HoloLens is Augmented reality, not virtual reality. It won't be as immersive if that was the goal. Its like a less buggy, better performing Google Glass that is a bit heavier in its current form. End goal is glasses replacement.
Yeah they are very different things. One lets you see and place things in your world. . think zombie shooter game in an actual city. . so many possibilities. . the other they chose the world for you. . Skyrim etc.
I think both have their place. Of course the fist one hololens won't be awesome until you can use it anywhere (not have to plug it in etc.)
Talk about apples and oranges. VR is just getting revved up, nor is AR a replacement for it or even a competing product. Samsung is even introducing their latest Galaxy as a "Virtual Reality Machine":
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar Authored 139 missions in VendettaOnline and 6 tracks in Distance
In the future Hololens could definitely replace any actual VR products out there. Many of these VR products will need to become way more sophisticated if they are to compete with a living world product like Hololens.
VR is nice in theory, but there is very little interactivity with the actual world, which makes it cumbersome for games that would ever require movement.
Hololens is primarily utilized in a real world environment, although it also gives you the opportunity to watch videos, or play any other type of game (including streaming games) right there as well.
Its completely possible to have hololens run VR at some point, but not the other way around.
Just seeing the demos of Hololens is incredibly impressive, I'm excited to see what else they come up with. So far.. VR has been mostly underwhelming.
In the future Hololens could definitely replace any actual VR products out there. Many of these VR products will need to become way more sophisticated if they are to compete with a living world product like Hololens.
VR is nice in theory, but there is very little interactivity with the actual world, which makes it cumbersome for games that would ever require movement.
Hololens is primarily utilized in a real world environment, although it also gives you the opportunity to watch videos, or play any other type of game (including streaming games) right there as well.
Its completely possible to have hololens run VR at some point, but not the other way around.
Just seeing the demos of Hololens is incredibly impressive, I'm excited to see what else they come up with. So far.. VR has been mostly underwhelming.
but it cant see that is I think what you dont fully understand.
AR cant and doesnt even want to capture every single solitary real life 'pixel' in your viewing space and make it a high quality blacklite image. Reality as it were will always be somewhere in your view space. that is the strength of AR but in many other cases its also its weakness.
more over, want AR with Oculus? just attach a camera to the front usb port that is designed mostly for exactly that..done
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
In the future Hololens could definitely replace any actual VR products out there. Many of these VR products will need to become way more sophisticated if they are to compete with a living world product like Hololens.
VR is nice in theory, but there is very little interactivity with the actual world, which makes it cumbersome for games that would ever require movement.
Hololens is primarily utilized in a real world environment, although it also gives you the opportunity to watch videos, or play any other type of game (including streaming games) right there as well.
Its completely possible to have hololens run VR at some point, but not the other way around.
Just seeing the demos of Hololens is incredibly impressive, I'm excited to see what else they come up with. So far.. VR has been mostly underwhelming.
but it cant see that is I think what you dont fully understand.
AR cant and doesnt even want to capture every single solitary real life 'pixel' in your viewing space and make it a high quality blacklite image. Reality as it were will always be somewhere in your view space. that is the strength of AR but in many other cases its also its weakness.
more over, want AR with Oculus? just attach a camera to the front usb port that is designed mostly for exactly that..done
And then walk around holding a computer plugged into a wall. Good plan.
No, Oculus will never work that way, it isn't designed for that. Cell phones should have that option, but they too- do not, you'd have to have some type of pass through, which would largely depend on hardware constraints how "realtime" it would get... they aren't designed to do that... Put your camera app on most phones and walk around with it open for 2 hours and tell me how well the images come through. Generally for short stints its fine, but the longer you have it open, the hotter the phone gets, the greater chance of lag it has.... strap that to your head and block out all light and tell me how safe you think it is.
Hololens is still a screen... its not completely dark.. LIke the Glyph it could potentially bring in VR applications, without closing you off completely from the world, so you could literally have the best of both worlds.
Besides you're seeing a real world in "real resolution" not something thats pixelated. Sure OR will control all pixels you can see... and thats just it.. they're all pixels... always, even if you were streaming what is around you. It will never be as good as actually seeing it first hand.
In the future Hololens could definitely replace any actual VR products out there. Many of these VR products will need to become way more sophisticated if they are to compete with a living world product like Hololens.
