|
AndrewP posted:Anyone have an issue with Elite: Dangerous graphics corrupting after a number of jumps? Space Madness
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2016 06:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 16:11 |
|
|
Rated PG-34 posted:Anyone know how to reset the head position in war thunder? I think it's C by default. Whatever the camera free look button is when playing on a monitor.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2016 06:49
|
|
|
Raskolnikov2089 posted:So is there any point to virtual desktop aside from porn? Solves the problem of interacting with your desktop until they come out with actual compelling AR displays that work as advertised. Of course once that comes out I would think VR would die until someone figured out how to recreate the holodeck from star trek.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2016 08:46
|
|
|
Why would AR kill VR? They are completely different things. In other news. It's been reported that the touch controllers have magnets in them so you can snap the two controllers together when you put them down. I guess you could also do it if you need to use a mouse or something and have to put one down, you can just attach it to the other controller. People who don't understand how magnets work assume this means that the touch controllers will cause all your hard drives to be wiped, crash any planes within 20nm and disable any hall sensors within 40 miles.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2016 14:47
|
|
|
To be fair if a plane is within 20 nanometers you're probably already hosed
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2016 15:14
|
|
|
Cojawfee posted:In other news. It's been reported that the touch controllers have magnets in them so you can snap the two controllers together when you put them down. I guess you could also do it if you need to use a mouse or something and have to put one down, you can just attach it to the other controller. People who don't understand how magnets work assume this means that the touch controllers will cause all your hard drives to be wiped, crash any planes within 20nm and disable any hall sensors within 40 miles.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2016 15:23
|
|
|
Cojawfee posted:Why would AR kill VR? They are completely different things. I'm sure they've made it so they don't but hopefully they don't snap together when you bring them close to each other using them. *playing game, controllers snap together* "PAAALLLMMMEEERRRRR!!!" 
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2016 16:27
|
|
|
I don't anticipate it being a problem. Developers of touch games will become aware of the proximity limitations and design their interface system around those limitations, i.e.: not use gestures that would cause the magnets to engage. Whether or not those limitations will preclude a valid and desirable gesture is yet to be seen. It reminds me of The Thrill of the Fight for Vive. I returned it because the basic gesture of putting up your dukes can cause the headset and the controllers to collide -- even when holding the controllers choked up as required. I know the game doesn't require you to block in this regard, boxing with a loose guard is an inauthentic and jarring experience.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2016 16:36
|
|
|
It isn't a problem in that literally thousands of developers have had the kits and it's such a minor feature it's not worth posting about. They're super weak magets just strong enough to let you set them down upright on a desk.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2016 16:39
|
|
|
Cojawfee posted:Why would AR kill VR? They are completely different things. AR is eminently more user friendly due to having to project a scene on your real surroundings. Instead of having to hit a button and reach for a thing in pass through camera mode, with a single point of view instead of stereo, I can simply reach for a thing and pick it up. Of course I'm thinking of AR in the fully mature sense where your whole field of view is usable and they fit in a pair of sunglasses instead of a big goofy ring hat and a 30 degree FOV a la hololens. VR headsets can't really provide that ability, there will always be some latency due to having to capture the image of the world via camera and process it to display in the visor.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2016 16:43
|
|
|
Tokyo Sexwhale posted:AR is eminently more user friendly due to having to project a scene on your real surroundings. Instead of having to hit a button and reach for a thing in pass through camera mode, with a single point of view instead of stereo, I can simply reach for a thing and pick it up. Of course I'm thinking of AR in the fully mature sense where your whole field of view is usable and they fit in a pair of sunglasses instead of a big goofy ring hat and a 30 degree FOV a la hololens. Agreed that an ideal form of AR that's so good it includes the ability to do VR as a side benefit would be superior to the HTC Vive.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2016 16:48
|
|
|
Anyone got advice on which of the basic model (post-founders'-edition) GTX 1080's to go for? Obviously I only really care about warranty and cooling. It's inordinately difficult to find a basic comparison of these things (as opposed to the $1000 extra-sperge-tastic variants).
