http://www.quakecon.org/2012/07/keynote-panel-details/

Looking forward to the "Virtual Insanity" panel

I find the members taking part very exciting - Virtual Insanity (6:00 PM) – featuring John Carmack (id Software), Michael Abrash (Valve), and Palmer Luckey (ModRetro). Moderated by Todd Hollenshead (id Software).

Id - Valve - and Palmer.... hopefully that paints a picture of the relationships and support to come!

Can't wait. Anyone else going to QuakeCon besides me?

If anyone wants to give me a flight from Toronto - I will be there in a heartbeat lol! Have a great time!

Hey Palmer,

How do we know you got our PayPal order (using the link in your signature) and when do you think you'll be shipping out the first units?
I completed all the steps, including the $500 payment, but haven't received any confirmation.

I'm really looking forward to checking out the Oculus Rift first hand!

Rich

I'm far more excited about this than I've ever been for any E3.

Sorry about the pointless post, I just had to say it.

I suggest shooting him a PM or email to the place you sent the gift to making sure he got everything okay.

Good idea. I'll give that a shot as well.

I think the main problem with the marketing of VR, is that its generally been lots of hype and very little substance. No doubt, "true VR" will be very popular when we get there. But what we have now is not even remotely close to "true VR". And when I say "true VR" I am talking about full-sensory replication ala The Matrix, etc. While the Rift is closer to the dream, its still not there yet. I think the Rift will be a great step forward compared to what consumers have had access to in the past. But I don't think its a mainstream product yet. Maybe the Rift 2.0 will be, who knows? Either way, we are slowly moving in the right direction, and that's all that counts.

Speaking of full-sensory replication, anyone know whatever happened to this project？
http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2009-03/04/researchers-work-on-virtual-touch-taste-smell

Seems like it might make a cool addon to the Rift

That project was worse than vapourware right from the start from what I recall.

From the article:



Yep. So, they are talking about generating a sense of touch, smell, taste, yet it seems they have little idea or way to achieve this.



That doesn't sound very practical either. How would you talk, how could it simulate textures, etc?

This just seems to be some researchers throwing out a wish list of features they'd like to have in VR, and hoping to get some funding. I wouldn't even bother thinking about them, until they come up with an actual technology or prototype.

Technologies already exist for smell, touch, etc, but the chances that someone is going to integrate them into one device, BEFORE we get them as separate devices, is pretty slim.

One sensory input that would be very useful to stimulate is balance. Galvanic Vestibular Stimlation tricks the brain into thinking the head has experienced some sort of rotational acceleration. It would mean that as well as coupling the virtual viewpoint directly to actual head orientation, perceived head orientation could be coupled of the virtual viewpoint, allowing 'forced' viewpoint motion (e.g your avatar is standing on a tilting platform, or is in an aircraft at is pitching/rolling/yawing). This would probably only be a good idea for seated users, or stimulation would invariably result in falling over.

Wow EdZ I can't wait to play California Games: Rift Edition with a galvanic vestibular stimulation plugin! That would be so... tubular.

Hi all (this being my first post on the forum ),



A(n) HMD has always been one of those things I really wanted but until this unit any HMD with 3d and a good FOV were just too expensive.

3D has always been one of those technologies I really hoped would take off. With me it started with the ELSA 3d revalator. Unfortunately that broke a few years after I got it

My next interest in 3D technology was the z800. If I remember correctly, on initial release the price was much lower than later on. By the time I could afford to buy it the price had gone up and was a bit too dear for me to buy on impulse.

I did win an auction for one on ebay a few years back, but it turned out to be a fraudulent seller. Luckily I did get the money back, but it did put me off HMDs for a while.

Finally last year I decided to treat myself with a 3d projector and bought the Epson TW6000. It was ok for a films but had a horrible input delay, making games unplayable. I swapped it for my fathers Epson TW3200, so I had a decent gaming device and he got a free upgrade to a 3D projector.

So as you can probably tell, I've not had the best experience with 3D/immersive technology.

So the only thing keeping my excitement in check for the Oculus Rift was the resolution. So I did a couple of quick calculations which I though I'd share with everyone, and it's safe to say I will be mashing F5 on the Kickstarter page when it goes live (I have some fun ideas, mostly involving a Galaxy S3 with the MHL->HDMI adapter ).

-------------------------------------------------

So the device has a horizontal resolution of 1280 pixels giving 640 per eye. To keep things simple I am assuming a uniform distribution of the pixels across the entire 90deg FOV.

First I wondered how big a pixel would be at 1m distance.

So 90/640 gives us a pixel size of 0.140625 degrees. At 1m this gives us a pixel size of ~2.454mm. Noticeable yes, but not a deal breaker.

I still wanted to know what a game might look like.

So I took a random screen shot of Crysis and scaled it so that when printed on an A4 sheet, 1pixel = 1mm.

A 1mm pixel must be held at 41.66cm (about the distance you may hold a book at) to be 0.140625 degrees per pixel.

