Fool me, this is real good shit ! [the VR thread]

[Istar]

(wouldn't want them to get the hump and delay the Oculus devkit I ordered last night)

My thinking behind my comment.

[Bod]

Combine it with the Omni treadmill & I think it's gonna be a whole new world of interaction.

[gilesgoat]

Combine it with the Omni treadmill & I think it's gonna be a whole new world of interaction.

One thing at the time, I still have to see the first of those devices working to my satisfaction, I would not mind at all
paying $600 instead of $300 if it is really going to work as I'd like it to work, it would still be very worth the money and not
really a super high price at all.

But at the moment I am still not totally convinced of what I have seen, I just hope that all those people into kickstarters and
such don't get too fast in "releasing someting" rather than releasing "something really good", there seems to be quite a bit
of "KS craze" going recently with projects coming out all over the places.

Terrific proof of concept and well crafted device ? : yes, totally.

Really nice useable working device ? : not totally conviced no.

Not at the point I am even sure if I could get one and develop for it because it's like "how can I develop with a thing that
all I see is kinda blur and low res ?"

I am very torn on this, should I throw away money get a SDK and see if maybe it works better after I spend 4 days on
it trying to make it work better and then try to develop a SW hoping that when/if a better version comes out the SW is
going to work even greater or should I wait for "the final version" to come out and see if THAT really works as I think it should ?

It would be a $300 gamble that for me could even end up in 1 day after I see that it could end up with "yes I can write
SW for this thing but I cannot see a thing of what I am doing and/or if I am doing it right".

If I'd do it ( with the SDK ) there's a very strong possibility after 1 week you'd see me asking if anyone wants to buy a
second hand sdk ...

[gilesgoat]

Ok ... after 10 mins of Google search I found this image on the internet so I don't think there's any problem to replicate
it here.

Now WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR THIS IS AN APPROXIMATION WITH SOME LITTLE EXXAGERATION BUT
it's "quite close" to what I mean, the only reason I am "resorting to this" is because I don't know how to explain it better
and/or get a better approximation.

Anyway this first image is the "test room" of the Oculus, I have NOT YET had the full possibility to play/run with the
"total complete setup" but let's say this is what you see on the PC SCREEN and this is kinda
what I would like to see when I put the oculus on ( now don't worry about the spherical it gets correct when you see it ).



Now when I put the Oculus on, this is more or less ( except a "old TV pixelated effect" on that is missing as I can't find
an easy way to replicate it ) what I see :



Now let me try to get you through those points and explain :

1. that this is very jaggy, there's LOT of dot-crawling when you move, imagine to see like lines draw by a ZX spectrum

2. that wall the bricks "you can never totally focus on them", I mean the texture or such not sure if it's antialiasing and/or
low res or probably both is like "too much filtered"

3. there's some "chromatic abberration" you quite see, now you can't see it in the image above BUT I can tell you it
was on it as well, I suppose it's a problem with the algorithm doing the spherical correction

4. that area was "even more blurry and more messy than what you see here", as soon as you move that just started to
be a mess of antialiasing and low res

5. ceiling, again not sure if it was the low res and/or too much filtering applied again a case of "is this out of focus or
is it as it should look ?"

6. now the text actually was THE GOOD THING, it does NOT look like in that image ( which I downsampled and upsampled
again ) it really looks more like the PC image, now that's puzzling me, I can see that text OK but I can't see "OK" all the rest ?

7. chair and such were relatively in ok focus, so looking actually quite like the PC image BUT had to be said had a bit
of difficulty to keep them in focus, also again the dot crawling effect is quite pronunced.

On the top of all this there's that "enlarged picture TV effect" that really adds one extra level of complexity for the eyes
to decide "what to focus on", put together all the things and you see what I mean.

As I said I hope today to have a chanche to try the full setup procedure and see if anything can improve but so far this
been more or less my experience after trying all the 3 lenses type, with and without glasses, changing this and that and
so on.

"You see what I mean ?"

What I'd like to see is "more similar to what the PC screen shows" but when you put the visor on it's quite a bit different.

[gravy]

You can get VR goggles that are exactly what you want they just cost thousands of dollars.

Carmack has helped add some magic sauce to the Occulus but the key thing about it isn't THIS IS BRAND NEW AND AMAZING, it's that it'll be well within the budget of a lot of people.

Obviously compromises and trade offs need to be made to hit that goal and that's why it has relatively low rez LCD panels.

[Yak]

Yeah, my attitude to it is that of course it could be better/higher rez/whatever, but anyway my eyes are a bit shit and the question is "does it do enough to have some fun/think about adding support to our future PC stuff/be worth a couple of hundred squid to try?" and for me the answer to that is yes .

