Oculus Rift: The Future of VR?

[Gahars]

The first game compatible with the device will be Doom 3 BFG, and looking at the footage, I can tell you this thing is a miracle; it actually managed to make Doom 3 worth playing!

there is some video showing doom 3 on it already?

On the Kickstarter page there is a video of a person playing Doom 3 with the device. The video can't show how it looked from his perspective, however.

 

[Deleted_171835]

I live near one of the biggest IMAX 3D state-of-the-art cinemas in my country which I frequent, my girlfriend owns a 3DS (I don't want one before it's hacked. To be honest, I just don't find the library interesting at this point and prefere to invest my money in retro consoles) so obviously I played on it on multiple occasions and I check out quite a few of 3D TV's whenever I'm shopping and guess what? I am not (all that) impressed.

The so-called "fishbowl effect" you're referencing here is a limitation of the paralax barrier technology, not a quality, you do realize that?

I don't know what games you've tried out (in 3D) on her 3DS so I can't say exactly comment on that.


The fishbowl effect isn't a limitation of the technology, though.

 

[Gahars]

Just a little update here: the project has crossed the million dollar mark. With another 29 days left, it's reasonable to assume that it could earn another million dollars (or more)

 

[Bladexdsl]

How will they make it affordable for the common gamer?

in about 20-30 years it will be affordable

 

[Guild McCommunist]

How will they make it affordable for the common gamer?

in about 20-30 years it will be affordable

I doubt it'll be outrageously expensive. Dedicated gamers have no issues laying down thousands of dollars for a good PC build or hundreds on anything from quality controllers, headphones, whatever. If you're able to spend $1000 on a TV, this doesn't seem outrageous.

 

[KingVamp]

I live near one of the biggest IMAX 3D state-of-the-art cinemas in my country which I frequent, my girlfriend owns a 3DS (I don't want one before it's hacked. To be honest, I just don't find the library interesting at this point and prefere to invest my money in retro consoles) so obviously I played on it on multiple occasions and I check out quite a few of 3D TV's whenever I'm shopping and guess what? I am not (all that) impressed.

The so-called "fishbowl effect" you're referencing here is a limitation of the paralax barrier technology, not a quality, you do realize that?

What 3d movies have you seen and what 3d games have you played? What are you looking for mostly? Depth or pop out 3d?
I seen mostly 3d movies this summer using those RealD glasses and haven't seen this cookie cutter thing you have been referring to.

 

[Foxi4]

I seen mostly 3d movies this summer using those RealD glasses and haven't seen this cookie cutter thing you have been referring to.

When you have really good eyesight (like I do) you can see the edges of what the editor cropped as a 3D layer.

As for what 3D movies I saw, I really can't remember the titles, I think Resident Evil: Afterlife was last, I was planning to see Prometheus but couldn't wait and streamed it.

As for the games, it was Nintendogs+Cats, Ocarina of Time and Sonic Generations. The 3D's there, but I can never properly set the slider and it's just "not impressive at all" to me.

 

[Guild McCommunist]

Okay this is somehow turning into a "let's debate the quality of the 3D on the 3DS" thread so I'm gonna nip it in the butt right here and say not to talk about the 3DS anymore.

 

[Eerpow]

The so-called "fishbowl effect" you're referencing here is a limitation of the paralax barrier technology, not a quality, you do realize that?

The screen is capable of reproducing any kind of 3D effect, the parallax barrier enables the screen to project two separate images to each eye, that's it.
There are plenty of photos, videos and games where pop out 3D happens, in Zelda you can make Links deku stick stick out 1-2 inches or so and in Mighty Switch Force there are particles and effects jumping out of the screen making the game rally pop visually. Also in Kid Icarus Pit is flying slightly outside the screen.
You can take a finger or a stylus to sort of compare and it's like poking a hologram. I suggest looking up some 3D images and try it out.

The fishbowl effect isn't a limitation of the screen, the screen uses the exact same principles as every other 3D technology out there.
A barrier is just another mean to project the left and right image correctly, it's impossible to have any limitations since that's all there is to it. This is how every 3D device works, whether it's a barrier directing light, polarizers or shutter glasses.
It's all the same, do some research and you'll realize how stupid it is to say that it isn't capable of pop-out.


The effect he is referring to isn't if stuff pop out or not, it's related to the depth of the actual game models themselves.

Many 3D Movies are filmed with camera lenses parallel to each other which is why actors look like cardboard cut outs on different layers, however in stereoscopic 3D games the in game camera have the cameras slightly angled giving object more depth. Just like how our eyes work, if you put your index finger in front of your nose you'll see a little bit of the sides of your finger with each eye and not just the part facing you as you would watching it with one eye only.

In this example there's two pairs of 3D cameras, one with parallel lenses and one with slightly angled ones.
With camera A the sphere would look like a flat circle placed in a 3D room while with camera B you actually see the depth of the object itself.

I learned this while screwing around with in game cameras in PC games using iZ3D. I can't remember what this was called but the angle of the lenses really makes a difference.

Bottom line, the 3DS screen is just as capable as everything else 3D, only in a smaller format of course which is perhaps why you don't find it particularly impressive.

