This will never amount to anything. The idea of virtual reality is great but the implementation not so much.
1. You would need the hardware to be universally plug and play and not just support a handful of games
2. You need the toy to be inexpensive
Once you got those two things covered then you need
3. The big boys to pick it up, like Microsoft, Sony or Nintendo
The world isn't ready to accept this yet, we are just not far enough technically to fill point 1 and 2
1 - USB and will play any game that supports it painlessly.
2 - The consumer version will be inexpensive
3 - I remember when the Big Boys wore diapers. What matters is the developers are picking it up. Nothing succeeds without the games and this is starting strong.
Ive got a Rift developer kit ordered, im designing a game specifically to take advantage of its functionality. Ive used this tech before and understand completely the immersion quality we are getting. Dont know how true the "next generation" statements are but ill say this - Im not spending a cent on any next generation console unless they support Rift.
Thousands have bought the developers version. Maybe you just dont quite grasp what I and so many are ready for?
This will never amount to anything. The idea of virtual reality is great but the implementation not so much.
1. You would need the hardware to be universally plug and play and not just support a handful of games
2. You need the toy to be inexpensive
Once you got those two things covered then you need
3. The big boys to pick it up, like Microsoft, Sony or Nintendo
The world isn't ready to accept this yet, we are just not far enough technically to fill point 1 and 2
1 - USB and will play any game that supports it painlessly.
2 - The consumer version will be inexpensive
3 - I remember when the Big Boys wore diapers. What matters is the developers are picking it up. Nothing succeeds without the games and this is starting strong.
Ive got a Rift developer kit ordered, im designing a game specifically to take advantage of its functionality. Ive used this tech before and understand completely the immersion quality we are getting. Dont know how true the "next generation" statements are but ill say this - Im not spending a cent on any next generation console unless they support Rift.
Thousands have bought the developers version. Maybe you just dont quite grasp what I and so many are ready for?
Any game that will support it. That's the problem right there. You have to be pretty naive if you think this will be universally supported. I'll give it an A for effort though. Truth is these gimmicky VR gaming goggles have come and gone over and over since the 90's and until as I said the big consoles start to integrate them they will never make it on to the mass market. Even if a few developers embraces them
This will never amount to anything. The idea of virtual reality is great but the implementation not so much.
1. You would need the hardware to be universally plug and play and not just support a handful of games
2. You need the toy to be inexpensive
Once you got those two things covered then you need
3. The big boys to pick it up, like Microsoft, Sony or Nintendo
The world isn't ready to accept this yet, we are just not far enough technically to fill point 1 and 2
You do realize that this is how things come to fruition don't you? Oh wait... you don't! Well lets see, if people like you had their way then we'd still be using paintings as pictures, if the generation after that was like you, then we'd still be stuck with black and white photos as people were actually against colour at first, or how about people who complained about cars and said the same thing? No thanks, I don't want to be stuck with paintings and riding horses everyday, I'd rather keep moving forward.
So to counterpoint:
1. The hardware will be universally plug and play for windows, and whether this iteration, or a future one takes off, many more than just a handful of games will be supported (much like 3D cards when they first came out, remember 3DFX?... probably not)
2. When something new comes out it is typically at a higher cost, as manufacturing becomes simplified the price will drop. This is true for almost any industry. Again, look at video cards.
3. The big boys don't need to pick it up. If they did, it would be great as it would absolutely launch things forward at a faster pace, but whether they do or don't, VR is something that too many people have wanted and even dreamt about for decades to just be swept under the carpet.
The world is ready to accept this. We are just at the beginning stages. You have to start somewhere. Things don't just become popular out of the blue unless you are talking about pop music.
None of your examples is really proof that this will succeed or not. Until it does lets leave it at speculation shall we?. I personally don't believe it since I've seen at least 3 of these being hyped up but never making it to the mass market
This will never amount to anything. The idea of virtual reality is great but the implementation not so much.
