Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Even got to try an early version of Oculus Rift and after 20 minutes got VR sickness.
The Rift DK1 had too low a refresh rate, too high a pixel persistence, too high a tracking latency, too much SDE (screen-door effect), and no positional tracking (only orientation tracking). It used an LCD screen which is definitely not optimal. All these things conspired to create an experience that could be uncomfortable after only a few minutes.
The Rift DK2 increased the refresh rate to 75 Hz and changed the screen to an OLED low persistence one while reducing the SDE and increasing the resolution, and also introduced limited positional tracking with much lower latency. If the machine you were using it with wasn't capable of a truly sustained 75 fps you could get judder and stutter. But it was better in several respects.
The consumer versions of the Rift and Vive have refresh rates of 90 Hz, even better resolution, even lower SDE, much better optics, separate screens for each eye which means you can adjust IPD (inter-pupillary distance) precisely, much improved comfort and weight and balance, they require powerful desktop PCs that can maintain a constant 90 fps, they have asynchronous timewarp, the software SDKs and tracking algorithms are much improved, and the positional tracking is vastly improved with much wider fov tracking solutions that can even allow movement within a 12'x9' or bigger space. The PSVR goes a slightly different direction, with frame interpolation and a 120 Hz refresh, a bit lower resolution and only a single screen but some outstanding optics, and an RGB (instead of pentile) arrangement of sub-pixels for even less SDE.
So, a lot of the things that caused "VR sickness" just from being inside VR have been eradicated, and the form factor and comfort are such that it's much easier to spend time inside. However, there are two other elements of motion sickness that we also need to consider:
2. that caused by artificial locomotion / vestibular dissonance -- this means if you're "walking" forward in a first-person simulation (accelerating / decelerating), but your inner ear and your brain don't feel those g-forces, that mismatch can cause some motion effects in some people; there are a lot of software and hardware ideas and research areas trying to work on this, but one interesting way to deal with it is 1:1 motion in room-scale VR -- when all of your movements translate directly into movements in the VR space and you can move around within a 100 or 200 square foot area, there's no vestibular dissonance...
3. that caused by actual experience within VR -- for instance, if you're in the passenger seat or back seat of a car driving erratically, or if you're on a high-wire suspended over a city, or you're on the deck of a ship far beneath the surface of the ocean, or you're climbing Mount Everest, it isn't outside the realm of expectation that you would experience feelings of vertigo or motion sickness in real life in these situations; I generally consider this GOOD motion sickness, in a way...
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan
Can't wait and hope they have all the kinks worked out.
Well, first-generation VR is about to launch. It's 33 days away now (unless you count GearVR). In a lot of ways it's very good, and produces some compelling experiences. But VR/MR/AR will exist along a continuum from now on. The next generation may feature foveated rendering, will likely feature wider FOV, might have Lightfield or multiple focal areas, may be completely untethered (i.e. wireless), will have built-in hand / finger tracking, may have limited real-time photogrammetry and body scan, will probably have much better HRTF / binaural audio simulation, may feature lip sync and expression tracking, will have an even less intrusive form factor, etc. First gen isn't out yet and we've already seen a number of next-gen technologies demonstrated that are true game-changers. And Nvidia and AMD are both about to release GPU products that will radically expand the computational ability of the 3D systems driving VR. This space is going to improve at an extremely rapid pace, with lots of different software and hardware advancements all being thrown at it constantly.
So, it depends on what you mean by kinks. The HTC Vive, using room-scale, on a powerful computer, is going to blow people away at how immersive it is, at how much presence is created and how it feels like you've just stepped into an alternate universe. But there will be some problems that software innovation will solve, some that the next generation of hardware will solve (such as the need for a cord), and some that will persist for a while (such as the fact that when you push on a wall in the simulation you don't "feel" it in the real world).
AR is typically used to denote Augmented Reality.
----------------------
I am HUGELY excited for VR and AR. I have been using the Oculus Rift DK2 extensively and I'm starting to learn Unity and work in VR.
It is stunning what the brain can fill in. I've been on vertiginous roller coasters, felt peace in an idyllic nature setting, and felt tension and fear unlike anything I've felt before in a game or media experience.
The technology is coming along. Personally I already think some of the things I've done in VR - mind you, I'm talking about games - has been FABULOUS. The sense of getting sucked into the game is profound. Even Half-Life 2, a ten-year old game, even on the DK2, produced this feeling that I was for the very first time actually SEEING everything because I was THERE.
I'm looking forward to new ways of experiencing, new ways of learning, new ways of thinking, new ways of socializing, new ways of working, new ways of shopping.