VR is nice in theory, but there is very little interactivity with the actual world, which makes it cumbersome for games that would ever require movement.
Hololens is primarily utilized in a real world environment, although it also gives you the opportunity to watch videos, or play any other type of game (including streaming games) right there as well.
Its completely possible to have hololens run VR at some point, but not the other way around.
Just seeing the demos of Hololens is incredibly impressive, I'm excited to see what else they come up with. So far.. VR has been mostly underwhelming.
but it cant see that is I think what you dont fully understand.
AR cant and doesnt even want to capture every single solitary real life 'pixel' in your viewing space and make it a high quality blacklite image. Reality as it were will always be somewhere in your view space. that is the strength of AR but in many other cases its also its weakness.
more over, want AR with Oculus? just attach a camera to the front usb port that is designed mostly for exactly that..done
And then walk around holding a computer plugged into a wall. Good plan.
No, Oculus will never work that way, it isn't designed for that. Cell phones should have that option, but they too- do not, you'd have to have some type of pass through, which would largely depend on hardware constraints how "realtime" it would get... they aren't designed to do that... Put your camera app on most phones and walk around with it open for 2 hours and tell me how well the images come through. Generally for short stints its fine, but the longer you have it open, the hotter the phone gets, the greater chance of lag it has.... strap that to your head and block out all light and tell me how safe you think it is.
Hololens is still a screen... its not completely dark.. LIke the Glyph it could potentially bring in VR applications, without closing you off completely from the world, so you could literally have the best of both worlds.
Besides you're seeing a real world in "real resolution" not something thats pixelated. Sure OR will control all pixels you can see... and thats just it.. they're all pixels... always, even if you were streaming what is around you. It will never be as good as actually seeing it first hand.
you need some help.
1. Gear VR DOES work that way, its why it has a camera on the front. With a developer making software for it for all intents and purposes it can be a AR device.
2. as I have already said more than once, if you want to play a game in which there is NOTHING...literally NOTHING WHATSOEVER in your real world space you want to see the VR is the way to go. AR will not have the quality of black light to make that experience what you would expect. There are a LOT of gaming experiences in which I do not want to see the coffee cup on hints of the coffee cup on my desk. In fact, like a 'true black' TV I want that background BLACK.
3. AR in the long run could be a billion times more succcessful than VR considering all markets but just because there are more gamers playing on smart phones does not mean consoles are not relevant.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
for the next iteration of VR look up Project Tango. It looks really cool. Sure it is crude atm but give it a generation or three and it will be really interesting.
In the future Hololens could definitely replace any actual VR products out there. Many of these VR products will need to become way more sophisticated if they are to compete with a living world product like Hololens.
VR is nice in theory, but there is very little interactivity with the actual world, which makes it cumbersome for games that would ever require movement.
Hololens is primarily utilized in a real world environment, although it also gives you the opportunity to watch videos, or play any other type of game (including streaming games) right there as well.
Its completely possible to have hololens run VR at some point, but not the other way around.
Just seeing the demos of Hololens is incredibly impressive, I'm excited to see what else they come up with. So far.. VR has been mostly underwhelming.
but it cant see that is I think what you dont fully understand.
AR cant and doesnt even want to capture every single solitary real life 'pixel' in your viewing space and make it a high quality blacklite image. Reality as it were will always be somewhere in your view space. that is the strength of AR but in many other cases its also its weakness.
more over, want AR with Oculus? just attach a camera to the front usb port that is designed mostly for exactly that..done
And then walk around holding a computer plugged into a wall. Good plan.
No, Oculus will never work that way, it isn't designed for that. Cell phones should have that option, but they too- do not, you'd have to have some type of pass through, which would largely depend on hardware constraints how "realtime" it would get... they aren't designed to do that... Put your camera app on most phones and walk around with it open for 2 hours and tell me how well the images come through. Generally for short stints its fine, but the longer you have it open, the hotter the phone gets, the greater chance of lag it has.... strap that to your head and block out all light and tell me how safe you think it is.
Hololens is still a screen... its not completely dark.. LIke the Glyph it could potentially bring in VR applications, without closing you off completely from the world, so you could literally have the best of both worlds.
Besides you're seeing a real world in "real resolution" not something thats pixelated. Sure OR will control all pixels you can see... and thats just it.. they're all pixels... always, even if you were streaming what is around you. It will never be as good as actually seeing it first hand.
you need some help.
