Meant to be Seen

Endothermic wrote:It's not surprising really since your eye's are basically focused at infinity with the RIFT which is closer to a natural resting focus then having to focus on a screen to watch a movie so your eye's don't work as hard so no strain.

Actually the reason for eye strain with 3D movies isn't just the fact that you're not focusing infinity (because that would mean that you get eye strain from watching 2D movies as well - the screen has the same distance as with a 3D movie after all). The problem is really that on one hand your eyes are converging onto a point somewhere in 3D space, while they keep focusing at the screen depth (because focusing at any other distance than the movie screen would cause the image to blur) and that's a very unnatural thing for our eyes to do.

In the real world, when your eyes converge onto an object 1 meter in front of you, they are also focusing 1 meter in front of you (to get a sharp image). With a 3D movie your eyes might converge onto a point that's 1 meter in front of you (because of that "nice" popup effect of something coming out of the screen into your face), while your focus is actually 20 meters in front of you - at the movie screen.

So I guess eye strain can't be totally eliminated with any current stereoscopic tech, not even the Rift.

If your eyes are 5.6cm apart and the screen displays things 6.5cm apart, then your eyes have to look outwards at a painful angle. That doesn't happen in real life, since in real life nothing appears more than the IPD apart.

My IPD is 6.25cm by the way.

So, I guess we need an IPD setting in the driver.

Laserschwert wrote:

Endothermic wrote:It's not surprising really since your eye's are basically focused at infinity with the RIFT which is closer to a natural resting focus then having to focus on a screen to watch a movie so your eye's don't work as hard so no strain.

Actually the reason for eye strain with 3D movies isn't just the fact that you're not focusing infinity (because that would mean that you get eye strain from watching 2D movies as well - the screen has the same distance as with a 3D movie after all). The problem is really that on one hand your eyes are converging onto a point somewhere in 3D space, while they keep focusing at the screen depth (because focusing at any other distance than the movie screen would cause the image to blur) and that's a very unnatural thing for our eyes to do.

In the real world, when your eyes converge onto an object 1 meter in front of you, they are also focusing 1 meter in front of you (to get a sharp image). With a 3D movie your eyes might converge onto a point that's 1 meter in front of you (because of that "nice" popup effect of something coming out of the screen into your face), while your focus is actually 20 meters in front of you - at the movie screen.

So I guess eye strain can't be totally eliminated with any current stereoscopic tech, not even the Rift.

By that logic, the rift would still be bad in 2D, as your eyes converge someplace arbitrary but are focused on the screen directly in front of your eyes. However, it has lenses. The lenses can change the distance at which your eyes need to focus to make it a more neutral position. Accompany that with a natural point of convergence, and I can see how it doesn't cause eye strain. I wouldn't even be surprised if the 2D mode would increase eye strain.

Mystify wrote:By that logic, the rift would still be bad in 2D, as your eyes converge someplace arbitrary but are focused on the screen directly in front of your eyes. However, it has lenses. The lenses can change the distance at which your eyes need to focus to make it a more neutral position. Accompany that with a natural point of convergence, and I can see how it doesn't cause eye strain. I wouldn't even be surprised if the 2D mode would increase eye strain.

I think if the lenses make your eyes focus AND converge at the same depth, it might work well in 2D (because in 2D the depth stays the same).

2EyeGuy wrote:So, I guess we need an IPD setting in the driver.

This functionality is basically already there for handling the partial overlap. I can easily add a parameter that is user controllable via the ingame menu.

Materialdefender, thanks for the info on GRID.
Please keep randomly namedropping games that will be supported
Its exciting

It's not random, it's just what I can say for sure. I don't want to promise anything I'm not really sure about.

Btw.: No headtracking in GRID so far. Is still fun.

GRID supports trackir5, and someone is making a trackir emulator right?
In any case I have trackir5myself so thats no problem.

2EyeGuy wrote:If your eyes are 5.6cm apart and the screen displays things 6.5cm apart, then your eyes have to look outwards at a painful angle. That doesn't happen in real life, since in real life nothing appears more than the IPD apart.

My IPD is 6.25cm by the way.

So, I guess we need an IPD setting in the driver.

Agreed about getting the left and right images centered on my IPD, but I did do that using a simple application I made that allows me to adjust the center offsets of Blender-created stereo pairs. Still, eye strain.

Is there any chance you would be willing to add compatibility for a racing simulation game called iRacing? It's a subscription based game, but I would be happy to pay your subscription fees.


Can you comment on any other racing games you haven't already mentioned that VorpX may be fully or partially working with?

A little update for all of you who were concerned regarding the depth buffer based 3D-reprojection: There will be a 'classic' 3D creation method that renders the scene twice too!