Here's a thread where I was effusive in my praise: //www.city-data.com/forum/video...ulus-rift.html
----------------------
My company is already experimenting with the Oculus Rift as a customer application. And, I can see five or ten years from now slipping on the VR and having the equivalent of ten screens around me rather than relying on a few flat monitors.
WOW! Sounds like toys only millionaires will be able to afford.
WOW! Sounds like toys only millionaires will be able to afford.
WOW! Where have you been?
Good first-generation VR is expensive, like many first-generation products. HDTVs were $15,000 when they first came out, how many non-millionaires have an HDTV now? The first iPhone (arguably the first smartphone) was $700 WITH a contract, how many non-millionaires have a smartphone now?
Minimum spec PC to run VR is $842, although many may be just a video card upgrade away. PS4 is $350. Oculus Rift is $599 (free shipping), HTC Vive is $799 + shipping. PSVR is $399. Prices will come down as the industry matures and progresses, but even now it's hardly required that you be a *millionaire* to be a VR enthusiast and hobbyist. For a ground-breaking product that creates unique and wondrous experiences, it's actually quite a bargain for early adopters like myself.
A co-worker of mine (definitely not a millionaire!) spent $3000 to enroll his 10-year-old in soccer (it'll only be $2500 this year though). I've seen people blow a few thousand on a five day cruise for two including airfare. A guy I know got half-season tickets for the Texas Rangers at well over what VR would cost. He drives an old pickup. An entry-level motorcycle like a Ninja 300 will cost you $5200 + training and riding gear. Hobbies can be expensive. But you still don't have to be a millionaire to participate in them. And certainly even first-generation VR is much less dear than a lot of hobbies I see people indulging in. Just smoking a pack of cigarettes a day will cost you $1800 a year around here (more than first-gen VR which will last you more than a year), would you say cigarettes are a toy only millionaires can afford? In 1996 I bought a PC for putting together a computer graphics (3d modeling) art portfolio. It was $3700 or $5600 in today's dollars. I was decidely un-millionairish.
I plan on getting Vive this year and will have it in my basement since it is room scale. Once I get it I will report back as to how much I like it or do not like it.
I plan on getting Vive this year and will have it in my basement since it is room scale. Once I get it I will report back as to how much I like it or do not like it.
I think you'll love it, overall. Yes, there are drawbacks this first-generation -- resolution and the cord for instance -- but it's pretty fascinating anyway. //www.city-data.com/forum/consu...ectronics.html
I think you'll love it, overall. Yes, there are drawbacks this first-generation -- resolution and the cord for instance -- but it's pretty fascinating anyway. //www.city-data.com/forum/consu...ectronics.html
Thanks from what I have seen I tend to agree.
I am having to decide what computer to get to run it.
Today I saw this and am thinking of making sure it has this game card.
The Radeon Pro Duo, which AMD has billed as the world's fastest graphics card,
The Radeon Pro Duo, which AMD has billed as the world's fastest graphics card...
I wouldn't get that one for first-gen VR. My 980Ti cost $580 and maxes out the Vive in everything (and the content I create won't push it beyond that either). I'm much more up on NVidia cards, and the Geforce 1070 and 1080 are about to be released and should equal the 980 and 980Ti, respectively, and after a couple of months should be cheaper (and require a lot less power).
A good i7 6700K, 980/980Ti/1070/1080, 16 GBs, Windows 10 system will likely take you through the entire first-generation of VR without ever needing more power or dropping below 90 fps.
I wouldn't get that one for first-gen VR. My 980Ti cost $580 and maxes out the Vive in everything (and the content I create won't push it beyond that either). I'm much more up on NVidia cards, and the Geforce 1070 and 1080 are about to be released and should equal the 980 and 980Ti, respectively, and after a couple of months should be cheaper (and require a lot less power).
A good i7 6700K, 980/980Ti/1070/1080, 16 GBs, Windows 10 system will likely take you through the entire first-generation of VR without ever needing more power or dropping below 90 fps.
I have been waiting for 20 years to have virtual reality so I am going to get it this year. Yes it will be expensive yes it will get better in the next 5-10 years as we move to full immersion VR and I am ok with that as I want to start this year.
I have been waiting for 20 years to have virtual reality so I am going to get it this year. Yes it will be expensive yes it will get better in the next 5-10 years as we move to full immersion VR and I am ok with that as I want to start this year.
Oh I'm totally on board with VR this year, I just mean that AMD card is a lot of money for no gain. You could get a 980Ti now and a 1080Ti in a year or two for less money combined than that $1500 AMD card and not see any difference. The requirements for VR are high but once you've met them there's literally no benefit to having more operations per second -- unless you're doing developer work or you also want extreme TFLOPS for 4K or higher flat gaming.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