1. Gear VR DOES work that way, its why it has a camera on the front. With a developer making software for it for all intents and purposes it can be a AR device.
2. as I have already said more than once, if you want to play a game in which there is NOTHING...literally NOTHING WHATSOEVER in your real world space you want to see the VR is the way to go. AR will not have the quality of black light to make that experience what you would expect. There are a LOT of gaming experiences in which I do not want to see the coffee cup on hints of the coffee cup on my desk. In fact, like a 'true black' TV I want that background BLACK.
3. AR in the long run could be a billion times more succcessful than VR considering all markets but just because there are more gamers playing on smart phones does not mean consoles are not relevant.
You didn't say Gear VR you said Oculus, where you can strap a camera on it first. And second, I have yet to see any "AR" games created ... I've looked at them already as I've preordered an S7 for my GF and she will be getting a gear vr with it, so I tried to see what it can do (and when it gets here and I test it I'll know even better) but so far nothing I've seen utilizes the camera in any way.. AT ALL.
Furthermore most of the "games" are reaaallly terrible looking, more than half of them are just videos that you can look around.... listen to things... and the actual games look pretty terrible in general. Most people don't want to go into a virtual reality world if all they'll end up seeing is minecraft graphics. Heavily pixelated worlds aren't very immersive.
Many people probably would enjoy the gimmick temporarily of seeing nothing in their real world.. I don't doubt there are plenty out there that need to escape complete and total reality into a headset world with developer sanctioned abilities and where there is no reality to the virtual reality, but thats why AR could very much so make VR obsolete. AR has the potential to work not only through the headset, but you could potentially use the same technology at events or in rooms designed specifically for AR.
OR has a long way to go if they want to ever truly utilize on the go AR functions.
You didn't say Gear VR you said Oculus, where you can strap a camera on it first. And second, I have yet to see any "AR" games created ... I've looked at them already as I've preordered an S7 for my GF and she will be getting a gear vr with it, so I tried to see what it can do (and when it gets here and I test it I'll know even better) but so far nothing I've seen utilizes the camera in any way.. AT ALL.
Furthermore most of the "games" are reaaallly terrible looking, more than half of them are just videos that you can look around.... listen to things... and the actual games look pretty terrible in general. Most people don't want to go into a virtual reality world if all they'll end up seeing is minecraft graphics. Heavily pixelated worlds aren't very immersive.
Many people probably would enjoy the gimmick temporarily of seeing nothing in their real world.. I don't doubt there are plenty out there that need to escape complete and total reality into a headset world with developer sanctioned abilities and where there is no reality to the virtual reality, but thats why AR could very much so make VR obsolete. AR has the potential to work not only through the headset, but you could potentially use the same technology at events or in rooms designed specifically for AR.
OR has a long way to go if they want to ever truly utilize on the go AR functions.
1. Gear VR is Oculus for all intents and purposes and even has the Oculus logo on the headset.
2. The usb port that is installed on the front of the Oculus headset was put there for one major thing in mind. attaching a camera to it. There is not some magical mystical blackhole of technology that makes all the possible for the Gear VR but not Oculus.
3. There are some GREAT game uses for AR, board games specifically. but I have tried VR and I am telling you the experience I want in a game AR Can not without question do. The EXACT same resolution problems that Oculus has AR is going to have as well. and there is not again some mystical magical black hole magic where an AR headset and suddenly produce better virual images because it has white light in the background instead of black light.
If you know what I was talking about you would see how out there your post is.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
@maskedweasel The issues of objects is exactly what Project Tango is working on solving
The have managed to have full VR deathmatches in a normal office using the office as the actual level.
but see guys playing an online shooter using the office as a level is great, in fact its fantastic, but its going to be really hard to scale that up to all or even most game uses.
Ok now you want to render the downtown as mountains and I can climb up to terraform? nope what if the office is closed? what if I already played that level, where is the next level? oh so I have to drive downtown on a sunday when there is nobody around instead of crawling out of bed to put on a headset? how many office floors do you have that are different? how many levels is this game going to have with different layout?
oh and what about all those friggin adds on TV about 'blacklight' what is that? anyone here know?
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
"As far as "issues" are concerned, I report the main of them here below, with the purpose to share what I am talking about.
