Oculus Rift HD prototype impressions
  2 / 3    
UE4 will have [u]OPTION[/u] of easier rift support. Not built in. Dev's still need to do a ton of work. Its like helixmod, no game is made 3D ready without doing stuff. Like huds off the top of my head. Its the same as 3d vision except probably more. Making a game on UE4/Unity just makes it much easier to build a rift game. The developers of these engines are trying to attract developers building games for rift, a game not built for the rift is really up to the developer if he wants to put the work in.
UE4 will have OPTION of easier rift support. Not built in. Dev's still need to do a ton of work. Its like helixmod, no game is made 3D ready without doing stuff. Like huds off the top of my head. Its the same as 3d vision except probably more. Making a game on UE4/Unity just makes it much easier to build a rift game. The developers of these engines are trying to attract developers building games for rift, a game not built for the rift is really up to the developer if he wants to put the work in.

Co-founder of helixmod.blog.com

If you like one of my helixmod patches and want to donate. Can send to me through paypal - eqzitara@yahoo.com

#16
Posted 07/24/2013 09:23 AM   
Thanks for your impressions Pirate, I can't wait to try it out myself some day. I'm pretty sure the lack of depth strength is OR devs playing safe, VR sickness + huge depth equals big headache, i'm sure we'll find a way to tweak it. I'm in my summer holidays with my g53sx laptop and the hmz t1, and other than the weight, it's a fantastic 3d experience, and I'm not missing my projector at all, with the hmz t1 the key thing is to cover all light with some kind of cloth, it really gives the sensation of a huge screen in front of you.
Thanks for your impressions Pirate, I can't wait to try it out myself some day.

I'm pretty sure the lack of depth strength is OR devs playing safe, VR sickness + huge depth equals big headache, i'm sure we'll find a way to tweak it.

I'm in my summer holidays with my g53sx laptop and the hmz t1, and other than the weight, it's a fantastic 3d experience, and I'm not missing my projector at all, with the hmz t1 the key thing is to cover all light with some kind of cloth, it really gives the sensation of a huge screen in front of you.

All hail 3d modders DHR, MasterOtaku, Losti, Necropants, Helifax, bo3b, mike_ar69, Flugan, DarkStarSword, 4everAwake, 3d4dd and so many more helping to keep the 3d dream alive, find their 3d fixes at http://helixmod.blogspot.com/ Also check my site for spanish VR and mobile gaming news: www.gamermovil.com

#17
Posted 07/24/2013 09:52 AM   
eqzitara, what makes you say that? I assume "built-in" support means head tracking and rift-compatible stereoscopic shaders are included at a minimum. I'm sure there are some overall design elements that could be optimised for the rift, but the actual barebones functionality should be in there, surely?
eqzitara, what makes you say that? I assume "built-in" support means head tracking and rift-compatible stereoscopic shaders are included at a minimum. I'm sure there are some overall design elements that could be optimised for the rift, but the actual barebones functionality should be in there, surely?

