[QUOTE=Orkel;40759660][url]http://www.engadget.com/2013/05/15/aquos-pad-sh-08e-7-inch-high-res-igzo-display-quad-core-snapdragon-600/[/url]
New phablet with a 7 inch 1200p display (1920x1200)
In a few years man, we'll be rolling with high res headsets. That'd be 960x1200 per eye compared to the 640x800 the devkit has.
[editline]24th May 2013[/editline]
~dramatic ~trailer for the Omni kickstarter
[hd]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOYklm_C7Ks[/hd][/QUOTE]
They made it all dramatic to make something that looks admittedly a bit nerdy seem really cool, but they forgot the part where [I]you don't wear a fucking polo if you want to look cool.[/I]
[QUOTE=ZestyLemons;40773273]Obligitory
wat
I don't think a lot of games support the ability to shoot yourself, HL2 included.[/QUOTE]
more oculus rift games need female characters. :quagmire:
[QUOTE=ZestyLemons;40773273]Obligitory
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HH7BlBb8Oxg[/media]
I don't think a lot of games support the ability to shoot yourself, HL2 included.[/QUOTE]
I loved Cr1TiKaL's playthrough of that game, he was so bemused
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66oK2491-bI[/media]
[QUOTE=daijitsu;40778438]I loved Cr1TiKaL's playthrough of that game, he was so bemused[/media][/QUOTE]
Talking Cr1TiKaL vids, you wouldn't happen to know the one where he suddenly stops talking, and then sneezes like he means serious business?
So Dyslexi, (Who posts Arma videos), posted this:
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NxCWwa7u7uM[/media]
I never really found him annoying, but he is just defending the shit out of how terrible he thinks the Occulus is. I don't disagree with his point, and I've heard a lot of users don't like the screendoor effect, but he reportedly only used the devkit version once for 15 minutes, and all of his comments make his opinion of it sound like objective fact. I seriously do not think 15 minutes with something like this is enough to warrant calling it a terrible product, obviously it has issues but damn, look at some of his comments:
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/pmSMnJ6.png[/IMG]
Maybe I'm the only one who thinks it's kind of dumb of him, I mean his userbase literally eats up anything this guy says so I wouldn't doubt a bunch of people will just blindly follow what he says.
Wow, that guy really hates the screen
[editline]27th May 2013[/editline]
is it that bad?
To an elitist spergloard that plays ARMA and records himself doing it, probably.
[QUOTE=tarkata14;40798562]So Dyslexi, (Who posts Arma videos), posted this:
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NxCWwa7u7uM[/media]
I never really found him annoying, but he is just defending the shit out of how terrible he thinks the Occulus is. I don't disagree with his point, and I've heard a lot of users don't like the screendoor effect, but he reportedly only used the devkit version once for 15 minutes, and all of his comments make his opinion of it sound like objective fact. I seriously do not think 15 minutes with something like this is enough to warrant calling it a terrible product, obviously it has issues but damn, look at some of his comments:
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/pmSMnJ6.png[/IMG]
Maybe I'm the only one who thinks it's kind of dumb of him, I mean his userbase literally eats up anything this guy says so I wouldn't doubt a bunch of people will just blindly follow what he says.[/QUOTE]
I wouldn't really even mind his comments if he had something to compare the oculus to, but there isn't much. You can't say something sucks if it's the first of that said thing, it just doesn't make sense.
He's saying that the screen sucks. That's a valid criticism of the rift. I don't think he appreciates the fact that the screen will certainly get better, because I think we all can agree, that while fine for a dev kit, this screen wouldn't be good enough for a consumer product.
[QUOTE=Kybalt;40798804]He's saying that the screen sucks. That's a valid criticism of the rift. I don't think he appreciates the fact that the screen will certainly get better, because I think we all can agree, that while fine for a dev kit, this screen wouldn't be good enough for a consumer product.[/QUOTE]
Personally I think the technology itself is what makes me want one, I don't think I would mind the flaws because of how fun it would be to play with and explore the possibilities of the Rift. That being said I still can't judge as I haven't tried it yet, but I really do hope the Oculus promotes the technology enough to encourage even more innovation into the VR market. It's still growing its legs, but the only way anything evolves is through trial and error, not through outright success. Even if it isn't the hologram technology that we want right now, it's still a very awesome concept that will hopefully inspire more like it.