The first three games where this is working (with some minor issues for now) are Crysis, Racedriver GRID and Mass Effect 3. Expect some more for the release version. All additional functionality that goes beyond creating the 3D effect will be available in this mode too.

Main focus is still the depth buffer version, so don't expect every game to work with both methods at launch. For eye separation values sensible for the Rift I still prefer the faster depth buffer mode on my DIY-Rift, but choice is always a good thing. So you will be able to choose what you prefer.

Nice!

And very excited for GRID in VR.

MaterialDefender wrote:

backstaia wrote:This is really cool
I was already wondering in the DIY thread how you got those games running on your rift. So i consider mass effect, witcher and descent already confirmed working. Nice! My body is ready for a retro Descent session. March can´t get here fast enough. Give us ARMA / DayZ suppport and you have a very happy customer. I will throw money at you...

It's Mass Effect 2 + 3, to be precise. Mass Effect 1 isn't covered for now, but most likely will be. ArmA 2 is supported and thus DayZ, I would guess. Although this is one of the cases, where I only worked with the demo so far, so this isn't 100% confirmed. Something might have changed in later patches that breaks the driver. Unlikely, but not impossible. Many things are very game specific in a driver like this.

Descent is a special case, and a good one! It's open source, a custom build of D2X-XL, has nothing to do with VorpX. It's not quite ready for prime time though, and I don't have much time ATM to work out the last kinks. As things stand, I will send my modifications to the main D2X-XL maintainer, he seems to be interested in Rift support himself. So chances are good, that before long you get Descent with Rift support by just downloading the normal D2X-XL build. Descent is a game that, despite its age, is way beyond cool on a Rift-like device.

Hello! I, as big fan Rift and MASS EFFECT, wish to learn!
How games from the third party will look, at present RIFT resolution??? And how video of an insert in games on huge FOV in RIFT will be stretched?
Tell! There will be all present games in driver VorpX, to support a natural mode three-dimensional 3D in two adequate staff? In particular, interests MASS EFFECT!
And an another question...
How the problem with antialiasing in your driver will be solved?

I thank for the answer! Also forgive for my English...

So materialdefender, is your method of 3d similar to the rift demos, as in 60 fps needed for each eye? If so, looks like we'll be waiting another few years for Crysis to run at those framerates just like when it was first released Well, on ultra anyway.

cerulianbaloo wrote:So materialdefender, is your method of 3d similar to the rift demos, as in 60 fps needed for each eye? If so, looks like we'll be waiting another few years for Crysis to run at those framerates just like when it was first released Well, on ultra anyway.

60 FPS is needed for each eye regardless of what approach you want to use.

The difference with materialdefender's approach is that (correct me if I'm wrong), instead of re-rendering the entire scene from a new eye position, he instead takes depth information from the first render pass to generate the second frame with almost no FPS hit. This means you get vastly better performance, but at the expense of some rendering artifacts.

TheHolyChicken wrote:

cerulianbaloo wrote:So materialdefender, is your method of 3d similar to the rift demos, as in 60 fps needed for each eye? If so, looks like we'll be waiting another few years for Crysis to run at those framerates just like when it was first released Well, on ultra anyway.

60 FPS is needed for each eye regardless of what approach you want to use.

The difference with materialdefender's approach is that (correct me if I'm wrong), instead of re-rendering the entire scene from a new eye position, he instead takes depth information from the first render pass to generate the second frame with almost no FPS hit. This means you get vastly better performance, but at the expense of some rendering artifacts.

Method 3D, how in CRYSIS 2?
The serious compromise...
I hope, the present 3D - too will be available!

cerulianbaloo wrote:So materialdefender, is your method of 3d similar to the rift demos, as in 60 fps needed for each eye? If so, looks like we'll be waiting another few years for Crysis to run at those framerates just like when it was first released Well, on ultra anyway.

Maybe Crysis isn't a good example anymore since I run it at 150fps in s3d on a slightly above mid-level gaming computer... (on ultra)

@Arni1984: Antialising: you can use antialiasing as always, nothing special to consider. Image stretching: the driver takes care of this.

@cerulianbaloo: 60fps are possible for almost any game with mid-range hardware.

@TheHolyChicken: No correction, just two additions 1) There is a 'classic' mode that renders each scene twice now too. Not for all supported games though. 2) Depending on the severity of artifacts introduced in the 'classic' mode (e.g. displaced shadows in some modern games) the reprojection method is not only twice as fast, but does indeed look better in various games.

Will we be able to switch between both rendering methods on the fly? Would be nice for comparison...

Yes.

Will you release a demo?

