious gamer, and not for an even semi-serious home theater person. It is strictly for someone with the money to blow on a toy.
  • 0 Hide
    d70guy , March 30, 2010 11:34 AM
    idisarmuWhat's wrong with the old school red-green glasses? It seems like a much cheaper and convenient solution. I would hate having to recharge glasses, let alone wear them if they're going to be heavier than normal.


    Red blue glasses are the worst case 3D experience. Both polarized and shutter glasses are 10 times better at delivering a realistic 3D experience. The anaglyph (red/blue separation of the image distorts the color of the image, and even with high quality (eyeglass quality) red/blue glass lenses the overall effect is that of a poor quality experience. Shutter glasses these days are not that heavy, and its not like you are going to be wearing them for the length of the movie. It really doesn't factor in. Personally, I will take the shutter glasses. They block light much better thereby eliminating the ghosting issues associated with the polarized lenses. I say this as someone who has worked with linear, circular, and shutter technology since the late 1980s.
  • 1 Hide
    Artman256 , March 30, 2010 12:21 PM
    From the dual projector page - "the filters polarize the light across a plane". This is not entirely true, old systems did that, but modern systems use circular polarization, which avoids the problems caused by tilting your head.
  • 1 Hide
    JohnnyLucky , March 30, 2010 12:21 PM
    This is going to be very expensive.
  • 12 Hide
    salgado18 , March 30, 2010 1:11 PM
    I don't know if it would be possible, but it would sure be AWESOME to see some of those games on a short gif animation in "fake" 3D! Please! (a video review would be great too!) :D 

    PLEASE people, vote me up! If you do they'll try it!
  • 5 Hide
    pluripotent , March 30, 2010 1:23 PM
    But Don! I'z only gotz one eye!
  • 2 Hide
    Rehnquist- , March 30, 2010 1:53 PM
    Why on earth are all the screenshots scaled down to such a low resolution?
Display more comments