Movement. Even if you have performant webcams (e.g.: 60fps), the FPS still matter. And even if I have split the webcam management from the rest of functionalities, with a multi-threaded approach, in order to avoid lack of performances, while waiting every frame to get information from cameras, you could still note a minimal delay between your movements and the following real-time video, that you wouldn’t have in real life. Moreover, even if you have a 60fps webcam (i.e. a shutter speed of about 1/60), you would still notice the motion blur effect, that you would not in the real life.
Pixels. Even if you have high resolution webcams (with low-res sensors you would worsen with a stretched blocky effect), the central grid of pixels of the Oculus display is still remarkable and this reduces the experience of directly looking the real world. Moreover, you cannot struggle against ISO of your camera sensor. As far as the Rift is a wired device, most of the time you would be in a low-light condition, that implies a high sensibility mode of the sensor and as a result, a lot of noise all over the frame. On top of that, the dynamic range of the webcam is not the same of the eye (about 10-14 f-stops), however this issue seems to be less annoying than the motion blur effect.
And no, hololense will not have the same resolutio problem because it isn't displaying everything, it is only detecting it and in some cases overlaying on it. That's completely different.
That's the best part though, shortly I will know what you're talking about with the samsungs VR, and at that point, then what? It's only going to reaffirm my point. Even in the first link I posted, they already stated AR will widely outpace VR. Sure there will be some games that VR will be able to do that AR won't... but... lets be honest.. there isn't anything truly special about VR aside from the immersion aspect, and that will still get cut down substantially depending on the use of controllers.
So you see no application for a VR headset that s both uncorded and can map out your environment in real time.? Or are you trying to troll just for the funking heck of it?
In the future Hololens could definitely replace any actual VR products out there. Many of these VR products will need to become way more sophisticated if they are to compete with a living world product like Hololens.
VR is nice in theory, but there is very little interactivity with the actual world, which makes it cumbersome for games that would ever require movement.
Hololens is primarily utilized in a real world environment, although it also gives you the opportunity to watch videos, or play any other type of game (including streaming games) right there as well.
Its completely possible to have hololens run VR at some point, but not the other way around.
Just seeing the demos of Hololens is incredibly impressive, I'm excited to see what else they come up with. So far.. VR has been mostly underwhelming.
but it cant see that is I think what you dont fully understand.
AR cant and doesnt even want to capture every single solitary real life 'pixel' in your viewing space and make it a high quality blacklite image. Reality as it were will always be somewhere in your view space. that is the strength of AR but in many other cases its also its weakness.
more over, want AR with Oculus? just attach a camera to the front usb port that is designed mostly for exactly that..done
And then walk around holding a computer plugged into a wall. Good plan.
No, Oculus will never work that way, it isn't designed for that. Cell phones should have that option, but they too- do not, you'd have to have some type of pass through, which would largely depend on hardware constraints how "realtime" it would get... they aren't designed to do that... Put your camera app on most phones and walk around with it open for 2 hours and tell me how well the images come through. Generally for short stints its fine, but the longer you have it open, the hotter the phone gets, the greater chance of lag it has.... strap that to your head and block out all light and tell me how safe you think it is.
Hololens is still a screen... its not completely dark.. LIke the Glyph it could potentially bring in VR applications, without closing you off completely from the world, so you could literally have the best of both worlds.
Besides you're seeing a real world in "real resolution" not something thats pixelated. Sure OR will control all pixels you can see... and thats just it.. they're all pixels... always, even if you were streaming what is around you. It will never be as good as actually seeing it first hand.
you need some help.
1. Gear VR DOES work that way, its why it has a camera on the front. With a developer making software for it for all intents and purposes it can be a AR device.
2. as I have already said more than once, if you want to play a game in which there is NOTHING...literally NOTHING WHATSOEVER in your real world space you want to see the VR is the way to go. AR will not have the quality of black light to make that experience what you would expect. There are a LOT of gaming experiences in which I do not want to see the coffee cup on hints of the coffee cup on my desk. In fact, like a 'true black' TV I want that background BLACK.
3. AR in the long run could be a billion times more succcessful than VR considering all markets but just because there are more gamers playing on smart phones does not mean consoles are not relevant.
You didn't say Gear VR you said Oculus, where you can strap a camera on it first. And second, I have yet to see any "AR" games created ... I've looked at them already as I've preordered an S7 for my GF and she will be getting a gear vr with it, so I tried to see what it can do (and when it gets here and I test it I'll know even better) but so far nothing I've seen utilizes the camera in any way.. AT ALL.