1. You would need the hardware to be universally plug and play and not just support a handful of games
2. You need the toy to be inexpensive
Once you got those two things covered then you need
3. The big boys to pick it up, like Microsoft, Sony or Nintendo
The world isn't ready to accept this yet, we are just not far enough technically to fill point 1 and 2
1) While that will never entirely happen, it's kind of like saying that games will never entirely abandon pure 2D graphics. Support could become very widespread, however, but it will take several years. The latest versions of DirectX and OpenGL both support stereoscopic 3D. If games that use the latest graphics APIs implement stereoscopic 3D properly (which I don't think would be all that hard, but I'm not entirely certain), then it will work not only with the Oculus Rift, but also with every other stereoscopic 3D implementation, from active shutter glasses to polarity glasses to whatever people come up with in the future.
2) It's basically a computer monitor in a different form factor. Whatever you're going to do, you'll need a computer monitor.
3) Console support is thoroughly unnecessary. For PC use, the "big boys" means the DirectX and OpenGL APIs, both of which support it.
This will never amount to anything. The idea of virtual reality is great but the implementation not so much.
1. You would need the hardware to be universally plug and play and not just support a handful of games
2. You need the toy to be inexpensive
Once you got those two things covered then you need
3. The big boys to pick it up, like Microsoft, Sony or Nintendo
The world isn't ready to accept this yet, we are just not far enough technically to fill point 1 and 2
You do realize that this is how things come to fruition don't you? Oh wait... you don't! Well lets see, if people like you had their way then we'd still be using paintings as pictures, if the generation after that was like you, then we'd still be stuck with black and white photos as people were actually against colour at first, or how about people who complained about cars and said the same thing? No thanks, I don't want to be stuck with paintings and riding horses everyday, I'd rather keep moving forward.
So to counterpoint:
1. The hardware will be universally plug and play for windows, and whether this iteration, or a future one takes off, many more than just a handful of games will be supported (much like 3D cards when they first came out, remember 3DFX?... probably not)
2. When something new comes out it is typically at a higher cost, as manufacturing becomes simplified the price will drop. This is true for almost any industry. Again, look at video cards.
3. The big boys don't need to pick it up. If they did, it would be great as it would absolutely launch things forward at a faster pace, but whether they do or don't, VR is something that too many people have wanted and even dreamt about for decades to just be swept under the carpet.
The world is ready to accept this. We are just at the beginning stages. You have to start somewhere. Things don't just become popular out of the blue unless you are talking about pop music.
1) The problem isn't hardware support. We've been using monitors for a long, long time, and it's just another monitor. Stereoscopic 3D does change some things, but both AMD and Nvidia support it in their drivers.
I wouldn't be entirely shocked if Intel does, too. Or if Intel doesn't start officially supporting it until 2018 and doesn't have actual working support until 2030. Intel video drivers are hard to predict.
2) While there are economies of scale, if stereoscopic 3D catches on, it won't necessarily mean sales of tens of millions of Oculus Rifts; it will mean there are a ton of competitors, just like there are with normal monitors. Industry standard APIs mean that if a game supports one stereoscopic 3D approach, it can support all of the rest with no additional work.
3) We've had stereoscopic 3D since the 1950s, and it still hasn't really caught on. Maybe it will become ubiquitous soon, or maybe in 50 years, it still won't have caught on.
2. Has a quick hotkey to show me the real world without a moments pause (like if I need to answer my phone or pick up a coffee cup or see who entered the room etc.)
3. Doesn't track my head/eye movement - I want to aim/look etc. with the mouse/keyboard not give myself neck pain and muscle spasms
I may consider buying one for the immersion, as long as
This will never amount to anything. The idea of virtual reality is great but the implementation not so much.
1. You would need the hardware to be universally plug and play and not just support a handful of games
2. You need the toy to be inexpensive
Once you got those two things covered then you need
3. The big boys to pick it up, like Microsoft, Sony or Nintendo
The world isn't ready to accept this yet, we are just not far enough technically to fill point 1 and 2
1 - USB and will play any game that supports it painlessly.