#18
Posted 07/24/2013 10:36 AM   
[quote="eqzitara"]Screen size is what gives a strong 3D image, when combined with a proper "sitting-distance". The problem is Nvidia assigns a screen size to each display. Which it can do accurately for all NON-PROJECTORS. It assumes you are using like a 90" projected image. When its probably like 60-70". If you still have the projector pm me and Ill give you a screen size hack. If your using like a 60" projected image and set depth to 100% you are only getting like 60%.[/quote] I largely agree with this. With my 90" screen, I reach my IPD (the distance between my eyes) of 6" for distant objects on the screen with depth set to 64%. With my 60" screen, 100% depth only gives 4" separation for distant objects. However, max depth is not affected by your sitting distance. Max depth, aka the infinity point, needs to match your IPD to be realistic. Convergence is another matter. There's no theoretical limit, it just depends on how comfortable you are crossing your eyes. Convergence essentially sets how close things are in relation to the max depth setting. I've seen a lot of people promoting the depth hack without fully understanding IPD and the hard number relationship between IPD and the maximum separation of objects on the screen which should be at infinity. If my memory serves me, both Bloody and eqzitara have been "guilty" of this, which is why it doesn't surprise me that you both report that the Rift, which asks you to set it to your actual IPD versus a vague percentage, has less depth than 3D Vision. I suspect that most 3D Vision users who use the depth hack have gotten used to viewing stereoscopic 3D that exceeds their IPD. This would require the eyes to diverge, which never happens in real life, and perhaps the extra eye movements give the suggestion of additional depth. But it's not realistic. Therefore the Rift doesn't do it. That said, stereoscopic 3D can still work in such cases. It can also tolerate some horizontal disparity between the left and right eye. Again, that's something that can't ever happen in real life, but our brains are somewhat flexible. It works, but it can be straining and it's nothing to strive for unless you're used to it. If you're used to it, just cheat the IPD however you can to suggest you have a greater IPD than you really do. If it asks for a number, just tell it 7 or 8 inches. I do that on the Minecraft wrapper when I play on my 60" screen. I tell it my IPD is 8.3", but it works out to 6.0" max separation in practice. Of course, the numbers are easy with a monitor, TV, or screen as long as you have a ruler or tape measure. Which I do. An HMD probably makes that kind of measurement difficult or impossible. In any case, I think it's important to trust the target numbers, which are objective, and not just comfort.
eqzitara said:Screen size is what gives a strong 3D image, when combined with a proper "sitting-distance". The problem is Nvidia assigns a screen size to each display. Which it can do accurately for all NON-PROJECTORS. It assumes you are using like a 90" projected image. When its probably like 60-70". If you still have the projector pm me and Ill give you a screen size hack.
If your using like a 60" projected image and set depth to 100% you are only getting like 60%.


I largely agree with this. With my 90" screen, I reach my IPD (the distance between my eyes) of 6" for distant objects on the screen with depth set to 64%. With my 60" screen, 100% depth only gives 4" separation for distant objects. However, max depth is not affected by your sitting distance. Max depth, aka the infinity point, needs to match your IPD to be realistic. Convergence is another matter. There's no theoretical limit, it just depends on how comfortable you are crossing your eyes. Convergence essentially sets how close things are in relation to the max depth setting.

I've seen a lot of people promoting the depth hack without fully understanding IPD and the hard number relationship between IPD and the maximum separation of objects on the screen which should be at infinity. If my memory serves me, both Bloody and eqzitara have been "guilty" of this, which is why it doesn't surprise me that you both report that the Rift, which asks you to set it to your actual IPD versus a vague percentage, has less depth than 3D Vision. I suspect that most 3D Vision users who use the depth hack have gotten used to viewing stereoscopic 3D that exceeds their IPD. This would require the eyes to diverge, which never happens in real life, and perhaps the extra eye movements give the suggestion of additional depth. But it's not realistic. Therefore the Rift doesn't do it.

That said, stereoscopic 3D can still work in such cases. It can also tolerate some horizontal disparity between the left and right eye. Again, that's something that can't ever happen in real life, but our brains are somewhat flexible. It works, but it can be straining and it's nothing to strive for unless you're used to it.

If you're used to it, just cheat the IPD however you can to suggest you have a greater IPD than you really do. If it asks for a number, just tell it 7 or 8 inches. I do that on the Minecraft wrapper when I play on my 60" screen. I tell it my IPD is 8.3", but it works out to 6.0" max separation in practice.

Of course, the numbers are easy with a monitor, TV, or screen as long as you have a ruler or tape measure. Which I do. An HMD probably makes that kind of measurement difficult or impossible. In any case, I think it's important to trust the target numbers, which are objective, and not just comfort.

#19
Posted 07/24/2013 11:13 AM   
[quote="Pirateguybrush"]eqzitara, what makes you say that? I assume "built-in" support means head tracking and rift-compatible stereoscopic shaders are included at a minimum. I'm sure there are some overall design elements that could be optimised for the rift, but the actual barebones functionality should be in there, surely?[/quote] Its up to developer. Its not so much built-in support as option to build in oculus rift renderer. I kind of blame writers, because alot of them have no idea. 3D vision has the same option.
Pirateguybrush said:eqzitara, what makes you say that? I assume "built-in" support means head tracking and rift-compatible stereoscopic shaders are included at a minimum. I'm sure there are some overall design elements that could be optimised for the rift, but the actual barebones functionality should be in there, surely?