[B]EDIT: [/B]And what is he comparing the screen to when he says it sucks? I mean, yes we have massive HD screens and even planned smartphones capable of 1080p, but neither of them are very close to your eyes and were never intended to be used as close as the Rift does. It's very early in technological terms, but he really just doesn't acknowledge the possibility that it might get better in the future.
[QUOTE=tarkata14;40798562]So Dyslexi, (Who posts Arma videos), posted this:
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NxCWwa7u7uM[/media]
I never really found him annoying, but he is just defending the shit out of how terrible he thinks the Occulus is. I don't disagree with his point, and I've heard a lot of users don't like the screendoor effect, but he reportedly only used the devkit version once for 15 minutes, and all of his comments make his opinion of it sound like objective fact. I seriously do not think 15 minutes with something like this is enough to warrant calling it a terrible product, obviously it has issues but damn, look at some of his comments:
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/pmSMnJ6.png[/IMG]
Maybe I'm the only one who thinks it's kind of dumb of him, I mean his userbase literally eats up anything this guy says so I wouldn't doubt a bunch of people will just blindly follow what he says.[/QUOTE]
He pretty much states why he doesn't care much for it in his video :
" What these things mean to me, is that they are used to enhance my experience."
He pretty much cares only if the Oculus actually makes him immersed or 'enhance' his game. He pretty much rags on it because it didn't fulfill is expectations. Now, I know he goes on in the video saying that he didn't have any expectations about the Rift, but I feel that he built an expectation accidentally. In the video, he goes on, before he went to his Rift experiences, about people who have asked questions and proposed the "Rift vs TrackIR" idea. Thus, causing him to build a unconscious expectation that it would be more immersive or useful than TrackIR. Unfortunate for him, the Developer version is just that: to help developers make games with Rift support, while supporting the creators with feedback and money. Now, he bases his arguments around that if the problems he's noticed are not fixed, the Rift would be a no-go.
At the moment though, he seems to be saying that the Rift will fail, and uses ad hominem arguments, "Stop being such a fanboy and accept a product can be critiqued and caveats can be given based on what they've chosen to show. You have blind faith that 'everything will be OK'" Which goes on to my next point.
The developers understand that the Rift's resolution is bad, but it is slated to be improved. In the second comment to the top, Dslyecxi tries to convince people that trying a [I]prototype dev-kit version of a product that is not finished untill another [B]year[/B][/I], and then telling those said people to base their opinions on that prototype.
He also may be blowing the pixelation issue out of proportion, but I can't judge that opinion yet, because I have yet to get my hands on one of the devices.
Although he has some sound argument, I think he may be grabbing for attention.
PS: I can't believe I wrote this at 3:21 in the morning.
Addendum: Oh god I got on the top page.
[QUOTE=tarkata14;40798562]So Dyslexi, (Who posts Arma videos), posted this:
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NxCWwa7u7uM[/media]
I never really found him annoying, but he is just defending the shit out of how terrible he thinks the Occulus is. I don't disagree with his point, and I've heard a lot of users don't like the screendoor effect, but he reportedly only used the devkit version once for 15 minutes, and all of his comments make his opinion of it sound like objective fact. I seriously do not think 15 minutes with something like this is enough to warrant calling it a terrible product, obviously it has issues but damn, look at some of his comments:
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/pmSMnJ6.png[/IMG]
Maybe I'm the only one who thinks it's kind of dumb of him, I mean his userbase literally eats up anything this guy says so I wouldn't doubt a bunch of people will just blindly follow what he says.[/QUOTE]
watching the video, dslyecxi seems to pretty much sum up my expectations in regards to the currently existing (devkit) rift. you'll note that those responses he's made are entirely based on his experience with this early iteration of the device - and very specifically, its rather lacking screen. he literally says in the video that the screen is without a doubt the single thing holding back the device from being amazing.