2 - The consumer version will be inexpensive
3 - I remember when the Big Boys wore diapers. What matters is the developers are picking it up. Nothing succeeds without the games and this is starting strong.
Ive got a Rift developer kit ordered, im designing a game specifically to take advantage of its functionality. Ive used this tech before and understand completely the immersion quality we are getting. Dont know how true the "next generation" statements are but ill say this - Im not spending a cent on any next generation console unless they support Rift.
Thousands have bought the developers version. Maybe you just dont quite grasp what I and so many are ready for?
USB? Egad, I hope not. If they're using USB to pass through the monitor signal, then the Oculus Rift is dead on arrival and we should look elsewhere. Even USB 3.0 (which many computers don't have) doesn't have enough bandwidth unless they're using a very low monitor resolution. There are some USB monitors out there, and they're dreadful, even for just a single monitor that's not trying to do anything fancy apart from using USB. For this, you'd want a recent version of DisplayPort, HDMI, or DVI.
This will never amount to anything. The idea of virtual reality is great but the implementation not so much.
1. You would need the hardware to be universally plug and play and not just support a handful of games
2. You need the toy to be inexpensive
Once you got those two things covered then you need
3. The big boys to pick it up, like Microsoft, Sony or Nintendo
The world isn't ready to accept this yet, we are just not far enough technically to fill point 1 and 2
1 - USB and will play any game that supports it painlessly.
2 - The consumer version will be inexpensive
3 - I remember when the Big Boys wore diapers. What matters is the developers are picking it up. Nothing succeeds without the games and this is starting strong.
Ive got a Rift developer kit ordered, im designing a game specifically to take advantage of its functionality. Ive used this tech before and understand completely the immersion quality we are getting. Dont know how true the "next generation" statements are but ill say this - Im not spending a cent on any next generation console unless they support Rift.
Thousands have bought the developers version. Maybe you just dont quite grasp what I and so many are ready for?
Any game that will support it. That's the problem right there. You have to be pretty naive if you think this will be universally supported. I'll give it an A for effort though. Truth is these gimmicky VR gaming goggles have come and gone over and over since the 90's and until as I said the big consoles start to integrate them they will never make it on to the mass market. Even if a few developers embraces them
There weren't any industry standard APIs that supported it until very recently. OpenGL 4.2 brought stereoscopic 3D support in 2011, and DirectX 11.1 did in 2012. Before that, to do stereoscopic 3D, you needed proprietary stuff, and that's a non-starter for PC games.
There have been some consoles that attempted it, most notably Nintendo's Virtual Boy and 3DS. They flopped, however.
2. Has a quick hotkey to show me the real world without a moments pause (like if I need to answer my phone or pick up a coffee cup or see who entered the room etc.)
3. Doesn't track my head/eye movement - I want to aim/look etc. with the mouse/keyboard not give myself neck pain and muscle spasms
I may consider buying one for the immersion, as long as
4. it doesn't cost more than 100-200$.
(2) is extremely unlikely. It wouldn't be any easier to do that with the Oculus Rift than it would be to make any other computer monitor go invisible and let you see the wall behind it.
2. Has a quick hotkey to show me the real world without a moments pause (like if I need to answer my phone or pick up a coffee cup or see who entered the room etc.)
3. Doesn't track my head/eye movement - I want to aim/look etc. with the mouse/keyboard not give myself neck pain and muscle spasms
I may consider buying one for the immersion, as long as
4. it doesn't cost more than 100-200$.
(2) is extremely unlikely. It wouldn't be any easier to do that with the Oculus Rift than it would be to make any other computer monitor go invisible and let you see the wall behind it.
External facing cameras with a quick button to swap from one view (in headset monitors) to external view.