Its up to developer. Its not so much built-in support as option to build in oculus rift renderer. I kind of blame writers, because alot of them have no idea. 3D vision has the same option.

Co-founder of helixmod.blog.com

If you like one of my helixmod patches and want to donate. Can send to me through paypal - eqzitara@yahoo.com

#20
Posted 07/24/2013 05:55 PM   
Source for that info?
Source for that info?

#21
Posted 07/24/2013 07:58 PM   
Sure. [url]http://www.joystiq.com/2013/06/07/oculus-rift-support-added-to-unreal-engine-4/[/url] [url]http://www.pcgamer.com/2013/06/09/unreal-engine-4-gets-oculus-rift-support-could-spell-good-things-for-future-indie-games/[/url] 3d vision had the exact same thing said for UE3. Certain authors just blow it out of proportion. Its basically the ability to integrate very easily. Alot of people thought the same thing where 3D vision was going to be supported in every game. Seriously think about it though. Head tilting mechanics[weapons/firstperson view], hud, etc. It cant not have the developer do nothing. Its impossible. It may make it easy but it still needs developer intervention. Im not a developer, maybe its ridiculously easy. Maybe its not. Need to see indie developers start to use UE4 before making a judgement call. Building Oculus rift into Unity seems easy. Its tools/features aimed at reducing development time for support of Oculus Rift by pre-integrating the necessary renderer tools.
Sure.
http://www.joystiq.com/2013/06/07/oculus-rift-support-added-to-unreal-engine-4/
http://www.pcgamer.com/2013/06/09/unreal-engine-4-gets-oculus-rift-support-could-spell-good-things-for-future-indie-games/

3d vision had the exact same thing said for UE3. Certain authors just blow it out of proportion. Its basically the ability to integrate very easily. Alot of people thought the same thing where 3D vision was going to be supported in every game.
Seriously think about it though. Head tilting mechanics[weapons/firstperson view], hud, etc. It cant not have the developer do nothing. Its impossible. It may make it easy but it still needs developer intervention. Im not a developer, maybe its ridiculously easy. Maybe its not. Need to see indie developers start to use UE4 before making a judgement call. Building Oculus rift into Unity seems easy.

Its tools/features aimed at reducing development time for support of Oculus Rift by pre-integrating the necessary renderer tools.

Co-founder of helixmod.blog.com

If you like one of my helixmod patches and want to donate. Can send to me through paypal - eqzitara@yahoo.com

#22
Posted 07/24/2013 11:00 PM   
I think the head tilting mechanics are supported via Freespace patented technology that's licensed and is somewhat of a drop in feature for the game Devs.
I think the head tilting mechanics are supported via Freespace patented technology that's licensed and is somewhat of a drop in feature for the game Devs.

#23
Posted 07/24/2013 11:36 PM   
I guess only time will tell, but I'd be surprised if head tilt was a difficult obstacle. People have already hacked it in to a whole lot of games, I can't see why it would be problematic.
I guess only time will tell, but I'd be surprised if head tilt was a difficult obstacle. People have already hacked it in to a whole lot of games, I can't see why it would be problematic.

#24
Posted 07/25/2013 05:45 AM   
As an aside, I really expect this thing to take off in a huge way. There were about 5 places at PAX to try the Rift, and every single one had a line that took about an hour to get through. This was consistent over the entire three days of the show. There's certainly a huge amount of interest.
As an aside, I really expect this thing to take off in a huge way. There were about 5 places at PAX to try the Rift, and every single one had a line that took about an hour to get through. This was consistent over the entire three days of the show. There's certainly a huge amount of interest.