you have to bear in mind he is approaching the device as it exists at the moment (hence the anger at people throwing "it'll be improved!" around in.. defence? of his first impressions? wat) from the perspective of using it in video games - and clearly the dev-kit's screen is just not up to scratch for it to be properly usable for him in this kind of scenario (it's also basically one of the main reasons I didn't jump for a dev-kit, since I'm looking for a rift for legit gaming)
about the only thing I'd have to disagree with him (his opinion, that is) is his points on the 1:1 rift head tracking vs trackir.
the reality is that trackir simply cannot provide a [I]usable[/I] 1:1 tracking experience past the physical limit of its view cone - about 50 or so degrees of head yaw - and even if this limitation was overcome, you'd still need to own a 360 projector dome screen
the rift provides full 1:1 tracking without this kind of restriction; usable 1:1 tracking
buut as per usual, I'm definitely not putting money onto a release device until I can either be convinced by the masses of feedback or just trying one out, but I do think the device will be amazing enough for this to mean pretty much nothing c;
In the context of his channel his criticism is warranted. Noticing tiny on-screen details is very important in competitive Arma. He could've made this clearer in the video I guess. He hammered on so much about the screen you would think it had stabbed him in the eyes or something.
But outside this context, the screen is of less importance, at least not vital, for an immersive game experience.
[QUOTE=Clavus;40801043]In the context of his channel his criticism is warranted. Noticing tiny on-screen details is very important in competitive Arma. He could've made this clearer in the video I guess. He hammered on so much about the screen you would think it had stabbed him in the eyes or something.
But outside this context, the screen is of less importance, at least not vital, for an immersive game experience.[/QUOTE]
while I suppose the types of games he plays require that kind of extra fidelity and therefore gives him more of a reason, personally I do believe that the screen fidelity plays an extremely major role for the acceptance of the rift as a gaming peripheral especially when posed against the other goals envisioned for the device
from what I gather they've practically nailed the latency issues, the three dimensional depth, the 3dof rotational head tracking and general form of the unit - which is why I'm agreeing with him on the importance of a higher fidelity screen for a successful launch as a consumer product. the translational tracking comes in too, but definitely less so
I really really want to see these guys pull it off amazingly well
Well my thoughts are
1) I don't know how much sense there is in reviewing what is essentially tool for developers to get starting modding in support/ developing VR games in preparation for the actual product release date. Except, of course, as a tool for those purposes. And I have yet to hear any actual developers say that it's terrible for development.
2) He says in the video that he looks for hardware that can "enhance" his experience. But that's really not where VR shines. Like Palmer said in that GDC talk, simply modding in Rift support to games designed for classic displays is not that exciting. Classic displays and VR are completely different things; ideally, products should be made specifically for one or the other, to fully realize the possibilities and address the caveats of developing for them. On a grander scale, it's similar to how when you make a film from a book, you don't simply try to transcribe the book into a film, but you instead try to take as much as possible that translates more or less directly, and then you fill in the rest with respectful creativity. While understanding film's ~100 years medium development.
3) He talks about how he thinks the rift would make him worse at multiplayer competitive games, but again, I don't think that's what the rift is about.
Finally, 4) I guess I have to wait until I actually try it out to take firm stance on this, but it occurs to me that people seem to have lost their ability to become immersed by becoming hyper-perceptive of all the flaws/issues/caveats there are with VR/ display technology in general. I'm not saying there isn't room to improve (they definitely should improve), but I think that before we had high-resolution displays, people had a much easier time just letting the illusion settle in. Letting their imagination take over, taking queues from what they saw and heard. Deus Ex, Morrowind, various roguelikes including dwarf fortress: these games have "poor" or nearly nonexistent graphics, but despite this, I've still become immersed in them.
Whatever flaws there are in the consumer version, I think that any problems with immersion ([I]while you have a 3d 90 degree head tracking HMD on your head[/I]), can mostly be chalked up to things distinct from the fidelity of the display.