There would be no need for such a thing on a computer monitor, so it's never been done and never will be. But it easily could be.
My cellphone can swap these views in the blink of an eye. Not at all impossible. It's very easy for me to use my phone (a monitor essentially for this purpose) to see through it at what's behind using the camera.
And like I said, it may be unlikely but it would be a requirement before I'd buy one.
2. Has a quick hotkey to show me the real world without a moments pause (like if I need to answer my phone or pick up a coffee cup or see who entered the room etc.)
3. Doesn't track my head/eye movement - I want to aim/look etc. with the mouse/keyboard not give myself neck pain and muscle spasms
I may consider buying one for the immersion, as long as
4. it doesn't cost more than 100-200$.
(2) is extremely unlikely. It wouldn't be any easier to do that with the Oculus Rift than it would be to make any other computer monitor go invisible and let you see the wall behind it.
External facing cameras with a quick button to swap from one view (in headset monitors) to external view.
There would be no need for such a thing on a monitor, so it's never been done and never will be. But it easily could be.
My cellphone can swap these views in the blick of an eye. Not at all impossible. It's very easy for me to use my phone (a monitor essentially for this purpose) to see through it at what's behind using the camera.
And like I said, it may be unlikely but it would be a requirement before I'd buy one.
Ah, I didn't think of that. And with the monitors almost right up against your eyes, it could be close to perspective correct for you, too. It's guaranteed to be much lower resolution than what your eyes can see, though, so it wouldn't let you see the real world all that well.
2. Has a quick hotkey to show me the real world without a moments pause (like if I need to answer my phone or pick up a coffee cup or see who entered the room etc.)
3. Doesn't track my head/eye movement - I want to aim/look etc. with the mouse/keyboard not give myself neck pain and muscle spasms
I may consider buying one for the immersion, as long as
4. it doesn't cost more than 100-200$.
(2) is extremely unlikely. It wouldn't be any easier to do that with the Oculus Rift than it would be to make any other computer monitor go invisible and let you see the wall behind it.
External facing cameras with a quick button to swap from one view (in headset monitors) to external view.
There would be no need for such a thing on a monitor, so it's never been done and never will be. But it easily could be.
My cellphone can swap these views in the blick of an eye. Not at all impossible. It's very easy for me to use my phone (a monitor essentially for this purpose) to see through it at what's behind using the camera.
And like I said, it may be unlikely but it would be a requirement before I'd buy one.
Ah, I didn't think of that. And with the monitors almost right up against your eyes, it could be close to perspective correct for you, too. It's guaranteed to be much lower resolution than what your eyes can see, though, so it wouldn't let you see the real world all that well.
Wouldn't have to.
Give me at least one front facing, and maybe two (one on each side) to at least give a panoramic view that approximates my "real" vision and I'd be happy.
Screens should be close enough to eyes anyway (like you said) to not mess with depth perception TOO much.
In fact I just tried it lol.
Shut one eye, put camera on cell phone on - held up as close to my eye (glasses) as I could without being too blurry, tried to pick up and manipulate various objects on my desk.
Not at all perfect, but was also still 3-4 inches from my eye and with one shut my depth perception was a bit off. Screens being closer in a headset, and one tuned left eye/right eye it could definitely work.
It suffers from the same flaws all that have come before it have. It's a neat idea but it's not one that will ever go main stream with current peripherals. Theres a reason VR Arcades go with floater sticks and physical vehicals to sit on and in. Not being able to see what your hands are doing is going to keep way to many gamers from trying this let alone buying it for it ever to go mainstream. Unless you want to see yourself typing and or using a game pad in game then most are going to pass simply because they can't use it.
I too see here some problems. Especially in sophisticated simulation games. In my view, in the short term, here seems only one solution - to use this feature together with some sort of the Mind-Reading Controller. Like these examples... http://www.psfk.com/2012/06/control-video-games-with-mind.html
And therefore is needed, that these devices would be at once compatibles, imho.