[gilesgoat]

You can get VR goggles that are exactly what you want they just cost thousands of dollars.

Carmack has helped add some magic sauce to the Occulus but the key thing about it isn't THIS IS BRAND NEW AND AMAZING, it's that it'll be well within the budget of a lot of people.

Obviously compromises and trade offs need to be made to hit that goal and that's why it has relatively low rez LCD panels.

Really ? And where do you get those googles that really are "exactly what I want" ?

Don't take me wrong I can see this Oculus is a big product and the price is really cheap, maybe "even too cheap".

Have you actually tried/seen the Oculus by yourself ? What do you think of it compared to what I wrote here ? Am I wrong ?
Am I right ? Is that what I should see or I should see better than this ?

Honestly, "if that's it" I can say "not for me, not even if it costs $300 the price is NOT the issue".

The issue is "I pay for something does it give me what I want ?" yes/no, the answer so far is "no" so that it costs $300
or $10 or $50 .. does not matter, does not give me what I want.

Yes is within "a budget" sure .. but still .. I mean "I want to see things" not "a blurb" ..

We'll try later with more time on it we'll see where it goes, but if it's going to be as I think it probably is maybe the all
answer is "yes, DOUBLE the resolution and I am going to buy it pronto", leave it as it is and "thanks but no thanks".

The answer from me is "No" because it just does not meet my expectations, really the price is NOT the issue, I'd happily
pay $600 if it works as I wish.

[gravy]

The top end ones are around $20k

I think you might have some unrealistic expectations, eye problems that spoil the experience and maybe not quite understand the disposable income some PC games players are willing to drop on gaming accessories.

$600 equates to a high specced but consumer gaming graphics card which people do buy.

And isn't this a bit more exciting that dropping all of that money on GFX card? I mean all you're getting there are more triangles, this is a genuinely new experience that hasn't been within the reach of most people until now.

I haven't played with one myself but what I would say is I know loads of devs who've got the dev version and some who've made some content for it. All I've seen are posts and tweets about how blown away they are. You're the first person I've seen saying it's not up to their standards.

No biggy.

[gilesgoat]

The top end ones are around $20k

I think you might have some unrealistic expectations, eye problems that spoil the experience and maybe not quite understand the disposable income some PC games players are willing to drop on gaming accessories.

$600 equates to a high specced but consumer gaming graphics card which people do buy.

And isn't this a bit more exciting that dropping all of that money on GFX card? I mean all you're getting there are more triangles, this is a genuinely new experience that hasn't been within the reach of most people until now.

I haven't played with one myself but what I would say is I know loads of devs who've got the dev version and some who've made some content for it. All I've seen are posts and tweets about how blown away they are. You're the first person I've seen saying it's not up to their standards.

No biggy.

Now I tell you only one thing : TRY ONE BY YOURSELF and then we'll talk again, if it's ok for you it's ok for you and I have
nothing to say about this.

What I am honestly saying is "I tried it, and I can't see it well" now I don't know yet fully if this is a limitation of my eyes
or the tech, but what I can say "for what I saw, I am not going to get it" because if I want to get a pair of glasses that
make me see bad I don't need them.

Maybe it works for others, maybe I am one of those people it does not work for, whatever it is "I am not going to buy
what I saw, no matter the cost".

[Yak]

Reminder of what used to cost north of £10K...

No Dataglove with Oculus of course, but I wonder how it'd work with something like the Leap Motion thingie...

[gilesgoat]

We are doing some other tests with more calm right now while downloading TF that has a more complex setup.

So far, I also found a recent data I can tell my eyes parameters are ( whatever they mean I am not 100% expert )

Right eye : sphere -2.25, cylinder -0.75, Axis 15
Left eye : sphere -2.00, cylinder -0.75, Axis 175

With lens type "A" ( normal vision ) -> mega shit, ALL out of focus no way to focus it, tried with glasses on can't still
do it ( but no wonders too much as those glasses are not really designed to work with very short distances )

What I noted is that *TINY* movements of the inclination of the display can make quite some difference which means
some part of the image but not all can get a bit more/worse in focus so "as soon as thing thing moves a little" problems come.

With lens type "B" ( moderate short sighted ) which should fit me -> better than A but still no good focus, tried with and
without glasses of course better without but still no joy, can't put focus on stuff, things look "about good" but
fundamentally out of focus, imagine to see stuff throught a glass smeared with oil.

We are now about to try with "C" as well while we are still waiting for the other SW to come in, but if it's like last time
we tried I already know it's going to be a "no joy".

There's anyway an overall blur, not really small, when you move around and that's probably refresh rate limitation or such,
but let's say "you can cope with it" if you ignore it when you move.

My problem is so far I can't see not even one static image right.

