[Review] 3D Vision Surround vs. Oculus Rift Development Kit 2
  3 / 5    
[quote="Shinra358"]Meanwhile, your savior is here: http://www.vrvana.com/ xD -Handles most of the work instead of your PC -You don't have to wear your glasses -You can see the outside without taking off the headset -crisp 1080p oled lenses -xinput emulation Pure Epicness.[/quote] 1080p oled is DK2 resolution, and screendoor effect is still there, far far from epic. In any case, afaik nobody has tried even a prototype of it, so it's vaporware until someone proves otherwise.
Shinra358 said:Meanwhile, your savior is here:


http://www.vrvana.com/


xD

-Handles most of the work instead of your PC
-You don't have to wear your glasses
-You can see the outside without taking off the headset
-crisp 1080p oled lenses
-xinput emulation

Pure Epicness.


1080p oled is DK2 resolution, and screendoor effect is still there, far far from epic. In any case, afaik nobody has tried even a prototype of it, so it's vaporware until someone proves otherwise.

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

#31
Posted 08/26/2014 05:48 PM   
3Dvision has a 'screen door effect' if you put your eye 10 pixels toward the screen :P FOV isnt really gonna hurt anything. If anything, it will lessen the chances of 2d items being doubled when looking at stuff in the foreground. I'd only be worried about that if it is less than the actual game's fov in 2D. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bAZ-MIyRKn8 And no stretching sides are always a plus in my book. Even if these were 2 real problems, which it isn't, they can't compare to the addition of not having to wear your eyewear under it and having the ability to still see outside of the headset.
3Dvision has a 'screen door effect' if you put your eye 10 pixels toward the screen :P

FOV isnt really gonna hurt anything. If anything, it will lessen the chances of 2d items being doubled when looking at stuff in the foreground. I'd only be worried about that if it is less than the actual game's fov in 2D.



And no stretching sides are always a plus in my book.


Even if these were 2 real problems, which it isn't, they can't compare to the addition of not having to wear your eyewear under it and having the ability to still see outside of the headset.

Model: Clevo P570WM Laptop
GPU: GeForce GTX 980M ~8GB GDDR5
CPU: Intel Core i7-4960X CPU +4.2GHz (12 CPUs)
Memory: 32GB Corsair Vengeance DDR3L 1600MHz, 4x8gb
OS: Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate

#32
Posted 08/26/2014 06:03 PM   
You are comparing it to a development kit, we don't know yet the final specs of the consumer version of the Oculus Rift, everything you mention may be fixed on the Oculus final version, who knows. We know for sure that it will have higher than 1080p resolution, so in that sense Oculus will be better, and most probably bigger FOV. I really hope it's amazing, but right now it doesn't look that good, time will tell.
You are comparing it to a development kit, we don't know yet the final specs of the consumer version of the Oculus Rift, everything you mention may be fixed on the Oculus final version, who knows. We know for sure that it will have higher than 1080p resolution, so in that sense Oculus will be better, and most probably bigger FOV.

I really hope it's amazing, but right now it doesn't look that good, time will tell.

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

#33
Posted 08/26/2014 06:23 PM   
Can someone explain why there is the need to compare the two different technologies? Is it because they share possible 3D effect in common? I still think it's Apple and Oranges comparison. While they are still fruits, they are different fruits. I still beleive that they each should be viewed on their own merits and any comparison should be made in regards to other technologies that are more aligned within their sphere. It would be more suitable to compare 3D TV Play on a Sony HMZ-T1/2 (with TrackIR) to the Oculus rift than it is to compare 3D vision on a 120hz display to the rift. They both have their separate parts and roles to play in gaming and the computer world. Where were we prior to having 120 Hz monitors for 3D gaming? Before the Oculus rift where were we in affordable HMD tech? Why is motion tracking viewed as a gimmick? Especially 1 to 1 motion tracking, is not that the same thing that some critics said/say about 3D (that it is nothing more than a gimmick). I think the big deal and hype stemmed from the cost to access VR. My HMZ-T1 and my ST1080 are both decent when it comes to movies... but not that great for me in games. Yet they cost 800 a piece (at time of purchase). In the end I plan on getting the most affordable HMD/VR solution but I will still have my 3D rig as long as there is support.
Can someone explain why there is the need to compare the two different technologies? Is it because they share possible 3D effect in common?

I still think it's Apple and Oranges comparison. While they are still fruits, they are different fruits. I still beleive that they each should be viewed on their own merits and any comparison should be made in regards to other technologies that are more aligned within their sphere. It would be more suitable to compare 3D TV Play on a Sony HMZ-T1/2 (with TrackIR) to the Oculus rift than it is to compare 3D vision on a 120hz display to the rift.