[QUOTE=xalener;40798642]To an elitist spergloard that plays ARMA and records himself doing it, probably.[/QUOTE]
Wow... honestly?
You're fucking pathetic to have to insult a person for criticising the rift. Jesus fucking christ.
Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the screen pretty much the most readily upgradable thing in the Rift?
[QUOTE=SIRIUS;40801766]Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the screen pretty much the most readily upgradable thing in the Rift?[/QUOTE]
I'm not sure about upgradeable by users (I'm sure some DIY enthusiasts could get away with it), but the consumer edition will have at least a 1080p display.
[QUOTE=ryandaniels;40801573]Well my thoughts are
1) I don't know how much sense there is in reviewing what is essentially tool for developers to get starting modding in support/ developing VR games in preparation for the actual product release date. Except, of course, as a tool for those purposes. And I have yet to hear any actual developers say that it's terrible for development.
2) He says in the video that he looks for hardware that can "enhance" his experience. But that's really not where VR shines. Like Palmer said in that GDC talk, simply modding in Rift support to games designed for classic displays is not that exciting. Classic displays and VR are completely different things; ideally, products should be made specifically for one or the other, to fully realize the possibilities and address the caveats of developing for them. On a grander scale, it's similar to how when you make a film from a book, you don't simply try to transcribe the book into a film, but you instead try to take as much as possible that translates more or less directly, and then you fill in the rest with respectful creativity. While understanding film's ~100 years medium development.
3) He talks about how he thinks the rift would make him worse at multiplayer competitive games, but again, I don't think that's what the rift is about.
Finally, 4) I guess I have to wait until I actually try it out to take firm stance on this, but it occurs to me that people seem to have lost their ability to become immersed by becoming hyper-perceptive of all the flaws/issues/caveats there are with VR/ display technology in general. I'm not saying there isn't room to improve (they definitely should improve), but I think that before we had high-resolution displays, people had a much easier time just letting the illusion settle in. Letting their imagination take over, taking queues from what they saw and heard. Deus Ex, Morrowind, various roguelikes including dwarf fortress: these games have "poor" or nearly nonexistent graphics, but despite this, I've still become immersed in them.
Whatever flaws there are in the consumer version, I think that any problems with immersion ([I]while you have a 3d 90 degree head tracking HMD on your head[/I]), can mostly be chalked up to things distinct from the fidelity of the display.[/QUOTE]
people are treating it like he's done a review for it, but in reality its just his first impressions of using the dev-kit unit mainly just because those same people continually proclaim their faith about the device and how he should get one in every video.
its a "here's my opinion on the rift as it stands now, as a bonus I've had a play with it for 15 minutes and also have had past experience with other HMD units"
for sure, games designed with the rift in mind can totally take advantage of it, but I have to disagree with the rift/screen contrast being as vivid as film/books. one main reason the rift has become so popular (amongst other reasons, like costs and so on) is because of video gamer's prospects of playing games in 'virtual reality'.
while video games in general is a pretty closed in imagination for the uses of VR, the reality is the rift, when described in relation to existing peripherals, is essentially an intermingle of the services provided by head tracking technology and a 3D screen (with various advantages and disadvantages, of course, this ain't clear cut or anything). that is because it is essentially the jobs of those peripherals that the rift will primarily take over in a consumer computer (for gaming, at least).