To try this for yourself, just print the picture on A4 (US letter will do fine, just hold it a bit closer) scaled to fit the page with no borders. If your printer can't print without borders, the scaled version will still be a good approximation.



I hope this helps a few of you out there worried about the resolution to realise it's actually quite good

Considering I'm looking forward to playing with the original Doom engine on the Rift, this is absolutely fine.
Thanks for the analysis, rcblob!

@rcblob: Helpful pic. There hasn't been much in the way of technical impressions of the Rift yet. I'll post my impressions of the device after QuakeCon. Until then...some of the newer members may not have found this yet but here's a review from the man himself...

http://www.mtbs3d.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=120&t=14967

Would the Oculus Rift be good/useable for someone who wanted to use it for flight sims, even while on a 3dof motion chair/platform? I'm guessing it'd be better to wait for a future version to be able to do this due to game compatibility, being able to read the hud, etc.? I have a Headplay, VR920, and 3 Trimersions (2 NIB), I should keep one to hold me over and sell the rest before this thing makes all the other HMD prices drop.

@KydDynoMyte: Well if rcblob's pic is a valid indication, I think you would have big problems with instrument panels for serious flight sim'ing. Have you considered selling all those devices and putting it towards an ST1080? That would be a significant upgrade and at 1080P resolution, it's probably the best HMD for flight sims in the near-term.

Near catastrophic success Kickstarter stories:
http://www.wired.com/design/2012/07/st_ ... ewall=true

Here's hoping Palmer doesn't have a bad Kickstarter experience.

I'm sure that Carmack and Abrash are making absolutely sure that he can deliver on whatever number of Rifts that he will promise.

And if there's only going to be 100 as he mentioned before (~20 of which presaled), then the limited backer rewards thing will prevent him from being swamped with money (and in turn, a huge IRS bill).

@KydDynoMyte: Brantlew is totally correct, I doubt the res will be sufficient for flight sims. 800x600 wasn't really. Of course, it depends on the sim and the need to read instrument panels. His suggestion of the ST1080 is a good one...

A sim modded specifically for Rift would be interesting to try. Something with big analogue gauges as overlays.

A simple solution that you could probably get to work in most flight sims is just binding a button to zoom in - I already use this in Rise of Flight on a normal screen to read the smaller dials.

More to the point, with proper headtracking and an HMD, if you need to look at the cockpit gauges, just look down. Suddenly they're in the center of your field of view and perfectly readable.

Playing games in Flatland has caused us to make some basic assumptions that are not valid with a high FOV HMD. As long as headtracking is responsive enough, some very natural real world motions map extremely easily into the game interface. All cockpit games benefit, from flight sims to race car sims to tank sims to giant robot games. Even non-cockpit games may benefit from such a basic reexamination of the ubiquitous HUD present in all games.

This is why hobbyists need to be involved in this process. There's new stuff to be tried. Some of it may end up being less than useful, but some of it may be quietly revolutionary. I can foresee difficulties while HMDs like the Rift are still paired with a conventional keyboard and mouse. I can foresee different difficulties with a gesture-based interface. All of this stuff needs to be experimented with. That's not to say that Valve guys won't also be experimenting. It's just saying that more heads (with displays mounted on them) are better.

DM

This virtual cockpit idea could be somehow applicable to first person shooters, and I hope the special version of Doom 3 will feature it: independent aiming and point of view. We should be able to use the head tracker to look around, but aiming should be done with our mouse. If we are aiming and looking to the north, and then we turn our head to look to the east, the crosshair (and the weapon) should remain aiming to the north.

I agree with LordJuanlo on this, not sure about the aiming with the head setup of the E3 demo.. Surely that is going to be more accurate than aiming with a controller or even with a mouse (that's actually what some of the reviewers were excited about) but it would also be less realistic.

I hope we can have both options and choose which one we prefer. Also if we keep the aiming and point of view independent then integrating new (and more realistic) aiming devices, like the razer hydra or the leap, would be much easier.

Thanks for the ST1080 suggestion for flight sims.

I drew up something real quick in cad with the Rift fov numbers, did I do something wrong? I got approx an 11:16 aspect ratio, 32¾' screen, @ 10'?

I put my head about 22" back from center and sideways from my 73" tv to get an approx idea of what this is like, and man oh man thatsa nice fov.

Arma 2, Arma 2, Arma 2!!! All FPS games using RIFT really need to take a serious lesson from Arma 2's control scheme. Independent head tracking, Iron-sights and mouse aiming. The head moves around naturally pivoted on the body, you move your body with WASD and you aim with your mouse. It doesn't get much simpler than that and it affords a desktop (or couch) FPS-VR experience on par with cockpit type games.

In the above scenario a hand-held controller (X-Box) does a great job as well. Independent head tracking/movement, body movement with analog sticks and iron-sights triggering for aiming. In some cases a controller is an even better fit for this type of usage.