Furthermore most of the "games" are reaaallly terrible looking, more than half of them are just videos that you can look around.... listen to things... and the actual games look pretty terrible in general. Most people don't want to go into a virtual reality world if all they'll end up seeing is minecraft graphics. Heavily pixelated worlds aren't very immersive.
Many people probably would enjoy the gimmick temporarily of seeing nothing in their real world.. I don't doubt there are plenty out there that need to escape complete and total reality into a headset world with developer sanctioned abilities and where there is no reality to the virtual reality, but thats why AR could very much so make VR obsolete. AR has the potential to work not only through the headset, but you could potentially use the same technology at events or in rooms designed specifically for AR.
OR has a long way to go if they want to ever truly utilize on the go AR functions.
I have to respectfully Disagree. I enjoyed the Evolution of VideoGames. Graphics isnt everything. I remember when people said PS3 level graphics was great, and now they say otherwise. Same with PS2 graphics, and on and on.
graphics will grow. What I enjoy about VR is to be able to interact with the environment with my head, eyes, hands and feet.
The Nintendo Wii brought attention to this exciting concept, but failed due to their conservative nature of the company that Video Games are only for kids. So we never got full experience from that potential until Playstation tried to copy and that left a bad taste in people mouth.
We never really had anything like VR in serious gaming yet. Virtual Boy was not VR. I hate when people say it was. It was just a headset. VR is more than just a headset.
I have to respectfully Disagree. I enjoyed the Evolution of VideoGames. Graphics isnt everything. I remember when people said PS3 level graphics was great, and now they say otherwise. Same with PS2 graphics, and on and on.
graphics will grow. What I enjoy about VR is to be able to interact with the environment with my head, eyes, hands and feet.
The Nintendo Wii brought attention to this exciting concept, but failed due to their conservative nature of the company that Video Games are only for kids. So we never got full experience from that potential until Playstation tried to copy and that left a bad taste in people mouth.
We never really had anything like VR in serious gaming yet. Virtual Boy was not VR. I hate when people say it was. It was just a headset. VR is more than just a headset.
Thats somewhat what I'm saying... that VR will need time to mature, I watched a few VR videos recently, and graphically they don't look great, but that doesn't mean they won't get there.
But in comparison, AR will allow you to interact with your head, hands, eyes and feet much better as you'll be able to see them, and what you're interacting with in realtime.
While the purposes and scope might be different, and AR isn't ready for primetime just yet, thus far I haven't seen anything on any VR set that makes me think.. "I really want to play that -- maybe even for hours"
Just like when wii put out their balance board, the actual ability to use those things, in the actual opportunity the game makes use of those things in VR (which most use head and eye tracking and many games would use some type of controller) its always about the software... always software that will make VR worth it.
From everything I've seen.. none of it IS worth it. But AR does have alternate applications that it can be used with. VR has its place, but its a very small, niche, selective place.
I want AR on Smartphones. Leave the VR to the home.
you have AR on your phone already... From advanced GPS to the plethora AR tag apps and programs designed to insert funny images and animations over your film and photos, just to mention the most common.
There is plenty of AR all around us that we do not realize.
I want AR on Smartphones. Leave the VR to the home.
you have AR on your phone already... From advanced GPS to the plethora AR tag apps and programs designed to insert funny images and animations over your film and photos, just to mention the most common.
There is plenty of AR all around us that we do not realize.
I think the very fact that 'we dont notice it' is a sign that its not really the same thing as we are talking about here.
Strick definitions of words and conveying meaning are not always the same thing
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Different technologies. While some people see it as an either or, it's really a matter of both in their element. (price not withstanding). Think of it as clothes you relax at home in, and clothes you wear when going out.
I have to respectfully Disagree. I enjoyed the Evolution of VideoGames. Graphics isnt everything. I remember when people said PS3 level graphics was great, and now they say otherwise. Same with PS2 graphics, and on and on.
graphics will grow. What I enjoy about VR is to be able to interact with the environment with my head, eyes, hands and feet.
The Nintendo Wii brought attention to this exciting concept, but failed due to their conservative nature of the company that Video Games are only for kids. So we never got full experience from that potential until Playstation tried to copy and that left a bad taste in people mouth.
We never really had anything like VR in serious gaming yet. Virtual Boy was not VR. I hate when people say it was. It was just a headset. VR is more than just a headset.