your point on immersion not relying on graphical fidelity at all is an [I]extremely[/I] valid one; seeing the modern game market's take on immersion and realistic graphics is quite depressing in my opinion; take a novel for instance - I've never been more immersed in a video game than I have been with a simple novel. I guess it must just be that the target audiences for games with this 'realism' == immersion concept don't read many novels ;p
like you, I'd need to see this for myself to be certain, but considering the peripheral as primarily for video gamers, I do believe that the screen's pixel resolution would come into play against immersion significantly - the majority of 3D video game titles leave little to the imagination, and (supposedly significantly noticeable according to dsylexci's experience) artefacts only serve to harm the immersion that a closed in system like the rift works to assist
I'm not certain just how significant of an issue the screen door effect is - I hear once things are in motion (primarily your head and eyes I suppose), it becomes less of a problem, but still, observations like dsylexci's definitely drive me to want them to push further on the screen fidelity area
[editline]27th May 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=SIRIUS;40801766]Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the screen pretty much the most readily upgradable thing in the Rift?[/QUOTE]
by the developers? I suppose the hardware exists and they could work it into the rift, but it would come at a (monetary) cost, though
[editline]27th May 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=danharibo;40801881]I'm not sure about upgradeable by users (I'm sure some DIY enthusiasts could get away with it), but the consumer edition [B]will have at least a 1080p display[/B].[/QUOTE]
as far as I know, this isn't confirmed yet
but I'm fairly sure its very likely
[QUOTE=Em See;40801983]
as far as I know, this isn't confirmed yet
but I'm fairly sure its very likely[/QUOTE]
Phones smaller than the Rift have 1080p displays, getting them into the rift should be doable.
[QUOTE=danharibo;40802082]Phones smaller than the Rift have 1080p displays, getting them into the rift should be doable.[/QUOTE]
I don't think it's a matter of "is it doable", but more of a cost issue.
from the sound of it he's reviewing it like it's a final product. I understand the criticism of the screen in its current state, but if you can't acknowledge that it pure and simple [b]isn't[/b] representative of the final product and throw an absolute tantrum about it like it's the worst thing on the planet, maybe buying the rift now shouldn't have been his top priority
[quote]hence the anger at people throwing "it'll be improved!" around in.. defence? [/quote]
it's well above a valid counter-argument. Putting the rift out now (using cost-effective screen tech that was available [i]last year[/i]) was fully intended to give power to [u]creators[/u] to give the product a head start by allowing people to make things compatible, to design games around it, and to make it [i]worthwhile when the consumer version comes out[/i]. It wasn't put out for [u]users[/u]. A youtube let's-player doesn't strike me as any authority on beta technologies, no matter how much he wants to be relevant. Sounds to me like he's angry he got hyped and dropped a few hundred dollars on a framework
[QUOTE=daijitsu;40802570]from the sound of it he's reviewing it like it's a final product. I understand the criticism of the screen in its current state, but if you can't acknowledge that it pure and simple [b]isn't[/b] representative of the final product and throw an absolute tantrum about it like it's the worst thing on the planet, maybe buying the rift now shouldn't have been his top priority
it's well above a valid counter-argument. Putting the rift out now (using cost-effective screen tech that was available [i]last year[/i]) was fully intended to give power to [u]creators[/u] to give the product a head start by allowing people to make things compatible, to design games around it, and to make it [i]worthwhile when the consumer version comes out[/i]. It wasn't put out for [u]users[/u]. A youtube let's-player doesn't strike me as any authority on beta technologies, no matter how much he wants to be relevant. Sounds to me like he's angry he got hyped and dropped a few hundred dollars on a framework[/QUOTE]
He didn't even buy it, he only tried it at some convention for like 15 minutes.
-snip-
[QUOTE=daijitsu;40802570]from the sound of it he's reviewing it like it's a final product. I understand the criticism of the screen in its current state, but if you can't acknowledge that it pure and simple [b]isn't[/b] representative of the final product and throw an absolute tantrum about it like it's the worst thing on the planet, maybe buying the rift now shouldn't have been his top priority
it's well above a valid counter-argument. Putting the rift out now (using cost-effective screen tech that was available [i]last year[/i]) was fully intended to give power to [u]creators[/u] to give the product a head start by allowing people to make things compatible, to design games around it, and to make it [i]worthwhile when the consumer version comes out[/i]. It wasn't put out for [u]users[/u]. [B]A youtube let's-player doesn't strike me as any authority on beta technologies, no matter how much he wants to be relevant.[/B] Sounds to me like he's angry he got hyped and dropped a few hundred dollars on a framework[/QUOTE]
Just for reference; he's not a "lets player", atleast not of the normal kind. He uploads videos playing (mostly) arma with his group called [URL="http://dslyecxi.com/shacktac_wp/"]shacktac[/URL].
