It's neat, but MAN is the FOV high! Unrealistically so. Not the actual image but the 3D representation of it. It's like the "eyes" are too far apart or something.
Thanks for telling me about this.
There are actually two stereoscopic parameters: camera separation and screen separation. Camera separation is the distance between the left and right eye cameras, and screen separation is the physical distance between the left and right eye images on the screen being used to view the content. Because of this, the optimal screen separation varies depending on the particular display being used to view the content.
The screen separation should always be such that, with the left eye image on the left and the right eye image on the right, the physical distance between the left and right eye images of an object at virtually infinite distance (for example, a cloud) is as close to about 6 cm as possible. But the number of pixels for this varies depending on the particular display.
With my 3D monitor, the optimal screen separation, in the native resolution, is around 192 pixels. But with other displays, it may be higher or lower (more likely lower).
I have now changed the default screen separation to 128 pixels. Both CameraShift and ScreenShift are "shift" values, which means that the default ScreenShift value is 64, since both eyes are shifted.
I have also added support for anaglyph rendering. Because of problems resulting from clearing the depth buffer, I haven't been able to get full resolution stereoscopic rendering to work, so the anaglyph mode uses checkerboard interleaving.
In KQ8 there is a bug in that mode where the cursor trails, but that bug does not occur in any of the other modes.
I have replaced the original anaglyph screenshot I uploaded with another one, which is rendered as a 1440x1080 checkerboard interleaved anaglyph. Here it is:
http://mbarich.tripod.com/kq8s3.jpgDoes that require a special graphics card? Not just the 3D, but the wrapper software itself.
Not at all. It's not a driver, just a wrapper. It translates Glide 2 calls into OpenGL.
It's just like the original version of OpenGlide, except that it has support for stereoscopic rendering and resolution overriding (and has a few other things improved).
For the best effect, you need a 3D display, but you can also use red/cyan glasses, or use the side-by-side mode and cross your eyes.
Make sure you read the readme, though; there are a few technical issues that you have to deal with when using OpenGlide with KQ8 (again, because of how poorly written KQ8's game engine is, most Glide wrappers don't even work with KQ8 at all). As the readme explains, you have to use windowed mode, not full-screen, and there's an obscuring window that you can't get rid of while KQ8 is running and have to move the game window away from.
I'm actually surprised by how well the 3D works with KQ8. Because of how poorly written KQ8's graphics engine is, I suspected that it wouldn't work well, but it works perfectly, as far as the 3D itself is concerned.
As with 3D in general, if you use a 3D display, and the settings are configured right, the effect is so lifelike that it feels like your display is a window into the actual scene.
And it's a LOT better than most of the 3D movies released so far. Most filmmakers haven't figured out how to do 3D properly yet; the 3D in most of the recently released 3D movies has been a joke. Two exceptions are
Final Destination 5 and
Hugo, but even those are only good some of the time. (I will admit, however, that the early bridge collapse sequence, and the incredibly unexpected ending, of
Final Destination 5 both were stunning in 3D and really have had an impact on me.
)
But when you play games in 3D with a stereoscopic driver or wrapper, you can just the stereoscopic parameters yourself to the optimal values.
