Nvidia 3D Vision Surround: Is This The Future Of Gaming?

Using 3D Vision Surround: The Lynchpin

Subjective reviews are challenging, because what I think is cool might not be as exciting for you. Don’t get me wrong. Performance is a big part of this story, and I’ll get into that shortly. But more than anything, 3D Vision Surround has to be evaluated on the experience it enables.

Fortunately, I’ve laid a little groundwork there by testing a number of games for the launch of 3D Vision last year. Today’s compatibility landscape is better in that there are more titles considered 3D Vision-ready. But others—even new games—simply don’t work well.

Generally Speaking

I enjoyed most of the games I played in 3D. You do lose a lot of light through the wireless active shutter glasses (as seen below), and this is particularly noticeable in already-dark titles like S.T.A.L.K.E.R. and Left 4 Dead. Games showcasing more vibrant colors stand out. Far Cry 2 and Just Cause 2 both looked great, for instance.

With the glasses turned on, it's easy to see just how much light you lose to the shutter technology.

The glasses themselves were comfortable enough to wear for extended periods before, and my thoughts there haven’t changed. Naturally, kids with smaller heads won’t find them as snug, and that’s an issue my buddy’s son ran into. But the grown-ups who played around on my 3D Vision Surround system never complained about the form variable in this equation.

It must be said that the Acer displays aren’t my favorite. Their 2D clarity is merely OK, and you have to be looking at them from a very specific angle to get the best 3D picture possible—it’s not even in the middle of the screen. Rather, you almost have to have your eyes aligned with the top bezel. Purportedly, some of the other displays look a lot sharper. Alienware’s 23” OptX AW2310, for instance, has received praise, and only costs $50 more than the Acer screens.

Battlefield: Bad Company 2

Battlefield: Bad Company 2 looks phenomenal. It is indeed one of those 3D Vision-ready titles, and it translates well to Surround. My benchmark sequence consists of the opening scene from World War II. In 3D, the waves splashing over the dinghy’s hull are probably the first thing you’ll notice. And with Surround, you get the wide field of view from both sides of the boat. The good news here is that it’s possible to enjoy this game with all of its effects enabled, giving you the best of DirectX 11 and 3D Vision Surround.

DiRT 2

Another popular title we’ve had in our suite for a while now, DiRT 2 actually doesn’t work with 3D Vision. I didn’t bother benchmarking this one as a result, but I did fire it up to see why Nvidia is recommending against playing it in 3D. Holy puke-fest, Batman. The company’s observations that shadows aren’t rendered correctly and lights aren’t projected correctly are right-on. There are issues with the dust and smoke that play havoc with depth. And after about three minutes, you really want to hurl. Nvidia is straightforward enough to tell you ahead of time though—this one doesn’t work.

Far Cry 2

Far Cry 2 launched before 3D Vision did. And yet, this one gets an Excellent label by Nvidia. That belies some of the compromises you need to make for an optimal experience, though. Setting Post FX to low means turning off DirectX 10 and dipping back to DirectX 9. Set shaders to Medium and turn off Bloom—those probably don’t have as adverse an effect. And when you’re viewing the game in 3D—a completely different experience anyway—it’s hardly noticeable. The fact that this game is so vibrant makes it easy to forget you’re losing light through the glasses and really enjoy the new perspective on gaming that 3D Vision Surround presents.

Crysis

Call it too old to matter, but Crysis remains a tested title in our suite. Unfortunately, the tool we use to measure performance with doesn’t do widescreen gaming resolutions, so we’re skipping the benchmarks here as well. And it’s just as well, because Nvidia tags Crysis with a Good rating, citing a number of quality compromises that need to be made, along with a couple of unavoidable artifacts that’ll likely have you playing Crysis in Surround 2D mode instead of 3D Vision Surround.

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2

Despite its relative newness, CoD gets a Good rating too, due to some objects rendering at the wrong depth. Moreover, you need to use the Widescreen Fixer tool with this game. Otherwise, the field of view is stretched/distorted (this applies to AMD's Eyefinity technology as well, in all fairness). The only real change to make in Call of Duty is turning off the game’s Depth of Field option—everything else looks sharp.

