Being a graphics junkie, I finally got myself 3D-glasses  8) - namely the VR920, which are the de-facto standard. I decided to share my experience here, for others that are interested in such gadgets.
Spent ~$400 on ebay for that, and then extra 50% at customs (damn, and 3 hours of bureaucracy! ), but when I tried them, I felt it was all worth it :D. 
Although I'm near-sighted (thus not focusing well in the VR simulation), man... it really makes you feel like you're there. The viewing-angle is only 32 degrees, so it looks very much as if you're in a cinema (a screen that doesn't cover your whole FOV), but everything onscreen looks almost completely as if it's real-life - just somewhat blurred. So much, that in some 3D demo (demoscene-like) I felt threatened when a cube morphed into a spiky ball and approached the VR "camera". And in Half-Life2, humans and everything look damn real o_O (while in 2D, the models suck imho).
The bad things are:
- you can feel motion-sickness (this is actually a pro, not cons lol) when you use the mouse instead of head-tracking
- head-tracking can be twitchy if you live just under a GSM transceiver, like I do. (tracking is done in the magnetic way). And even in perfect conditions, tracking is a bit laggy with faster head-movements.
- resolution is only 640x480, not even widescreen. Though, I wonder whether higher resolution is any good if the optics are not made perfectly adjustable
- optics are not adjustable in any way. Everyone has different distance between eyes, not everyone has 20/20 vision. So, eye-strain is present after an hour or two. Plus blurriness if you don't wear contacts. Haven't tried longer sessions, as motion-sickness kicks-in for me ^^"

Anyone else tried something like that? IMAX stuff included.
Posted on 2008-12-03 15:04:55 by Ultrano
Wow. What games did you try playing with that kickass toy?  ;)
Posted on 2008-12-03 17:49:49 by roticv
I'll stick to red and blue cellophane and stereoscopic rendering for now, after reading those specs, lol.
$400 for a headache? I can buy a headache for a lot less :D
Posted on 2008-12-03 23:46:15 by Homer
roticv: just my collection of Valve's Source-based games HL2:xxx,  Portal, CS:S; some demo-versions of crap included in the driver-CD; and after work will try SiN2 and Doom3 (hoping this time I'll get scared, unlike my first runs).
I just finished a 5-hour session of 3d gaming, no eye-strain or motion-sickness this time ^^.  (was imagining I'm actually doing the ingame movements, and like in real-life I didn't care to focus).
Posted on 2008-12-04 00:45:28 by Ultrano
Wow. That seems pretty cool.
Are you screwed if  you wear glasses because you're short-sighted?
Also, maybe games today even don't have 640*480 mode...it says it takes input up to 1024, but i presume then the thing resamples the input which is not desirable...

Posted on 2008-12-23 12:06:00 by HeLLoWorld
Yeah, it's not perfect with glasses. Had to browse the forums to find how to remove the nose-pads.
Downsampled 1024 to 640 is nice. I.e you can easily read text from all tiny displays in Doom3, and chat in CS:Source.
Any larger resolution would be useless if your vision is not 20/20 (or you don't wear contacts), and would make the goggles expensive beyond reach.
Posted on 2008-12-23 18:42:13 by Ultrano
cool
can we please see you make some asm-demo targeted at that display? wonder how RTRT would feel like+ add force feedback?
Posted on 2008-12-29 13:29:33 by daydreamer
I've been building an OpenGL library, but in C++. It's infuriating enough that most gl calls take 10-30k cycles :P. It simply wraps GL calls, puts them in a good sequence, and hides ancient useless stuff that non-experts would try to use, thanks to ancient tutorials. Plus importers of different model formats, that are ready for shading.
Though, it's made+meant to be used together with masm.
So, yes - I'll be trying to make a demo :)  (GF8x00+ only)

And no, RTRT is bullshit, from my experience with software drawing of graphics. I prefer rasterization with nVidia's _true_ multithreading, controlled by specialized hardware and early Z-culling.
Posted on 2008-12-30 04:56:41 by Ultrano
Well I guess RTRT sucks if you use a sledgehammer, it gets rough, instead of right hardware its fine, with all bells and whistles already builtin
Attachments:
Posted on 2009-01-03 12:06:03 by daydreamer
Time will tell :). There is less than 1 year till Larrabee gets unveiled. I think Intel will scrap it, or try their luck with expensive subpar performance, while making several nice preprocessed demos to lure customers (make them blame gamedevs for not using LB). And meanwhile Intel are notorious for their drivers, so I can't put on rose-colored glasses yet :P
But I sure would want easy reflection/refraction ingame :)
Posted on 2009-01-03 12:55:04 by Ultrano

Time will tell :). There is less than 1 year till Larrabee gets unveiled. I think Intel will scrap it, or try their luck with expensive subpar performance, while making several nice preprocessed demos to lure customers (make them blame gamedevs for not using LB). And meanwhile Intel are notorious for their drivers, so I can't put on rose-colored glasses yet :P
But I sure would want easy reflection/refraction ingame :)

program it in pixelshaders I meant, instead of asm
the above runs at 19 FPS
Posted on 2009-01-05 05:07:57 by daydreamer
I want to target my demo to those goggles, could it be possible to have two different viewpoint calculations for each eye to get working?
ala 3d glasses work like?
or not?
Posted on 2009-01-12 16:52:16 by daydreamer
Of course, you simply draw each frame twice, and move your projection-matrix to the side accordingly.
With simple hacks on that projection-matrix and timing, the dozens of games that run with need no modification by their developer.
(timing is necessary to make frame_LeftEye think its duration is 0ms, while frame_RightEye is 16.6ms, so animated data will be identical in both frames)
Posted on 2009-01-12 17:23:28 by Ultrano