 

[Foxi4]

The so-called "fishbowl effect" you're referencing here is a limitation of the paralax barrier technology, not a quality, you do realize that?

The screen is capable of reproducing any kind of 3D effect, the parallax barrier enables the screen to project two separate images to each eye, that's it.

That is not exactly true. An LCD screen has a border which deliminates what can and can't be displayed - pop-out is severely limited due to that factor and that factor alone, since if the object is too large to fit on the screen, you may not display it in pop-out 3D as you cannot see it completely. Most games are designed, as it was said numerous times, to look like "within a fishbowl" to avoid displaying partial objects at all costs. Another limitation is the distance between you and the screen - the shorter it is the narrower is the angle at which two "screens" have to be displayed, hence slight movements of your head play a huge role in 3D perception. It's not "perfect" - it's the best we have though, and I understand that.

I see what you're trying to say, but it's not what I'm getting at.

 

[Eerpow]

The so-called "fishbowl effect" you're referencing here is a limitation of the paralax barrier technology, not a quality, you do realize that?

The screen is capable of reproducing any kind of 3D effect, the parallax barrier enables the screen to project two separate images to each eye, that's it.

That is not exactly true. An LCD screen has a border which deliminates what can and can't be displayed - pop-out is severely limited due to that factor and that factor alone, since if the object is too large to fit on the screen, you may not display it in pop-out 3D as you cannot see it completely. Most games are designed, as it was said numerous times, to look like "within a fishbowl" to avoid displaying partial objects at all costs. Another limitation is the distance between you and the screen -the lower it is the narrower is the angle at which two "screens" have to be displayed, hence slight movements of your head play a huge role in 3D perception. It's not "perfect" - it's the best we have though, and I understand that.

I see what you're trying to say, but it's not what I'm getting at.

I you take a 3D movie and display it on the small LCD everything will remain intact, only smaller.
A projected screen will still have borders too. It's only a matter of scale.
A 100 times smaller screen displays a 100 times smaller image with depth and popout on the same scale.
That's why pop out is limited to about an inch which in my opinion isn't severely given the screen size, it's just not used that often since you'll need things to jump at the player, depth can in rare cases be helpful when judging distances between enemies and projectiles (where there are no shadows) like in a game like Star Fox where you let's say navigate through an asteroid belt.
Pop out is less needed.

Edit: I hope you agree that it isn't a limitation of the parallax technology since the same thing would happen if you had a screen in that size using 3D glasses instead.

 

[Foxi4]

Edit: I hope you agree that it isn't a limitation of the parallax technology since the same thing would happen if you had a screen in that size using 3D glasses instead.

Parallax barriers are structures that selectively block and transmit light from different portions of a light-emitting, or light-reflecting, surface in order to present the right and left eyes with different perspectives to create binocular disparity and stereopsis. For example, the display surface can show a composite image with vertical image stripes for right and left eye images and the parallax barrier can have vertical slits that direct the appropriate image stripes to reach the right and left eyes when the viewer is located within a restricted viewing location. Generally, if the viewer moves outside the restricted viewing location, then the viewer sees undesirable "pseudoscopic" images with reversed depth, double images, or black lines. These pseudoscopic images can cause eye strain and headaches.
Having some distance between the parallax barrier and a light-emitting, or light-reflecting, surface is required in order for the parallax barrier to direct light rays along different angles to the right and left eyes. However, this distance causes many of the limitations of the parallax barrier method. For example, this distance restricts the proper viewing location within which the viewer must be located in order to avoid pseudoscopic images. This distance is also why parallax barriers do not work well, if at all, for simultaneous viewing by multiple viewers and why motion parallax is limited with parallax barriers.

The limitations of three-dimensional displays that use stationary parallax barriers or lenticular arrays include: (1) the viewing zone is restricted and outside this restricted zone a viewer sees pseudoscopic images (with depth reversal, double images, and black bands); (2) there is a tradeoff between low resolution and limited range of motion parallax (generally less than twelve different perspectives) due to the constraints of spatial demultiplexing; (This is what causes the "cardboard cut-out effect" - you only have a very limited amount of layers and cannot, as you tried to show, display a "sphere" - just a flat cut-out of one that looks like it and hope that the brain does the rest of the work - Foxi4) (3) for displays with vertical lenticules or vertical parallax barriers, there is little or no vertical motion parallax (with up and down head motion); (4) such devices are generally restricted to one viewer; (5) lenticular arrays and active parallax barriers, such as Liquid Crystal Display (LCD) shutters, can be expensive and fragile; (6) for displays with parallax barriers, the image can be dim because the barriers block a significant amount of the image light; (7) conflict between accommodation and stereoscopic vision can cause eye strain, headaches, and long-term adverse effects; and (8) boundaries between light-emitting elements can create dark lines, graininess, and rough edges.

http://www.holovisio...3d-display.html

http://upload.wikime...ular_screen.svg

Can we please just agree that parallax barriers are quite limited? Because they are.

 

[Eerpow]

http://www.holovisio...3d-display.html

http://upload.wikime...ular_screen.svg

Can we please just agree that parallax barriers are quite limited? Because they are.