They both have their separate parts and roles to play in gaming and the computer world. Where were we prior to having 120 Hz monitors for 3D gaming? Before the Oculus rift where were we in affordable HMD tech?

Why is motion tracking viewed as a gimmick? Especially 1 to 1 motion tracking, is not that the same thing that some critics said/say about 3D (that it is nothing more than a gimmick).
I think the big deal and hype stemmed from the cost to access VR. My HMZ-T1 and my ST1080 are both decent when it comes to movies... but not that great for me in games. Yet they cost 800 a piece (at time of purchase).

In the end I plan on getting the most affordable HMD/VR solution but I will still have my 3D rig as long as there is support.

Intel Core i9-9820x @ 3.30GHZ
32 gig Ram
2 EVGA RTX 2080 ti Gaming
3 X ASUS ROG SWIFT 27 144Hz G-SYNC Gaming 3D Monitor [PG278Q]
1 X ASUS VG278HE
Nvidia 3Dvision
Oculus Rift
HTC VIVE
Windows 10

#34
Posted 08/26/2014 08:20 PM   
[quote="msm903"]Why is motion tracking viewed as a gimmick? Especially 1 to 1 motion tracking, is not that the same thing that some critics said/say about 3D (that it is nothing more than a gimmick).[/quote]I was thinking the same exact thing, 'gimmick' or not hell that's the only reason I really want one, although it is funny to see 3D users throwing around the g-word after being served it for so long. I don't even want to be able to look around fully, 360 degrees, in the gaming world but just to be able to look around in the direction I'm facing, left, right, up and down in front of me. VR isn't really VR without head-tracking, otherwise it's just another HMD ... and I really have zero interest in mounting a display to my head. :)
msm903 said:Why is motion tracking viewed as a gimmick? Especially 1 to 1 motion tracking, is not that the same thing that some critics said/say about 3D (that it is nothing more than a gimmick).
I was thinking the same exact thing, 'gimmick' or not hell that's the only reason I really want one, although it is funny to see 3D users throwing around the g-word after being served it for so long. I don't even want to be able to look around fully, 360 degrees, in the gaming world but just to be able to look around in the direction I'm facing, left, right, up and down in front of me. VR isn't really VR without head-tracking, otherwise it's just another HMD ... and I really have zero interest in mounting a display to my head. :)
#35
Posted 08/26/2014 09:19 PM   
[quote="TsaebehT"][quote="msm903"]Why is motion tracking viewed as a gimmick? Especially 1 to 1 motion tracking, is not that the same thing that some critics said/say about 3D (that it is nothing more than a gimmick).[/quote]I was thinking the same exact thing, 'gimmick' or not hell that's the only reason I really want one, although it is funny to see 3D users throwing around the g-word after being served it for so long. I don't even want to be able to look around fully, 360 degrees, in the gaming world but just to be able to look around in the direction I'm facing, left, right, up and down in front of me. VR isn't really VR without head-tracking, otherwise it's just another HMD ... and I really have zero interest in mounting a display to my head. :)[/quote] Exactly. Thinking about some game design ideas for UE4, that's the thing it took me 5 minutes of use to realize. VR that doesn't require head movement (and nobody would require 180 degree movements) isn't VR and is just playing a game on a (sub-par) fixed display. These games are not going to sell if they're competing against real VR games. Because you don't really become transported into the world unless you're moving your head and the world is reacting 1:1. That's when you get sucked in and all the warts of DK2 disappear. It's the head tracking that makes VR special. If you simply want games on a fixed focal point, 3D Vision will trash it for a long time in the image quality department.
TsaebehT said:
msm903 said:Why is motion tracking viewed as a gimmick? Especially 1 to 1 motion tracking, is not that the same thing that some critics said/say about 3D (that it is nothing more than a gimmick).
I was thinking the same exact thing, 'gimmick' or not hell that's the only reason I really want one, although it is funny to see 3D users throwing around the g-word after being served it for so long. I don't even want to be able to look around fully, 360 degrees, in the gaming world but just to be able to look around in the direction I'm facing, left, right, up and down in front of me. VR isn't really VR without head-tracking, otherwise it's just another HMD ... and I really have zero interest in mounting a display to my head. :)


Exactly. Thinking about some game design ideas for UE4, that's the thing it took me 5 minutes of use to realize. VR that doesn't require head movement (and nobody would require 180 degree movements) isn't VR and is just playing a game on a (sub-par) fixed display. These games are not going to sell if they're competing against real VR games. Because you don't really become transported into the world unless you're moving your head and the world is reacting 1:1. That's when you get sucked in and all the warts of DK2 disappear. It's the head tracking that makes VR special. If you simply want games on a fixed focal point, 3D Vision will trash it for a long time in the image quality department.

