Nvidia is trying it’s hands at bringing 3d gaming into the mainstream (for PC’s at least, for now) with it’s 3d Vision Technology: http://www.gamespot.com/features/6202819/index.html?tag=topslot;thumb;2
It works well, apparently, with lots of current games (some glitches have been reported however) and Nvidia is promising to work with developers to make sure upcoming games make use of the technology.
I haven’t tried it, but all reports point to the experience being nothing short of coolness.
But what do you think? Too early still for this technology? Will it eventually take off? What do you thin it lacks, what would make you want to try it/purchase it?
I’m pretty sure these will go over about as well as Bigfoot’s Killer NIC card and Ageix’s PhysX card.
I don’t think they have the same issues. Killer NIC was doomed because it was an expensive product that didn’t really make much (or any) improvement.
PhysX was doomed because it was a chicken/egg problem (No developer is going to support it unless there’s a huge install base because its very difficult to offer PhysX and non-PhysX versions of the same game unless the added physics effects are trivial and non-gameplay related; No consumer is going to buy a PhysX card unless enough developers support it and the effects are awesome and gameplay-related)
However, I’d wager “3D glasses” are fairly easy to support from a developers perspective. If the game is rendered in 3D, as 95% of games are these days, it already has all the information needed to make the glasses work to their fullest extent. I doubt the developer has to do much work whatsoever. And people will still buy their game even if they don’t have 3D glasses.
I was thinking more that they’re all products that don’t add a lot to the experience, but still cost $200.
Lamp?
Well, judging by the Gamespot article playing Left 4 Dead:
It looks like it might add something to the experience. Certainly more than the Killer NIC.
Sand?