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2016 16:51
|
|
|
Low latency video passthrough with higher-latency overlay is not a problem if you do it in hardware (VLSI/FPGA). FOV will be inferior to an overlay on a transparent surface, however. Power consumption would be worse, too, which is a major factor in portability, a cornerstone of good AR. e: Also, your "eyes" would be further forward than normal and I have no clue how that would gently caress with you.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2016 17:03
|
|
|
sliderule posted:e: Also, your "eyes" would be further forward than normal and I have no clue how that would gently caress with you. Judging by our experience with VR it'd mean that turning your head gives immediate and significant nausea. Miscalculating the eye camera positions is one of those things that badly breaks the human sense of balance. Fortunately you wouldn't necessarily need to have the eye positions be wrong. With reprojection and suitable lenses you should be able to present a "correct" view to the eyes; it would have artifacts on the edges of objects, but that should be a much less disruptive problem than presenting a completely incorrect view. Technically with large enough lenses on the cameras you could even do it without the reprojection, but that's starting to get mechanically infeasible.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2016 17:33
|
|
|
If you want AR without looking like a Google Glasshole, there's Laforge Optical's Shima AR glasses. https://www.laforgeoptical.com
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2016 17:33
|
|
|
El Grillo posted:Anyone got advice on which of the basic model (post-founders'-edition) GTX 1080's to go for? Obviously I only really care about warranty and cooling. It's inordinately difficult to find a basic comparison of these things (as opposed to the $1000 extra-sperge-tastic variants).
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2016 17:47
|
|
|
Lemming posted:Space Madness Upgrading to Windows 10 seemed to solve the problem. Which is good, because Elite: Dangerous nicely supersampled, along with Voice Attack and some classic rock, is a drat compelling VR experience.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2016 21:53
|
|
|
Helter Skelter posted:I don't think there's really anyone beating EVGA's lifetime warranty, so any of their non-FE models (like this one) would probably be a good choice. Assuming you can find one in stock, of course, as 1080 cards in general still seem to be in short supply. EVGA stopped doing lifetime warranty's awhile ago. They still have one of the longest warranties you can get though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 02:50
|
|
|
w00tazn posted:EVGA stopped doing lifetime warranty's awhile ago. They still have one of the longest warranties you can get though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 02:52
|
|
|
Cojawfee posted:Why would AR kill VR? They are completely different things. If a device is capable of excellent AR then it should also be capable of excellent VR, provided it's capable of blocking photons from the outside world from hitting your retinas. So something like Magic Leap could be capable of obsoleting the current tech we're using in VR headsets, despite it's applications primarily being AR-focused.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 06:30
|
|
|
TheRagamuffin posted:I dunno how it took this long to hit me, but......how long until a Jurassic Park Trespasser port, do you think? I loving wish. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 08:35
|
|
|
SwissCM posted:If a device is capable of excellent AR then it should also be capable of excellent VR, provided it's capable of blocking photons from the outside world from hitting your retinas. AR and VR are totally different things. AR augments reality and VR replaces reality. The uses for one are pretty exclusive from the uses for the other.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 16:58
|
|
|
Helter Skelter posted:I don't think there's really anyone beating EVGA's lifetime warranty, so any of their non-FE models (like this one) would probably be a good choice. Assuming you can find one in stock, of course, as 1080 cards in general still seem to be in short supply. I've got this one, it's been fine. It's just what happened to be in stock a while back, but actually I think I'd pick this one again. Not too rice-y, decent cooler and warranty.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 16:59
|
|
|
SwissCM posted:If a device is capable of excellent AR then it should also be capable of excellent VR, provided it's capable of blocking photons from the outside world from hitting your retinas. This has traditionally been a huge stumbling block in AR, and not for want of trying; high contrast obscuration with pixel-level control just hasn't been cracked yet. Of course if all you want is complete obscuration and you don't care about switch times then you can just put a blindfold on over the AR headset, so admittedly this specific use case isn't particularly hard.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 17:07
|
|
|
Cojawfee posted:AR and VR are totally different things. AR augments reality and VR replaces reality. The uses for one are pretty exclusive from the uses for the other.  Its not super practical right now for one device to act on the whole spectrum for a whole variety of reasons, but things like the Vive or the Gear VR can dip left a little bit with their cameras, and Hololens or Magic Leap (maybe) have a lot of flexibility around the middle area. Its conceivable that a full MR headset will come out sometime.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 17:23
|
|
|
It could, but that is years down the road. It will probably just be a new model of a VR headset that also does AR. AR by itself will not kill VR though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 18:03
|
|
|
Cojawfee posted:AR and VR are totally different things. AR augments reality and VR replaces reality. The uses for one are pretty exclusive from the uses for the other. With a mixed-reality device like the Magic Leap, whats to stop anyone from just blocking all light from coming through the lenses and instead relying purely on the device for visual display? If you have the technology to augment reality, you can use that same tech to create a virtual reality and likely to do a better job of it. VR is a subset of AR.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 18:11
|
|
|
SwissCM posted:With a mixed-reality device like the Magic Leap, whats to stop anyone from just blocking all light from coming through the lenses and instead relying purely on the device for visual display? Because engineering-wise you are adding cost for a questionable benefit. If I am designing an AR headset I'm going to be aware of cost. Making it so you have to have a light-blocking structure a part of an AR system is going to hinder it's AR performance. Augmented Reality is meant to ~augment~ reality as you see it, so something like a pair of contacts or a lightweight (oh god the weight) set of glasses, with open space to use your peripheral vision similar in concept to Google Glass. The "cost" to make an AR heaset also do Virtual Reality means you have to add a bunch of stuff to your AR headset to make that viable. Why not just leave the AR to the AR and let the VR stuff do VR stuff? If you don't someone else will. The technology might be similar sure but an actual product that does both seems like compromises on at least one end if not both.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 18:40
|
|
|
SwissCM posted:With a mixed-reality device like the Magic Leap, whats to stop anyone from just blocking all light from coming through the lenses and instead relying purely on the device for visual display?