Any chance of Starcraft 2 being supported? Thus far I've not seen any RTS with Rift support, and I am a bit surprised that there doesn't seem to be any support for two out of the three best selling PC games in the past three years, Starcraft 2 and Diablo 3.

I do not think third person games will work all too well, as the camera moves around too much which will cause motion sickness. However, for games with a fixed birds eye camera, such as Starcraft or Diablo, it should work well.

@spire Just curious but what are your specs? And what resolution are you playing at? I've got a decent mid range and am pulling maybe 45-50 in most areas on ultra with mods, comparable on vanilla. I did test 800x600 in fraps to get a gauge of performance on rift, but didn't break 80 or so, even on super uggo low. Not sure if I'd really want to play crysis with the rift though, as the foliage flickering is pretty bad in that game, even with mods designed to counter it.

@material Yeah 60 fps is easy but 120 for MOST games? On mid range? That's a lot more difficult, pretty sure you'd need high end for that. Like I told spire I've been doing some fraps testing on various games, including older ones like mirrors edge, portal 2, half life 2 etc. Those all perform exceptionally, easily breaking 120, but when I fire up a more recent title, even on low, not so much. I think I'll be needing quite an upgrade before I can play a crysis 2/metro 2033 level game with the rift. Or at least a high end graphics card. Right now I have a 7850 which is just fine and I expect it to perform admirably for the less intensive rift supported titles, but may decide to get an additional card for crossfire if someone gets head tracking perfect for something like skyrim.

MaterialDefender wrote:Yes.

If I am not mistaken, a similar method 3D, is in TriDef the driver...
VorpX and 3D VISION. There can-whether be conflicts between them?

cerulianbaloo wrote:@spire Just curious but what are your specs? And what resolution are you playing at? I've got a decent mid range and am pulling maybe 45-50 in most areas on ultra with mods, comparable on vanilla. I did test 800x600 in fraps to get a gauge of performance on rift, but didn't break 80 or so, even on super uggo low. Not sure if I'd really want to play crysis with the rift though, as the foliage flickering is pretty bad in that game, even with mods designed to counter it.

GTX 680 is probably the most important thing. 12gb ram, 3.4ghz oc quad i7. But I'm also playing via 3dtv play on a 120" projector which means I'm playing at 720p and not 1080p, so that obviously makes a big difference...

spire8989 wrote:

cerulianbaloo wrote:@spire Just curious but what are your specs? And what resolution are you playing at? I've got a decent mid range and am pulling maybe 45-50 in most areas on ultra with mods, comparable on vanilla. I did test 800x600 in fraps to get a gauge of performance on rift, but didn't break 80 or so, even on super uggo low. Not sure if I'd really want to play crysis with the rift though, as the foliage flickering is pretty bad in that game, even with mods designed to counter it.

GTX 680 is probably the most important thing. 12gb ram, 3.4ghz oc quad i7. But I'm also playing via 3dtv play on a 120" projector which means I'm playing at 720p and not 1080p, so that obviously makes a big difference...

I wouldn't call that a "mid-tier" computer. Almost nothing about it is in the middle of what is available, it is amogst the top in almost every regard. It isn't an extremist computer but definitely on an enthusiast level.

For what its worth, I have a GTX 470 SLI rig (with an aging E8400 CPU) and I get around 45FPS average in Crysis on Ultra.

Paladia wrote: I wouldn't call that a "mid-tier" computer. Almost nothing about it is in the middle of what is available, it is amogst the top in almost every regard. It isn't an extremist computer but definitely on an enthusiast level.

Fair enough. And I did get the 680 when it came out almost a year ago, so maybe a little extremist even.

I thought that was you cyber that mentioned elsewhere getting those numbers. As you said, a not so well optimized game, something cryteks CEO all but admitted to when discussing crysis 3. A little too future proof as he said. I still think it looks stunning with mods, and would love to be on those beaches with a rift but it's just not gonna happen without a card like spire's. You did mention having an older CPU, and I've heard some of the physics and ai pathing is pretty intensive, but again, some of this is just poor optimization.

Crysis at the the highest setting is a little bit too much for mid range hardware if 60fps are the goal. But on High a GTX560 or equivalent is enough for constant 60fps even at demanding outdoor locations with a lot of fighting going on. At least when using the reprojection mode. In the "render twice mode" things look different of course.

Hey, MaterialDefender. Not sure if you have any HMD yet, but have you tested how 3rd person games work in an HMD like the Rift? It sounds like you already are supporting some 3rd person games (eg. Mass Effect 3), which from a technical standpoint is obviously no different from a 1st person title, but how are you handling head tracking and what's the experience like?

pewpewk wrote:Hey, MaterialDefender. Not sure if you have any HMD yet, but have you tested how 3rd person games work in an HMD like the Rift? It sounds like you already are supporting some 3rd person games (eg. Mass Effect 3), which from a technical standpoint is obviously no different from a 1st person title, but how are you handling head tracking and what's the experience like?