As a wearer of glasses I have to first check if I can actually use the device. No point buying it when I can't use it.
If the developers have factored in glasses into their design though, I will be ordering a pack asap. Emersion level extreme: here I come.
The devs have factored in glasses. The view window can be slid forward to make room for them so that there is room inside and your lenses don't come in contact with the unit's lenses.
The Oculus Rift seems like it will be the first of many, but it's also one of the few with a lot of big backing behind it. Other companies are working on similar products, and you even have a few teams going in the direction of augmented reality, such as CastAR. Unlike the attempt in the 80's, this round of virtual reality technology has much more affordable and far less bulky equipment. It's accessible, and that makes a big difference in adoption.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
I don't know if it has it already, but what the OR needs to REALLY freak me out is a high MP external camera (like on phones) so you can see your hands and body in game when you look down at yourself. Or for augmented reality stuff.
I hope the OR is cool and it catches on, with 4k and flexible screens coming out I think it could become an amazing way to play games.
I think it'd be awesome for a hyper-immersive first-person MMO. But what I really want to see is the kind of VR they've got going on in Sword Art Online or Accel World, but I doubt that'll happen (if it does, I bet it won't be in my lifetime ).
<childish, provocative and highly speculative banner about your favorite game goes here>
the dev kit is just 300 bucks but their is still no launch date and price posted on consumer version of the rift. A lot of the new kickstarter campaigns are promising rift support as their bonus donation goals. The dead linger 7 days to die starforge and planet explorers are all doing this in the survival sandbox multiplayer genre. So the indie devs are already all over the rift and have the dev kits on backorder since none have went out yet. It looks pretty promising if they keep the price range at what consumers are expecting, not being more than the dev kit. The problem is there is so much hype behind this thing now that this company can easily screw this up badly if they try to price gouge the consumer base because they think it will sell so well. A new tech device like this people are very skeptical about from the start until word of mouth spreads and the company gains trust with its consumers. The easiest way to fail is to get too greedy from the start when you know the dev kit is only 300 bucks. I wouldnt worry about games supporting this feature as its already catching on with indie dev studios everywhere. It just might be awhile for full game support with triple A companies but Im pretty sure mods with api support will start showing up on the internet just like all mmorpgs have and other games already even when they are not supported by the devs IE GW2 SWTOR etc.
IMO, a waste of time and money. People will be all gushing over it at first, then it will sit the corner of their room like excersise equiptment. I won t be bothered to ever use it. I d rather play games the good old way.
Originally posted by Soki123 IMO, a waste of time and money. People will be all gushing over it at first, then it will sit the corner of their room like excersise equiptment. I won t be bothered to ever use it. I d rather play games the good old way.
A driving game with a rift, wheel and pedals... There will be no going back. The immersion is incredible.
I'm just going to watch and see how this thing turns out, I absolutely won't be adopting it. I have issues with most 3D products, mainly due to a red/green deficiency ala color-blindness which isn't really the inability to see those colors but more confusion on what those colors actually are. So while I can see some 3D effects, most of it is lost on me, or worse gives me a headache and severe eye strain.
My questions on all of this is, doesn't this system require a game be built to support it? How laborious is that process, can it be patched in, and how much does the development cost the team? Are there any talks of a support system to automate the inclusion of this device, a universal application or such that will translate titles without further work on the developers parts? Is such a "plug n play" application even feasible? My immediate reaction is how this is going to effect mmo development, if this system is adopted and demanded is the only requirement for inclusion utilizing a development kit, are there aftermarket support systems in place? Will developers have to hire professionals in this new/old field to work on or maintain games functionality? How does this effect the artwork teams on games?
So plenty of questions, perhaps they have all been answered but I'll wait to see how the gaming industry pans out on this.
Comments
1 - USB and will play any game that supports it painlessly.
2 - The consumer version will be inexpensive
3 - I remember when the Big Boys wore diapers. What matters is the developers are picking it up. Nothing succeeds without the games and this is starting strong.