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 18:42
|
|
|
KakerMix posted:...The "cost" to make an AR heaset also do Virtual Reality means you have to add a bunch of stuff to your AR headset to make that viable.  Just need a bit more slack in front of the eyes. Possibly more metal studs.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 20:16
|
|
|
I'm willing to consider "VR legs" a thing now, as after a week of consistent play Minecraft VR no longer gives me noticeable nausea.
Ludicrous Gibs! fucked around with this message at 01:53 on Aug 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 01:47
|
|
|
Ludicrous Gibs! posted:I'm willing to consider "VR legs" a thing now, as after a week of consistent play Minecraft VR no longer gives me noticeable nausea. Yeah, there are some games that used to give me a touch of it and now they don't. I don't know if that is "VR legs" or just a purely psychosomatic thing of me thinking a lot about "is this making me feel ill or not" when I first started trying out VR, and now I don't think about it anymore unless I actually start to feel noticeably queasy.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 04:29
|
|
|
Man screw the gym, just play Audioshield on the MGR Revengeance sound track for like half an hour. Ow.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 04:33
|
|
|
Yeah, I heard that game can give a good workout, with the right songs. Definitely on my to-buy list once I get a PC headset with motion controllers.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 05:48
|
|
|
KakerMix posted:Because engineering-wise you are adding cost for a questionable benefit. If I am designing an AR headset I'm going to be aware of cost. Making it so you have to have a light-blocking structure a part of an AR system is going to hinder it's AR performance. Augmented Reality is meant to ~augment~ reality as you see it, so something like a pair of contacts or a lightweight (oh god the weight) set of glasses, with open space to use your peripheral vision similar in concept to Google Glass. The "cost" to make an AR heaset also do Virtual Reality means you have to add a bunch of stuff to your AR headset to make that viable. Why not just leave the AR to the AR and let the VR stuff do VR stuff? If you don't someone else will. Google Glass barely even counts as AR, it's a glorified HUD and neither it nor Hololens have limited FOV for the users benefit, but because the technology they're using doesn't allow for it. While you're right that adding blinders or whatever to the device would be of questionable benefit at this point due to the limited FOV, how long do you think that'll be the case for? Apart from needing to block light from passing through the display (something that could be achieved with some opaque plastic), nothing else needs to be done to make a true AR device capable of rendering a virtual environment.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 06:14
|
|
|
Intels project alloy looks like it will do fully fledged AR and VR. Im not entirely clear whether it does pass through but since theyre apparently using integrated cameras for depth sensing theres no reason why not. Plus its totally wireless. No specs yet though
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 10:49
|
|
|
Cojawfee posted:Why would AR kill VR? They are completely different things. Not kill, but engulf because AR is a superset of VR that solves various problems with VR. Specifically, when AR graphics consume the entire view, you have VR. But wait... the AR bits can allow you to see your hands, keyboard, mouse, controllers, feet, and maybe even your dog who looks like he's about to throw up. Also, the real world doesn't have motion lag which may make people feel more comfortable when only a few scene elements are laggy.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 19:34
|
|
|
I think we're going to see VR implementing more AR stuff before we see any AR good enough to even match VR.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 19:36
|
|
|
Cojawfee posted:I think we're going to see VR implementing more AR stuff before we see any AR good enough to even match VR. Agreed - but at that point the distinction blurs and will become meaningless. My personal expectation is that we'll just end up with cameras feeding the real world into the displays.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 19:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 16:11 |
|
|
patentmagus posted:Agreed - but at that point the distinction blurs and will become meaningless. My personal expectation is that we'll just end up with cameras feeding the real world into the brain.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 20:01
|
|