I join a question!
It is interesting, how look 3rd person games, with present RIFT resolution?

I've heard that head bobbing effects in game work extremely poorly with the Rift, causing the stomach to turn around, which is why it was turned off in DOOM 3 BFG edition. Will the driver be able to turn such things off if you are unable to do so through game options?

As the Oculus Vice President said:

Mitchell explained that it's also up to developers to design software that functions well for VR. He noted that Carmack removed the blowback-when-hit effect in Doom 3 to better suit the Rift.

"You can't just strap VR onto a game and have a good experience. You need to take the steps to make it great," he explained.

If you add support for Amnesia: The Dark Descent and the upcoming Amnesia: A Machine for Pigs, you'll be my hero and I'll buy the driver for sure.

Also: The Penumbra series, and Call of Cthulhu: Dark Corners of the Earth.

All of these are games that are built around max immersion, Oculus support would be amazing.

Grix wrote:If you add support for Amnesia: The Dark Descent and the upcoming Amnesia: A Machine for Pigs, you'll be my hero and I'll buy the driver for sure.

Also: The Penumbra series, and Call of Cthulhu: Dark Corners of the Earth.

All of these are games that are built around max immersion, Oculus support would be amazing.

All of these games also are OpenGL so I doubt that will be made possible with a driver, I think the developer would have to enable it, sadly.

spire8989 wrote:

Grix wrote:If you add support for Amnesia: The Dark Descent and the upcoming Amnesia: A Machine for Pigs, you'll be my hero and I'll buy the driver for sure.

Also: The Penumbra series, and Call of Cthulhu: Dark Corners of the Earth.

All of these are games that are built around max immersion, Oculus support would be amazing.

All of these games also are OpenGL so I doubt that will be made possible with a driver, I think the developer would have to enable it, sadly.

Well it can be done, but it would require essentially rebuilding the drivers from the ground up to just support OpenGL I believe. I'm sadly not sure if it's worth the time or effort in doing so, but I certainly hope some option becomes available for the Amnesia games because I would DIE (literally) playing them in VR.

pewpewk wrote: Well it can be done, but it would require essentially rebuilding the drivers from the ground up to just support OpenGL I believe. I'm sadly not sure if it's worth the time or effort in doing so, but I certainly hope some option becomes available for the Amnesia games because I would DIE (literally) playing them in VR.

On this note, one of the interviews I was watching with Palmer had him specifically mention that he wants to play Amnesia on the rift in 3d. So, maybe that means something... or nothing, but I can hope :3

@pewpewk, arni: I have a DIY Rift for testing. Third person games work surprisingly well with head tracking, provided the camera isn't too far away from the character. Might be a matter of taste to some degree, but I like it.

@Paladia: Nothing I can do regarding games with head bobbing, that has to be done in the game options, as you already guessed. Won't be a big problem for most games though. I have yet to find one, where this is distracting.

@Grix, Spire: With a little bit of luck there will be rudimentary OpenGL support (without 3D) in the first release version. No promises though. If I don't find the time to do this before release, it will be done later.

MaterialDefender wrote:@pewpewk, arni: I have a DIY Rift for testing. Third person games work surprisingly well with head tracking, provided the camera isn't too far away from the character. Might be a matter of taste to some degree, but I like it.

@Paladia: Nothing I can do regarding games with head bobbing, that has to be done in the game options, as you already guessed. Won't be a big problem for most games though. I have yet to find one, where this is distracting.

@Grix, Spire: With a little bit of luck there will be rudimentary OpenGL support (without 3D) in the first release version. No promises though. If I don't find the time to do this before release, it will be done later.

Very interesting. I'm glad to hear that there may be OpenGL support either in the first version or in the future. This is very much turning into a "SHUT UP AND TAKE MY MONEY" situation!

pewpewk wrote:This is very much turning into a "SHUT UP AND TAKE MY MONEY" situation!

Indeed. Any idea on pricing yet Mat?

pewpewk wrote:

MaterialDefender wrote: @Grix, Spire: With a little bit of luck there will be rudimentary OpenGL support (without 3D) in the first release version. No promises though. If I don't find the time to do this before release, it will be done later.

Very interesting. I'm glad to hear that there may be OpenGL support either in the first version or in the future. This is very much turning into a "SHUT UP AND TAKE MY MONEY" situation!

One thing the Oculus Rift needs in order to be successful is standardized integration. Their dev kit and C++ API is a good start, but I want to see an oculus rift API in OpenGL and DirectX.