I REALLY hope developers focus in on what can be accomplished in a seated or standing-in-place ecosystem first before they scare the public off with what equates to running around in a china shop with a blindfold on. That would be a terribly short-sighted mistake.

Hopefully there will be a super-easy "just add a few hooks to your program here and here" mode for the API. There can be a more intricate system for people who wish to take advantage of it, but a simple way to add basic compliance to a game is going to be an immediate request.

Players and developers will be having many "Eureka!" moments, where they realize how great a particular game would be in VR and immediately want to try it out. It's important to take every measure to encourage that sort of experimentation, allowing even end-of-life products to add a quick patch.

I'm pretty sure that the Doom 3 BFG edition will not have independent head tracking, but it seems like there is something more sophisticated going on than tying it directly to the mouse. Perhaps the controller input has a higher priority than the head tracker, and they trade off control proportionally somehow.

Carmack stated that the tracking is using the full matrix, meaning it supports yaw, pitch and roll directly in the engine (as opposed to using mouse emulation which would lack roll and also introduce additional lag).

Ah, good point. I wonder if that means that the player's POV is actually decoupled from the gun direction, though.

I think the next step solution would be something similar to Arma2-TrackIR support: independend x-y axis to head and the option to bind leaning and so on. Keyfeatures for better egoshooter gameplay.

Yes, but unfortunately not really possible with a gyroscopic tracker (like the Hillcrest).. see here:
http://www.mtbs3d.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=120&t=15040&start=60

That's why I hope we can get TrackIR support as well with Doom 3 BFG / Doom 4 (or even better a general interface to modify camera translation and allow independent 6 DOF).

Remember that Freetrack/TrackIR only support a limited range of motion. Even with ideal marker placement, turning more than about 40-45deg left or right has never been very reliable for me, with even less range looking up or down (especially up, which is a real pain). The marker setup can be easily occluded, and relies on none of the fiducial points crossing past each other in all but one axis (for the symmetric 'side-of-head marker arrangement, or in any axis for the cap-marker arrangement). It's fine when using a monitor (you usually constrain your head yourself due to the need to actually see the screen), but once your head can move freely I'd imagine you'll very quickly start to hit the limits of the system involuntarily.

Oh that’s a shame to hear.. i thought it was much better than that. In that case I guess we’re stuck in trying to find a custom optical solution that actually works, at least with 90 degree angles. Maybe by using multiple cameras and/or markers on the side/back of the rift as brantlew suggested. We would need to tweak the image processing as well, of course.

Another option that I mentioned in the other thread and that I think could work would be to use a combination of both systems: gyros to get the yaw-pitch-roll and optical to get the actual relative position x-y-z.

To have an interface in the Doom 3 engine that allows us to translate the camera would still be nice though!

I'm pretty sure the Doom3 BFG edition has independent head tracking which is decoupled from aiming (which is the way to do it! Just like ARMA2). That's where an analog controller scenario actually works better because you can handle both aiming and body motion & rotation with the two analog inputs. Your head is free to look wherever it wants without influencing the body or aiming dynamics. Iron-sights really come into play here as well as you can temporarily attach the viewport to the aiming recticle when that's necessary for precision aiming.

Please GOD, please, make developers pay attention to the above control scheme...

I have not noticed any problems when using a 360 controller with force feedback, even with a HMZ-T1. Or do you mean force feedback from a steering wheel? I have not tested it with any of those, would be a good idea to do so. Very cool setup you have, it is great that you want to integrate with the Rift!



We have a booth now, so yes!



Even worse are all the sites who are now calling it "Project Oculus". Thanks, Engadget.



Very true, and also why I am being careful to not market this version of the Rift as a consumer product. We only get one shot at mass consumer adoption, the Rift will give developers the tools they need to have content ready when the consumer hardware is. Having big names in the game industry giving endorsements will dispel a lot of fears.



I love GVS! I have a simple two electrode unit, would like to try one of the configurations with more electrodes so I can do finer control. Problem is, GVS has very little research compared to VR, safety and performance wise. I would not hope for it in a near-future product, maybe consumer revision V2?



And actually, it looks quite a bit better than your demo! Anti-aliasing helps a ton.



Don't worry, we are doing everything that can be done to make sure that it all goes down right. That tax bill problem with Printrbot, for example, could have been avoided with some basic advice from a financial adviser. We can scale this from as few as 100 units all the way to tens of thousands.



Initial support will be for gamepads, though we will work on other devices starting right away. It won't be a jump to full VR, but it will be a big step towards it! Lots of different possible control schemes, ideally people will be able to choose what they like best control wise, without developers having to do the work of supporting different control schemes themselves.

Palmer, do you have a printable example of what the resolution would be like? Or make you or Carmack have a screen grab of final rendered resolution as seen through the Rift. I'm super curious to see the resolution, and sadly can't make the trip out to Texas

Can't wait to show this to everyone that I know.

Is there going to be an option to adjust the IPD in the kit or is it set at a nominal distance? I just measured my IPD and it is 6.3 cm I think this is about average?