[edit] lens "C", in fact, even worse, no joy.

So far "standard setup" -> NOT ONE settings of lens/etc. allows me to see any clear image, "B" is the one that gets a bit
close to better and is the best of the 3 but it's still not correct, again maybe the best description I can give of it is "world
through a glass smeared with oil".

Pretty furstrating, we are still downloading TF to see what's going to be with more complex settings.

I mean I am no kidding guys, I am almost crying actually, I mean "ok this is amazing new tech new joy", put it on trying
this, that whatever, "and it does not work" ?

What can I say ? Is it perfect ? No ! Should I buy it ? Why if I can't use it at all ?

Is it my fault ? Well my eyes are what they are I did not make them ...

So ?

You see what I mean ?

[toxibunny]

Apparently they're upping the rez for the consumer release version.

I'm well excited about the rift, mostly about the price and high field of view. I can put up with a bit of screen door effect or whatever as long as they keep the price low. £150 hopefully before long. That's kindof my upper limit for how much I'd spend on a toy for just myself...

[Whiteball]

Once all the gimmicky things have been done and people get down to using it really well and in innovative ways I can see it being a fantastic product.

Even if it just shows other manufactures there is a market for this kind of thing at a certain price point we may see more development in this hardware field. That can only be a good thing.
I think the visuals, while needing to be good, will be a second to 'the experience'. If it is a truly immersive atmosphere and helps suspend the disbelief then it will be a winner for sure.
I don't think you can look at all aspects being perfect first time round with something like this, it will grow and morph into a better product over the years as all the tech is refined and tweaked (and prices permit).

[gilesgoat]

MY FINAL CONSIDERATIONS ABOUT OCULUS RIFT

Ok after spending a couple of hours trying this & that "my virdict so far".

Sadly : IT DOES NOT work for me tried all the possible settings, all the possible fiddling all you can think about it, I
can't see one clear image out of it, everything is just a world out of focus that I cannot look at, if I try to play with it in
those conditions gives me a quite serious motion sickness within a few mins and my eyes get incredibly tired.

So :

clever design ? Yes, smart idea, to an extent certainly I can say "well done".

Worth the money ? Absolutely yes IF it's going to work for you.

BUY

My advice, beware, TRY IT BEFORE TO BUY IT because it could NOT work.

Certainly all QDOS and all to the people that did work and worked on it, they brought us a product that yes is affordable
and delivers ( for those that can use it ) what it promises and it's cool and all.

BUT, it's certainly not perfect yet, there's room for improvements.

I am the proof ( and I am not the only one, there are forums with people around reporting problems as mine ) that
"for some people it does not work", the bottom line is people like me would need custom correction lenses to make it work
and/or MAYBE I should have some special very short distance glasses on and try it with those, my current glasses don't
do the trick.

Calibritaion SW and such I've seen is "ridicolous" it's almost a "non calibration" at all, that can/should be improved.

But I wonder up to how much you can correct/calibrate some stuff in SW certainly for people with sight like mine you
should have the possibility to change and rotate the spherical projection, maybe it's still possible to correct astigmatism
via SW otherwise I think "nothing can do it except custom lenses" which means "you have to improve LOT the support
for people wearing prescription glasses".

So for me, at the moment, there's really no point in buying it, it would be money thrown out of a window and in a way
"even worse" because "yes I can try my best to write SW for it, but I can never see clearly what I am doing".

So on this toy, until improvements I have to say "pass"

Hopefully anyway I wish all the best to Oculus, they will certainly have lot of sales and possibly then more time to improve
this technology and make it even more accessible for people with some sight problems like me, so I definitely wish them
success and "bring out more products"

But alas .. am I going to buy one ? Eh, sadly no, it would have no use for me until comes a version that is more customizeable for your own eyes.

Or "Dear Oculus Rift, I give you my eyes data, make for me some correction lenses I am going to pay for those and/or tell me who can make those" .. whatever works

Could well be "another side market" for them

So that's the situation "nice, amazing, but not perfect and not for everyone ( yet ? ) ".

[edit] - and in all and all despite the not nice ending I can say this experience still been very worth because it really saved
me $300 that otherwise I would have thrown out the window and then I would have been EXTREMELY pissed at ..

[Jamesac]

The problem with concluding anything about Oculus Rift is that this isn't for consumers. The point with the current model is to get it into developer hands so they can make cool things for it. Judging it as if you'd wandered down to the store and bought a new gaming console isn't going to work here. Once it's actually been properly released with its final screen and lenses, there will be plenty of room to be thrilled or unimpressed. Right now, it's just a thing that works, flawed but available. There's a reason I haven't bought one yet, despite wanting it beyond all reason.

James