Thats somewhat what I'm saying... that VR will need time to mature, I watched a few VR videos recently, and graphically they don't look great,
nop you are still not understanding me.
The EXACT TO THE TEE graphical limitations VR has with displaying Virtual objects is EXACTLY TO THE TEE the same that AR will have
The graphics in AR doesnt magically be able to render more polygons than VR simply because its called AR. In fact becaue of the 'white light' problem its even HARDER for AR
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Well otoh.... Seeing how the Hololens DK´s go out this month we know jack of what it will actually be able to do. Sure MS says it will be able to do a lot... But that said that about the kinect too... =P
Now i hope it will deliver because it opens the door for some very cool things.
Comments
I think both have their place. Of course the fist one hololens won't be awesome until you can use it anywhere (not have to plug it in etc.)
Wa min God! Se æx on min heafod is!
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online and 6 tracks in Distance
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
VR is nice in theory, but there is very little interactivity with the actual world, which makes it cumbersome for games that would ever require movement.
Hololens is primarily utilized in a real world environment, although it also gives you the opportunity to watch videos, or play any other type of game (including streaming games) right there as well.
Its completely possible to have hololens run VR at some point, but not the other way around.
Just seeing the demos of Hololens is incredibly impressive, I'm excited to see what else they come up with. So far.. VR has been mostly underwhelming.
AR cant and doesnt even want to capture every single solitary real life 'pixel' in your viewing space and make it a high quality blacklite image. Reality as it were will always be somewhere in your view space. that is the strength of AR but in many other cases its also its weakness.
more over, want AR with Oculus? just attach a camera to the front usb port that is designed mostly for exactly that..done
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
No, Oculus will never work that way, it isn't designed for that. Cell phones should have that option, but they too- do not, you'd have to have some type of pass through, which would largely depend on hardware constraints how "realtime" it would get... they aren't designed to do that... Put your camera app on most phones and walk around with it open for 2 hours and tell me how well the images come through. Generally for short stints its fine, but the longer you have it open, the hotter the phone gets, the greater chance of lag it has.... strap that to your head and block out all light and tell me how safe you think it is.
Hololens is still a screen... its not completely dark.. LIke the Glyph it could potentially bring in VR applications, without closing you off completely from the world, so you could literally have the best of both worlds.
Besides you're seeing a real world in "real resolution" not something thats pixelated. Sure OR will control all pixels you can see... and thats just it.. they're all pixels... always, even if you were streaming what is around you. It will never be as good as actually seeing it first hand.
1. Gear VR DOES work that way, its why it has a camera on the front. With a developer making software for it for all intents and purposes it can be a AR device.
2. as I have already said more than once, if you want to play a game in which there is NOTHING...literally NOTHING WHATSOEVER in your real world space you want to see the VR is the way to go. AR will not have the quality of black light to make that experience what you would expect. There are a LOT of gaming experiences in which I do not want to see the coffee cup on hints of the coffee cup on my desk. In fact, like a 'true black' TV I want that background BLACK.
3. AR in the long run could be a billion times more succcessful than VR considering all markets but just because there are more gamers playing on smart phones does not mean consoles are not relevant.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
This have been a good conversation
Furthermore most of the "games" are reaaallly terrible looking, more than half of them are just videos that you can look around.... listen to things... and the actual games look pretty terrible in general. Most people don't want to go into a virtual reality world if all they'll end up seeing is minecraft graphics. Heavily pixelated worlds aren't very immersive.
Many people probably would enjoy the gimmick temporarily of seeing nothing in their real world.. I don't doubt there are plenty out there that need to escape complete and total reality into a headset world with developer sanctioned abilities and where there is no reality to the virtual reality, but thats why AR could very much so make VR obsolete. AR has the potential to work not only through the headset, but you could potentially use the same technology at events or in rooms designed specifically for AR.
OR has a long way to go if they want to ever truly utilize on the go AR functions.
2. The usb port that is installed on the front of the Oculus headset was put there for one major thing in mind. attaching a camera to it. There is not some magical mystical blackhole of technology that makes all the possible for the Gear VR but not Oculus.
3. There are some GREAT game uses for AR, board games specifically. but I have tried VR and I am telling you the experience I want in a game AR Can not without question do. The EXACT same resolution problems that Oculus has AR is going to have as well. and there is not again some mystical magical black hole magic where an AR headset and suddenly produce better virual images because it has white light in the background instead of black light.