Of course they are limited in those ways with the viewing angle and everything but it isn't the reason to why games doesn't use pop out that much, which is what I thought we were talking about.
I see the point you're getting across but your original comment said it was because of the parallax barrier, which it isn't.

Edit: Damn that looks expensive. Small spinning lenses creating "cones" of light giving us a 3D screen that's has a sweet spot no matter how you turn the monitor. Cool.

 

[Foxi4]

I see the point you're getting across but your original comment said it was because of the parallax barrier, which it isn't.

Y'see, a parallax barrier is limited only to a small amount of layers - it's a physical limitation that you simply can't get over at this point, while a 3D movie for instance is not - any amount of layers can be created via post-processing of the images. Of course the film makers are lazy and they rarely do that, but my point is that the 3D we see today appears to be cardboard cut-outs, and the 3DS naturally does very little, if any, post-processing since it's not the buffiest of machines plus the parallax barrier wouldn't be able to display more layers anyways so why bother.

I posted a source file describing in detail what the limits of a parallax barrier are, and all of my complaints spring exactly from them, I don't see why you'd be so adamant in defending this technology. It's good as it is, all I said was that I don't find it as impressive as people say. It's just my personal opinion.

Edit: Damn that looks expensive. Small spinning lenses creating "cones" of light giving us a 3D screen that's has a sweet spot no matter how you turn the monitor. Cool.

This (somewhat) could actually be used, albeit for only one person, on the 3DS - I see no reason why the camera shouldn't track the head of the viewer and adjust the angle in real-time, especially since not all the CPU resources are used by games on the 3DS - some of them are restricted for the OS to use, and that's what it should be doing while you play games.

 

[KingVamp]

This (somewhat) could actually be used, albeit for only one person, on the 3DS - I see no reason why the camera shouldn't track the head of the viewer and adjust the angle in real-time, especially since not all the CPU resources are used by games on the 3DS - some of them are restricted for the OS to use, and that's what it should be doing while you play games.

I guessing it not being used that way because of the battery. As in, it would deplete faster.

 

[Bladexdsl]

How will they make it affordable for the common gamer?

in about 20-30 years it will be affordable

I doubt it'll be outrageously expensive. Dedicated gamers have no issues laying down thousands of dollars for a good PC build or hundreds on anything from quality controllers, headphones, whatever. If you're able to spend $1000 on a TV, this doesn't seem outrageous.

so their going to spend 20k just to make their lame run and gun generic shooters more realistic? PAH they can have it!

 

[Guild McCommunist]

so their going to spend 20k just to make their lame shooters more realistic? PAH they can have it!

Shooters aren't the only games in the first person.

I'm sure you'd shit yourself playing Amnesia on this thing.

Also, the whole "shootars r bad!!!!" thing stopped being cool or funny years ago.

 

[Eerpow]

I see the point you're getting across but your original comment said it was because of the parallax barrier, which it isn't.

Y'see, a parallax barrier is limited only to a small amount of layers - it's a physical limitation that you simply can't get over at this point, while a 3D movie for instance is not - any amount of layers can be created via post-processing of the images. Of course the film makers are lazy and they rarely do that, but my point is that the 3D we see today appears to be cardboard cut-outs, and the 3DS naturally does very little, if any, post-processing since it's not the buffiest of machines plus the parallax barrier wouldn't be able to display more layers anyways so why bother.

I posted a source file describing in detail what the limits of a parallax barrier are, and all of my complaints spring exactly from them, I don't see why you'd be so adamant in defending this technology. It's good as it is, all I said was that I don't find it as impressive as people say. It's just my personal opinion.

I know what parallax barriers are and how they work, but the barriers aren't linked to the "amount of layers" in a 3D image.
A real 3D image doesn't consist of layers and if you would divide a 3D image into such the number would be infinite, though on a 3DS that number would be the horizontal resolution divided by two. However this isn't humanly noticeable.

Imagine this: You're looking at two photographs (cross eye 3D) (L and R perspectives) that are the same size as the 3DS screen, the resulting image is deep and it has a cat popping out.
Take the same image and transfer it to the 3DS screen and both the cat and the background will remain exactly the same but at a lower resolution.
The parallax barrier does it job and "directs" light to your two eyes the same way the photo do.

I'm not defending the technology as much as I'm saying you don't find it as impressive because of the screen size and not because of the parallax barrier as you claim. No matter what technology you use they are identical 3D (depth and pop out) wise when scaled down to the size of the 3DS's screen.

There is no post processing, it's simply two cameras and two images and a way to project those images to each eye. No layers involved.
The only extra amount of processing involed is the extra camera and the doubled resolution.

The post processing to enhance 3D in movies is a completely different thing, a movie with post enhancements will look the same whether it's parallax or polarized 3D.

 

[Gundam Eclipse]

Thought this might interest people:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8gaqQdyfAz8&feature=player_embedded

Wasn't sure if it was worth a thread of its own V:

 

[Janthran]

Why did GabeN beard I don't understand
he doesn't seem like a gamer anymore