#36
Posted 08/26/2014 09:26 PM   
Actually headtracking is probably the reason why VR is succeeding so much, even though you have a bulky 400gr screen attached to your face, because everyone "gets it". Hand the OR to your mother, grandfather, whatever, they know how to interact with it because that's how real life works,you looks somewhere and the worlds reacts accordingly, much like the wii succeeded because motion controllers are so natural. Once hand motion controllers are added to the mix, it will be wildly successful, just because it's the natural interface in the real world, and everything points at Oculus introducing hand controls at Oculus Connect: http://www.roadtovr.com/oculus-unconfirmed-vr-input-device-youll-probably-hear-connect/
Actually headtracking is probably the reason why VR is succeeding so much, even though you have a bulky 400gr screen attached to your face, because everyone "gets it". Hand the OR to your mother, grandfather, whatever, they know how to interact with it because that's how real life works,you looks somewhere and the worlds reacts accordingly, much like the wii succeeded because motion controllers are so natural. Once hand motion controllers are added to the mix, it will be wildly successful, just because it's the natural interface in the real world, and everything points at Oculus introducing hand controls at Oculus Connect: http://www.roadtovr.com/oculus-unconfirmed-vr-input-device-youll-probably-hear-connect/

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

#37
Posted 08/26/2014 09:46 PM   
The DK2's a vastly different experience from 3d vision surround or even 3d vision surround + head tracking and the real key is as birthright mentioned earlier is getting the right perspective & scale so that your brain buys into the illusion of "being there." otherwise it seems like a very large but lower-res 3d display in comparison. When it's right you really do get sucked in and forget about the warts for a time though. Elite Dangerous does that quite well and also has a VR friendly GUI with menus hovering is space you can open by looking at them etc.. it all feels very natural but the really cool thing was sitting in a chair with arm rests IRL and having the in-game arm be in exactly the right place and right size to where it really did trick my brain into thinking that was my arm in game and then when the fingers wiggled but I didn't tell them to it's a surreal sensation. Also just got the new vopx beta dk2 driver working with skyrim (be aware not that many other games have stereo 3d support yet with vorpx + DK2) vorpx is great because it allows for lots of customization options like stereo separation amount and head height etc.. + features to help deal with menus and controller issues. It takes some fiddling to get the scale right but once you do the sense of scale is amazing and hard to describe other than it really feels like you are there vs. looking in through an open window and even with a 3d projector where you can get the images life sized there really is no comparison for the immersion level. Here's a review someone did of vorpx+dk2+skyrim [url]http://youtu.be/Xqbozfvp4Os?list=UU3yHQJXeit-p_2H2kpRIEFQ[/url] It really is pretty epic especially when a dragon attacks from above and you are running around using the terrain as cover or looking out from under a ledge etc... I also don't notice the lower resolution/screen door effect nearly as much in skyrim as in games where there are a lot of solid colors or cockpit text and dials to try and read. I could spend hours just walking around looking at the different environments but that brings up the one big negative of it in it's current form in that it's pretty uncomfortable to wear for more than 20-30 minutes at a time. It seems much better suited for a quick dogfight (there's a pretty cool battle of Endor x-wing demo as well) or car race or VR experiences that take 15-20 minutes to play out etc... It's still very much a work in progress but if you are a hobbyist and don't mind all the tinkering it takes with drivers and config files to get things working it's a pretty exciting and satisfying glimpse into the future of VR entertainment. There are plenty of games I'll still prefer in HQ 3d surround and other types of games in 120hz 2d surround but the rift opens up a whole new type of entertainment experience in addition to those including many that will be unique to VR.
The DK2's a vastly different experience from 3d vision surround or even 3d vision surround + head tracking and the real key is as birthright mentioned earlier is getting the right perspective & scale so that your brain buys into the illusion of "being there." otherwise it seems like a very large but lower-res 3d display in comparison. When it's right you really do get sucked in and forget about the warts for a time though.

Elite Dangerous does that quite well and also has a VR friendly GUI with menus hovering is space you can open by looking at them etc.. it all feels very natural but the really cool thing was sitting in a chair with arm rests IRL and having the in-game arm be in exactly the right place and right size to where it really did trick my brain into thinking that was my arm in game and then when the fingers wiggled but I didn't tell them to it's a surreal sensation.