Ive got a Rift developer kit ordered, im designing a game specifically to take advantage of its functionality. Ive used this tech before and understand completely the immersion quality we are getting. Dont know how true the "next generation" statements are but ill say this - Im not spending a cent on any next generation console unless they support Rift.
Thousands have bought the developers version. Maybe you just dont quite grasp what I and so many are ready for?
Any game that will support it. That's the problem right there. You have to be pretty naive if you think this will be universally supported. I'll give it an A for effort though. Truth is these gimmicky VR gaming goggles have come and gone over and over since the 90's and until as I said the big consoles start to integrate them they will never make it on to the mass market. Even if a few developers embraces them
None of your examples is really proof that this will succeed or not. Until it does lets leave it at speculation shall we?. I personally don't believe it since I've seen at least 3 of these being hyped up but never making it to the mass market
Better motion tracking system than kinect for hands
I know that it is ugly ... but with 1$ you can have "minority report" glove
1) While that will never entirely happen, it's kind of like saying that games will never entirely abandon pure 2D graphics. Support could become very widespread, however, but it will take several years. The latest versions of DirectX and OpenGL both support stereoscopic 3D. If games that use the latest graphics APIs implement stereoscopic 3D properly (which I don't think would be all that hard, but I'm not entirely certain), then it will work not only with the Oculus Rift, but also with every other stereoscopic 3D implementation, from active shutter glasses to polarity glasses to whatever people come up with in the future.
2) It's basically a computer monitor in a different form factor. Whatever you're going to do, you'll need a computer monitor.
3) Console support is thoroughly unnecessary. For PC use, the "big boys" means the DirectX and OpenGL APIs, both of which support it.
1) The problem isn't hardware support. We've been using monitors for a long, long time, and it's just another monitor. Stereoscopic 3D does change some things, but both AMD and Nvidia support it in their drivers.
I wouldn't be entirely shocked if Intel does, too. Or if Intel doesn't start officially supporting it until 2018 and doesn't have actual working support until 2030. Intel video drivers are hard to predict.
2) While there are economies of scale, if stereoscopic 3D catches on, it won't necessarily mean sales of tens of millions of Oculus Rifts; it will mean there are a ton of competitors, just like there are with normal monitors. Industry standard APIs mean that if a game supports one stereoscopic 3D approach, it can support all of the rest with no additional work.
3) We've had stereoscopic 3D since the 1950s, and it still hasn't really caught on. Maybe it will become ubiquitous soon, or maybe in 50 years, it still won't have caught on.
If it:
1. Can be worn with glasses
2. Has a quick hotkey to show me the real world without a moments pause (like if I need to answer my phone or pick up a coffee cup or see who entered the room etc.)
3. Doesn't track my head/eye movement - I want to aim/look etc. with the mouse/keyboard not give myself neck pain and muscle spasms
I may consider buying one for the immersion, as long as
4. it doesn't cost more than 100-200$.
USB? Egad, I hope not. If they're using USB to pass through the monitor signal, then the Oculus Rift is dead on arrival and we should look elsewhere. Even USB 3.0 (which many computers don't have) doesn't have enough bandwidth unless they're using a very low monitor resolution. There are some USB monitors out there, and they're dreadful, even for just a single monitor that's not trying to do anything fancy apart from using USB. For this, you'd want a recent version of DisplayPort, HDMI, or DVI.
There weren't any industry standard APIs that supported it until very recently. OpenGL 4.2 brought stereoscopic 3D support in 2011, and DirectX 11.1 did in 2012. Before that, to do stereoscopic 3D, you needed proprietary stuff, and that's a non-starter for PC games.
There have been some consoles that attempted it, most notably Nintendo's Virtual Boy and 3DS. They flopped, however.
(2) is extremely unlikely. It wouldn't be any easier to do that with the Oculus Rift than it would be to make any other computer monitor go invisible and let you see the wall behind it.