If you know what I was talking about you would see how out there your post is.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
The have managed to have full VR deathmatches in a normal office using the office as the actual level.
This have been a good conversation
Ok now you want to render the downtown as mountains and I can climb up to terraform? nope
what if the office is closed? what if I already played that level, where is the next level? oh so I have to drive downtown on a sunday when there is nobody around instead of crawling out of bed to put on a headset? how many office floors do you have that are different? how many levels is this game going to have with different layout?
oh and what about all those friggin adds on TV about 'blacklight' what is that? anyone here know?
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
http://federico-mammano.github.io/Looking-Through-Oculus-Rift/
"As far as "issues" are concerned, I report the main of them here below, with the purpose to share what I am talking about.
Movement. Even if you have performant webcams (e.g.: 60fps), the FPS still matter. And even if I have split the webcam management from the rest of functionalities, with a multi-threaded approach, in order to avoid lack of performances, while waiting every frame to get information from cameras, you could still note a minimal delay between your movements and the following real-time video, that you wouldn’t have in real life. Moreover, even if you have a 60fps webcam (i.e. a shutter speed of about 1/60), you would still notice the motion blur effect, that you would not in the real life.
Pixels. Even if you have high resolution webcams (with low-res sensors you would worsen with a stretched blocky effect), the central grid of pixels of the Oculus display is still remarkable and this reduces the experience of directly looking the real world. Moreover, you cannot struggle against ISO of your camera sensor. As far as the Rift is a wired device, most of the time you would be in a low-light condition, that implies a high sensibility mode of the sensor and as a result, a lot of noise all over the frame. On top of that, the dynamic range of the webcam is not the same of the eye (about 10-14 f-stops), however this issue seems to be less annoying than the motion blur effect.
Yes, many issues ... but it works!"
and here's an interesting nut
http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2015-08/13/why-oculus-isnt-pursuing-augmented-reality
And no, hololense will not have the same resolutio problem because it isn't displaying everything, it is only detecting it and in some cases overlaying on it. That's completely different.
That's the best part though, shortly I will know what you're talking about with the samsungs VR, and at that point, then what? It's only going to reaffirm my point. Even in the first link I posted, they already stated AR will widely outpace VR. Sure there will be some games that VR will be able to do that AR won't... but... lets be honest.. there isn't anything truly special about VR aside from the immersion aspect, and that will still get cut down substantially depending on the use of controllers.
So you see no application for a VR headset that s both uncorded and can map out your environment in real time.? Or are you trying to troll just for the funking heck of it?
This have been a good conversation
Philosophy of MMO Game Design
graphics will grow. What I enjoy about VR is to be able to interact with the environment with my head, eyes, hands and feet.
The Nintendo Wii brought attention to this exciting concept, but failed due to their conservative nature of the company that Video Games are only for kids. So we never got full experience from that potential until Playstation tried to copy and that left a bad taste in people mouth.
We never really had anything like VR in serious gaming yet. Virtual Boy was not VR. I hate when people say it was. It was just a headset. VR is more than just a headset.
Philosophy of MMO Game Design
But in comparison, AR will allow you to interact with your head, hands, eyes and feet much better as you'll be able to see them, and what you're interacting with in realtime.
While the purposes and scope might be different, and AR isn't ready for primetime just yet, thus far I haven't seen anything on any VR set that makes me think.. "I really want to play that -- maybe even for hours"
Just like when wii put out their balance board, the actual ability to use those things, in the actual opportunity the game makes use of those things in VR (which most use head and eye tracking and many games would use some type of controller) its always about the software... always software that will make VR worth it.
From everything I've seen.. none of it IS worth it. But AR does have alternate applications that it can be used with. VR has its place, but its a very small, niche, selective place.
There is plenty of AR all around us that we do not realize.
This have been a good conversation
Strick definitions of words and conveying meaning are not always the same thing
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
I self identify as a monkey.
nop you are still not understanding me.
The EXACT TO THE TEE graphical limitations VR has with displaying Virtual objects is EXACTLY TO THE TEE the same that AR will have
The graphics in AR doesnt magically be able to render more polygons than VR simply because its called AR. In fact becaue of the 'white light' problem its even HARDER for AR
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Now i hope it will deliver because it opens the door for some very cool things.
This have been a good conversation
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다