#25
Posted 07/25/2013 12:32 PM   
[quote="Pirateguybrush"]As an aside, I really expect this thing to take off in a huge way. There were about 5 places at PAX to try the Rift, and every single one had a line that took about an hour to get through. This was consistent over the entire three days of the show. There's certainly a huge amount of interest.[/quote] This has been consistently happening in E3, GDC, etc there's a huge interest in OR/VR no matter what naysayers say. Using a Batman analogy, maybe it's not the hero 3d deserves, but it's the hero it needs :p
Pirateguybrush said:As an aside, I really expect this thing to take off in a huge way. There were about 5 places at PAX to try the Rift, and every single one had a line that took about an hour to get through. This was consistent over the entire three days of the show. There's certainly a huge amount of interest.


This has been consistently happening in E3, GDC, etc there's a huge interest in OR/VR no matter what naysayers say. Using a Batman analogy, maybe it's not the hero 3d deserves, but it's the hero it needs :p

All hail 3d modders DHR, MasterOtaku, Losti, Necropants, Helifax, bo3b, mike_ar69, Flugan, DarkStarSword, 4everAwake, 3d4dd and so many more helping to keep the 3d dream alive, find their 3d fixes at http://helixmod.blogspot.com/ Also check my site for spanish VR and mobile gaming news: www.gamermovil.com

#26
Posted 07/25/2013 12:47 PM   
Pretty much. While it may be far from perfect at the moment, there's a great deal of interest - and impressions from people I spoke with who tried even the regular dev kit (only a few people got to try the prototype) were very positive.
Pretty much. While it may be far from perfect at the moment, there's a great deal of interest - and impressions from people I spoke with who tried even the regular dev kit (only a few people got to try the prototype) were very positive.

#27
Posted 07/25/2013 02:05 PM   
I find the psychology of the whole thing completely fascinating. Rift has absolutely incredible momentum and enthusiasm and free press. The actual experience is pretty underwhelming. 3D Vision has absolutely no momentum and 3D is a stupid fad and gives you headaches. But the actual 3D Vision experience is completely mindblowing.
I find the psychology of the whole thing completely fascinating. Rift has absolutely incredible momentum and enthusiasm and free press. The actual experience is pretty underwhelming. 3D Vision has absolutely no momentum and 3D is a stupid fad and gives you headaches. But the actual 3D Vision experience is completely mindblowing.

Acer H5360 (1280x720@120Hz) - ASUS VG248QE with GSync mod - 3D Vision 1&2 - Driver 372.54
GTX 970 - i5-4670K@4.2GHz - 12GB RAM - Win7x64+evilKB2670838 - 4 Disk X25 RAID
SAGER NP9870-S - GTX 980 - i7-6700K - Win10 Pro 1607
Latest 3Dmigoto Release
Bo3b's School for ShaderHackers

#28
Posted 07/26/2013 04:46 AM   
I have to disagree with "underwhelming". I was very impressed by the HD prototype, and once the issues are sorted I can see it being amazing. Then when V2 comes out with a higher-res screen...
I have to disagree with "underwhelming". I was very impressed by the HD prototype, and once the issues are sorted I can see it being amazing. Then when V2 comes out with a higher-res screen...

#29
Posted 07/26/2013 07:56 AM   
Well, I haven't seen the HD prototype, just the Dev Kit, but from my expectation as a 3D gamer, it's underwhelming. The immersion is good, better than my projector, but not stunningly better. The headtracking is really great. Having played 3 hours of Half-Life 2 in the Rift, I found it underwhelming by comparison to my normal 3D Vision setup.
Well, I haven't seen the HD prototype, just the Dev Kit, but from my expectation as a 3D gamer, it's underwhelming. The immersion is good, better than my projector, but not stunningly better. The headtracking is really great.

Having played 3 hours of Half-Life 2 in the Rift, I found it underwhelming by comparison to my normal 3D Vision setup.

Acer H5360 (1280x720@120Hz) - ASUS VG248QE with GSync mod - 3D Vision 1&2 - Driver 372.54
GTX 970 - i5-4670K@4.2GHz - 12GB RAM - Win7x64+evilKB2670838 - 4 Disk X25 RAID
SAGER NP9870-S - GTX 980 - i7-6700K - Win10 Pro 1607
Latest 3Dmigoto Release
Bo3b's School for ShaderHackers

#30
Posted 07/26/2013 09:43 AM   
  2 / 3    
Scroll To Top