Also just got the new vopx beta dk2 driver working with skyrim (be aware not that many other games have stereo 3d support yet with vorpx + DK2) vorpx is great because it allows for lots of customization options like stereo separation amount and head height etc.. + features to help deal with menus and controller issues. It takes some fiddling to get the scale right but once you do the sense of scale is amazing and hard to describe other than it really feels like you are there vs. looking in through an open window and even with a 3d projector where you can get the images life sized there really is no comparison for the immersion level. Here's a review someone did of vorpx+dk2+skyrim http://youtu.be/Xqbozfvp4Os?list=UU3yHQJXeit-p_2H2kpRIEFQ It really is pretty epic especially when a dragon attacks from above and you are running around using the terrain as cover or looking out from under a ledge etc...

I also don't notice the lower resolution/screen door effect nearly as much in skyrim as in games where there are a lot of solid colors or cockpit text and dials to try and read. I could spend hours just walking around looking at the different environments but that brings up the one big negative of it in it's current form in that it's pretty uncomfortable to wear for more than 20-30 minutes at a time. It seems much better suited for a quick dogfight (there's a pretty cool battle of Endor x-wing demo as well) or car race or VR experiences that take 15-20 minutes to play out etc...

It's still very much a work in progress but if you are a hobbyist and don't mind all the tinkering it takes with drivers and config files to get things working it's a pretty exciting and satisfying glimpse into the future of VR entertainment. There are plenty of games I'll still prefer in HQ 3d surround and other types of games in 120hz 2d surround but the rift opens up a whole new type of entertainment experience in addition to those including many that will be unique to VR.

Core System Specs: CPU: i7 3960k @ 4.5, Rampage IV Extreme MB, PSU: Ultra X4 1200w, GPU: 2x GTX 980ti sli, 2x OCZ Vertex 3 240 SSD in raid 0 system drive, 2tb WD green storage, 16gb Ram, Win 7 64 & Win 10 dual boot. 3X Planar SA2311w monitors. 3x Acer 5360 projectors + immersive display pro blending, DK2

#38
Posted 08/26/2014 11:32 PM   
I read a post on the oculus forums that there is a setting for convergence in vorpx and it is in the advanced menu and called Focalpoint " Enable Advanced Settings in the VorpX control panel. Then when you are in game press 'DEL' to access the ingame VorpX config and you should see a new setting called Focal Point." https://developer.oculusvr.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=42&t=13353 Anyone try it?
I read a post on the oculus forums that there is a setting for convergence in vorpx and it is in the advanced menu and called Focalpoint

" Enable Advanced Settings in the VorpX control panel. Then when you are in game press 'DEL' to access the ingame VorpX config and you should see a new setting called Focal Point."


https://developer.oculusvr.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=42&t=13353


Anyone try it?

#39
Posted 08/29/2014 02:49 PM   
Good news
Good news

#40
Posted 08/29/2014 04:18 PM   
I only knew about 3d strength/eye separation option, glad to hear about convergence tweaking, thanks for this. Other than the obvious, this is great news since many games can have decent 3d with the old trick of high convergence, low 3d, maybe this could help some games in vorpx too.
I only knew about 3d strength/eye separation option, glad to hear about convergence tweaking, thanks for this. Other than the obvious, this is great news since many games can have decent 3d with the old trick of high convergence, low 3d, maybe this could help some games in vorpx too.

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

#41
Posted 08/29/2014 09:24 PM   
<----Actually has and tried. Vorpx is almost purely depth buffer/fake 3d. So tweaking convergence has trade offs. Which is main reason its "hidden". Being hidden for VR reasons is kind of BS. Its flat in comparison to any VR game using real/geometry 3D due to the fact of hiding distortion. Nothing against Ralph since Depth Buffer 3D is probably for the best when rendering 1080P 3D @ consistent 75FPS w/o SLI I believe and real 3D is neigh impossible with that kind of performance overhead. I just dislike misleading especially when its a product. It does however do a good job of depth buffer though [havent tested performance cost] with a good interface + very accurate headtracking. Games with real 3D support with minimal issues is extremely limited. Much lower then 3D vision / tridef by a large margin.
<----Actually has and tried.

Vorpx is almost purely depth buffer/fake 3d. So tweaking convergence has trade offs. Which is main reason its "hidden". Being hidden for VR reasons is kind of BS. Its flat in comparison to any VR game using real/geometry 3D due to the fact of hiding distortion. Nothing against Ralph since Depth Buffer 3D is probably for the best when rendering 1080P 3D @ consistent 75FPS w/o SLI I believe and real 3D is neigh impossible with that kind of performance overhead. I just dislike misleading especially when its a product. It does however do a good job of depth buffer though [havent tested performance cost] with a good interface + very accurate headtracking.