Just Cause 2

Another 3D Vision-ready title, Just Cause 2 can be summed up in one word: sick. This was the game I showed to visitors who wanted to see what 3D Vision Surround was all about. It’s bright enough to diminish the effects of losing light to the shutter glasses, and the effects had my guests bobbing and ducking as if they were in danger of bonking their heads on a palm tree. “This is what I want for Christmas,” one friend quipped to his wife. “How much?” she asked. I patted him on the back. “Wishful thinking, man.”

Aliens Vs. Predator

Nvidia seems to struggle in the games it wasn’t able to affect prior to launch. Aliens vs. Predator isn’t exactly new anymore, yet it’s unrated by the latest driver and wholly unplayable. The fault here is leveled at this one being a game worked on by AMD. I was able to generate benchmark scores using the demo—and the playback actually looked great in 3D Vision Surround mode. Once I hopped into the actual game, though, the hand and gun appearing in front of your face is rendered incorrectly, making it nearly impossible to play.

Chris Angelini
Chris Angelini is an Editor Emeritus at Tom's Hardware US. He edits hardware reviews and covers high-profile CPU and GPU launches.
  • killerclick
    What are those lines between the screens? Oh yeah, it's the black plastic the monitors are made of! Three monitor gaming = FAIL.
    Reply
  • meat81
    Without sounding ignorant like killerclick, they do need to start producing mainstream monitors that have little to no bezel. If not then i might as well buy a 32-40 inch TV that does 120-240hz and go with that.
    Reply
  • liquidsnake718
    Hell you might as well go all out and connect 3 32 or 42 inch samsung series 6-8led tvs and tri sli or crossfire 5970's..... one would definitly need watercooling systems and core i7 6 core chips, with an ROG x58 board with ssd's max RAM, win 7 64bit, and 1000watts... this machine would then have to played in full airconditioning and with crazy sounds with some amps and extra lighting effects.....

    You would then have total fun playing games like Crysis, Resident evil, left for dead, Dirt, and Cod MW2..... one can imagine
    Reply
  • liquidsnake718
    all for the cost of around $7500... this would last you for about 3years of fun.... then after, youd have to get rid of it
    Reply
  • gxpbecker
    better yet, a single fold out (nearly bezel-less) display.
    As the article says, this is all nice and dandy but the costs are high, to say the least. However as time passes this technology will be more affordable for us average joes. Good too see GRFX companines are pushing new toys
    Reply
  • gxpbecker
    liquidsnake718Hell you might as well go all out and connect 3 32 or 42 inch samsung series 6-8led tvs and tri sli or crossfire 5970's..... one would definitly need watercooling systems and core i7 6 core chips, with an ROG x58 board with ssd's max RAM, win 7 64bit, and 1000watts... this machine would then have to played in full airconditioning and with crazy sounds with some amps and extra lighting effects.....You would then have total fun playing games like Crysis, Resident evil, left for dead, Dirt, and Cod MW2..... one can imagineAnd will cost as much in power to run that machine as an Air COnditioner during the Houston Summer.
    Reply
  • Onus
    The scales are way too big. Too much money, too much power needed (which means more money), and way too much physical space. Cost and power usage may come down, but space? In the mainstream, I'd sooner expect the VR headset to make a return.
    Reply
  • Reynod
    I wish I could afford all of that hardware ... alas not.

    The Samsung 120HZ 24" monitor, glasses and GTX card cost us arond $780.

    Played it for a few days and got sore eyes.

    Gave it to the kids.

    They played with the glasses for a week.

    Now the glasses are in a drawer.

    Not much more to tell really.

    The whole experience with the glasses reminded me of:

    The yoyo
    The pogo stick
    The hat with the beer cans on top of it and the tubes
    The Bling "Gaming" case with neons that I disconnected
    The Superfloppy
    The external CD Burner
    The ex-wife

    All terribly short experiences of delight (dynamic quality) followed by a feeling of bewilderment and a sense that I had been played by a consumerist market.

    C Wright Mills please save me ... from myself.

    Chris ... is there a cure ?
    Reply
  • ravnoscc
    I have a question:

    Could you explain how the bezels are compensated for in 3D Surround mode? I am trying to imagine how having 2-3 inch spaces in between each projected image would look in 3 dimensions... Having difficulty, but maybe a short explanation?
    Reply
  • theroguex
    So long as there is a bezel, there is no point to having surround in games. None at all.

    Well, racing games could get away with it.
    Reply