External facing cameras with a quick button to swap from one view (in headset monitors) to external view.
There would be no need for such a thing on a computer monitor, so it's never been done and never will be. But it easily could be.
My cellphone can swap these views in the blink of an eye. Not at all impossible. It's very easy for me to use my phone (a monitor essentially for this purpose) to see through it at what's behind using the camera.
And like I said, it may be unlikely but it would be a requirement before I'd buy one.
Ah, I didn't think of that. And with the monitors almost right up against your eyes, it could be close to perspective correct for you, too. It's guaranteed to be much lower resolution than what your eyes can see, though, so it wouldn't let you see the real world all that well.
Wouldn't have to.
Give me at least one front facing, and maybe two (one on each side) to at least give a panoramic view that approximates my "real" vision and I'd be happy.
Screens should be close enough to eyes anyway (like you said) to not mess with depth perception TOO much.
In fact I just tried it lol.
Shut one eye, put camera on cell phone on - held up as close to my eye (glasses) as I could without being too blurry, tried to pick up and manipulate various objects on my desk.
Not at all perfect, but was also still 3-4 inches from my eye and with one shut my depth perception was a bit off. Screens being closer in a headset, and one tuned left eye/right eye it could definitely work.
I too see here some problems. Especially in sophisticated simulation games. In my view, in the short term, here seems only one solution - to use this feature together with some sort of the Mind-Reading Controller. Like these examples... http://www.psfk.com/2012/06/control-video-games-with-mind.html
And therefore is needed, that these devices would be at once compatibles, imho.
The devs have factored in glasses. The view window can be slid forward to make room for them so that there is room inside and your lenses don't come in contact with the unit's lenses.
The Oculus Rift seems like it will be the first of many, but it's also one of the few with a lot of big backing behind it. Other companies are working on similar products, and you even have a few teams going in the direction of augmented reality, such as CastAR. Unlike the attempt in the 80's, this round of virtual reality technology has much more affordable and far less bulky equipment. It's accessible, and that makes a big difference in adoption.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Remember when 3-d tv's where going to be the next big thing..?
Yeah, I barely do either... Just a gimmick really..
I don't know if it has it already, but what the OR needs to REALLY freak me out is a high MP external camera (like on phones) so you can see your hands and body in game when you look down at yourself. Or for augmented reality stuff.
I hope the OR is cool and it catches on, with 4k and flexible screens coming out I think it could become an amazing way to play games.
<childish, provocative and highly speculative banner about your favorite game goes here>
I have one, It works very well. The resolution of the developer version is too low but the retail version is to be higher.
Shooter's and driving games are totally #%$@ing awesome with the rift and will put a big smile on your face.
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
You could just stick your head in a microwave and turn it on
No matter how cynical you become, its never enough to keep up - Lily Tomlin
A driving game with a rift, wheel and pedals... There will be no going back. The immersion is incredible.
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
I'm just going to watch and see how this thing turns out, I absolutely won't be adopting it. I have issues with most 3D products, mainly due to a red/green deficiency ala color-blindness which isn't really the inability to see those colors but more confusion on what those colors actually are. So while I can see some 3D effects, most of it is lost on me, or worse gives me a headache and severe eye strain.
My questions on all of this is, doesn't this system require a game be built to support it? How laborious is that process, can it be patched in, and how much does the development cost the team? Are there any talks of a support system to automate the inclusion of this device, a universal application or such that will translate titles without further work on the developers parts? Is such a "plug n play" application even feasible? My immediate reaction is how this is going to effect mmo development, if this system is adopted and demanded is the only requirement for inclusion utilizing a development kit, are there aftermarket support systems in place? Will developers have to hire professionals in this new/old field to work on or maintain games functionality? How does this effect the artwork teams on games?
So plenty of questions, perhaps they have all been answered but I'll wait to see how the gaming industry pans out on this.