Games with real 3D support with minimal issues is extremely limited. Much lower then 3D vision / tridef by a large margin.

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

#42
Posted 08/30/2014 02:34 AM   
So if I got you right you are saying that those focal/convergence settings are hidden for good reason because they cause distortions in those Z-Buffer/fake 3D games which by now is the only way for most games to be played using Vorpx. I would like to know if this focal/convergence setting could and should be used in those real geometry 3D games (Skyrim, Bioshock Infinite...). Would you say this setting is generally hidden for good reason and should NEVER be touched or could those real 3D/geometry 3d games benefit from it...especially for someone who likes high convergence while playing but doesn't like any form of FAKE?
So if I got you right you are saying that those focal/convergence settings are hidden for good reason because they cause distortions in those Z-Buffer/fake 3D games which by now is the only way for most games to be played using Vorpx. I would like to know if this focal/convergence setting could and should be used in those real geometry 3D games (Skyrim, Bioshock Infinite...). Would you say this setting is generally hidden for good reason and should NEVER be touched or could those real 3D/geometry 3d games benefit from it...especially for someone who likes high convergence while playing but doesn't like any form of FAKE?

#43
Posted 08/30/2014 08:02 AM   
[quote="eqzitara"]<----Actually has and tried. Vorpx is almost purely depth buffer/fake 3d. So tweaking convergence has trade offs. Which is main reason its "hidden". Being hidden for VR reasons is kind of BS. Its flat in comparison to any VR game using real/geometry 3D due to the fact of hiding distortion. Nothing against Ralph since Depth Buffer 3D is probably for the best when rendering 1080P 3D @ consistent 75FPS w/o SLI and real 3D is neigh impossible with that kind of performance overhead. I just dislike misleading especially when its a product. It does however do a good job of depth buffer though [havent tested performance cost] with a good interface + very accurate headtracking. Games with real 3D support with minimal issues is extremely limited. Much lower then 3D vision / tridef by a large margin.[/quote] When Last did you try it? In the few games that are actually configured with Vorpx right now there is an option for using Geometry 3D. One example is Mirror's edge and another is Skyrim. There is also the options for just the Z buffer also. Of course the Geometry 3D option is much better in my opinion. I don't think that option exists in games that aren't configured within VorpX though. I am just checking to see if the geometry 3D he has listed is infact Fake 3D.
eqzitara said:<----Actually has and tried.

Vorpx is almost purely depth buffer/fake 3d. So tweaking convergence has trade offs. Which is main reason its "hidden". Being hidden for VR reasons is kind of BS. Its flat in comparison to any VR game using real/geometry 3D due to the fact of hiding distortion. Nothing against Ralph since Depth Buffer 3D is probably for the best when rendering 1080P 3D @ consistent 75FPS w/o SLI and real 3D is neigh impossible with that kind of performance overhead. I just dislike misleading especially when its a product. It does however do a good job of depth buffer though [havent tested performance cost] with a good interface + very accurate headtracking.

Games with real 3D support with minimal issues is extremely limited. Much lower then 3D vision / tridef by a large margin.


When Last did you try it? In the few games that are actually configured with Vorpx right now there is an option for using Geometry 3D. One example is Mirror's edge and another is Skyrim. There is also the options for just the Z buffer also. Of course the Geometry 3D option is much better in my opinion.

I don't think that option exists in games that aren't configured within VorpX though.

I am just checking to see if the geometry 3D he has listed is infact Fake 3D.

Intel Core i9-9820x @ 3.30GHZ
32 gig Ram
2 EVGA RTX 2080 ti Gaming
3 X ASUS ROG SWIFT 27 144Hz G-SYNC Gaming 3D Monitor [PG278Q]
1 X ASUS VG278HE
Nvidia 3Dvision
Oculus Rift
HTC VIVE
Windows 10

#44
Posted 08/30/2014 10:17 AM   
@Lohan No, you can still touch convergence even with depth buffer. Its "hidden" because of diminishing returns. The more "3D effect" the more visual distortion. Trade off. @Msm903 9 months ago. There are very little games with geometry 3d support and they are equal/inferior support to Tridef on those titles alone. The pros of Vorpx is DX11 support which is something Tridef never got to for OR support.
@Lohan
No, you can still touch convergence even with depth buffer. Its "hidden" because of diminishing returns. The more "3D effect" the more visual distortion. Trade off.

@Msm903
9 months ago. There are very little games with geometry 3d support and they are equal/inferior support to Tridef on those titles alone.
The pros of Vorpx is DX11 support which is something Tridef never got to for OR support.

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

#45
Posted 08/30/2014 05:48 PM   
  3 / 5    
Scroll To Top