[QUOTE=Dj-J3;40802780]Just for reference; he's not a "lets player", atleast not of the normal kind. He uploads videos playing (mostly) arma with his group called [URL="http://dslyecxi.com/shacktac_wp/"]shacktac[/URL].[/QUOTE]
And it may be worth mentioning that he does contracted work for Bohemia Interactive.
Regardless of whether the video was intended as a review, or whether he has done work in the industry, I still don't see how any comment on the screen's quality is informative or useful. It's like making a comment on a nail hammer's ability to break rocks. That's not it's intended purpose. Likewise, the dev kit is for game development, not for playing those games. It does, of course, serve that purpose to some extent, but it's really not it's intended use.
The "hype" he refers to in the video has [I]never[/I] been about how great the screen is; no one has put on a rift and said "what really impresses me is the screen resolution and lack of visual artifacts". What impresses people is the the latency, the fov, the cost (in relation to those and other characteristics), the current industry support and interest, and in general the prospect of VR becoming a reality. (as opposed to an expensive novelty)
So again, what's the utility of this video? He says himself that he wanted to address the hype surrounding OR, and then he goes on to talk about the screen, which has literally nothing to do with the hype. I realize he may have made a mistake in associating the dev kit's display fidelity with the OR's hype, but attacks on "hype" are by their nature attacks on a community, generally a community you aren't even part of. Which is fine, but that should throw up red flags warning you to make absolutely certain you know what you are talking about, and it should definitely make you cautious when using strong words like "terrible". For that reason, it seems to me that he is a careless person who likes to hear himself speak.
[QUOTE=danharibo;40802082]Phones smaller than the Rift have 1080p displays, getting them into the rift should be doable.[/QUOTE]
I would like to see the GS4's screen in the Rift but at the moment that screen is like > $200. I think down the road, OLED will be preferred because of the phenomenal black levels.
[QUOTE=daijitsu;40802570]from the sound of it he's reviewing it like it's a final product. I understand the criticism of the screen in its current state, but if you can't acknowledge that it pure and simple [b]isn't[/b] representative of the final product and throw an absolute tantrum about it like it's the worst thing on the planet, maybe buying the rift now shouldn't have been his top priority
it's well above a valid counter-argument. Putting the rift out now (using cost-effective screen tech that was available [i]last year[/i]) was fully intended to give power to [u]creators[/u] to give the product a head start by allowing people to make things compatible, to design games around it, and to make it [i]worthwhile when the consumer version comes out[/i]. It wasn't put out for [u]users[/u]. A youtube let's-player doesn't strike me as any authority on beta technologies, no matter how much he wants to be relevant. Sounds to me like he's angry he got hyped and dropped a few hundred dollars on a framework[/QUOTE]
but he didn't buy one at all, he posted his impressions of the devkit which happened to be at whatever tech conference he was at perchance - primarily because so many people were asking him about whether he was going buy one
it isn't his review of the final product since the final product does not exist yet - he's judging it based off of what he had to try. clearly there is a lot of promise (he acknowledges this), he's just saying that as it exists now, the screen is a major issue.
yes, he is giving his opinion of a tech demo for developers and should have considered making it more clear so that the negativity towards the rift wouldn't as much butthurt
he is essentially being pessimistic, yes, but the negative [I]point [/I]he brings up are valid - the price point will have to go up to sport the larger resolution screen, and I believe they will put a larger screen in for release and yes, they probably will have to up the price (which I'm okay with)
So the latest Gmod Beta has Rift support in apparently.
[quote]There’s a couple of reasons you might want to convert to the new beta
Updates every hour
Want to test your mods and addons with the new version
Like being on the latest version
Faster load times
Install on a different drive
All the lua files are loose and visible instead of being in a gcf
Rift support
Experimental Linux client support
[/quote]
[url]http://garry.tv/2013/05/28/steampipe-beta/[/url]
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
