Register
Events
Popular
More
Post #41
I don't think Oculus Rift is a good purchase if you want to play online games, you will be disavantaged a lot ( dunno if u can say that in english but what I mean is that you can't be better at aiming with the oculus rift than with a mouse) Oculus Rift could be good for games like Amnesia, The Forest, slenderman etc... but not Rust first cuz the survival aspect is inexistant ATM, and 2nd because you will struggle at killing people wich is what the game is about FOR THE MOMENT
-
-
Apparently you haven't had the privilege to play with one yet. You can still use the mouse and keyboard. And the aiming factor is done through the mouse still the only reason for the headset is the "camera view" and which direction your looking. but you can still aim with most games with the mouse.
it adds that 3rd dimension of gaming.. The "mouse look" is off but the aiming on the screen is still on and the gun moves around the screen as if your moving it around in RL while looking 1 direction.
-
oculus rift was just bought out for 2billion dollars from facebook have fun . the oculus rift is no more
-
Or it sounds like they have 2 billion dollars more to invest into development and production. It sounds like the Oculus Rift has been assured to exist.
-
It may not be as bad as it sounds. Maybe FB will continue to let the Oculus team operate somewhat independently, although I can't help but feel like if that's what FB wanted they would have invested rather than purchased.
-
Let's not turn this thread into "Arguing over whether or not FB buying Oculus Rift is the worst thing ever," there are already at least three threads on Facepunch over this, and arguing about the future of Rift is completely off-topic for Rust.
Even if Rust deliberately did not support the Rift over being swallowed up by the Zuck Empire, there's still OpenVR and otherVR initiatives that Rust could support when the time comes to tackle VR support.
Let's stick to the topic.
-
Right. I'm personally looking forward to Valve's VR, they really know what they're doing when it comes to VR as they've actually done plenty of research into the topic and stand the best chance of really nailing it.
Anyway. Yeah, we could see headbob optionally disabled. Garry said himself he experiences motion sickness in the Oculus. If headbob causes motion sickness, I think it's a pretty safe bet they're not going to force headbob on in VR mode. There's no way Garry would be able to stand it in testing ;)
There's also some other things to consider in that respect, though.
For instance, aim-down-sights is a bit more complicated in VR. In real life, you have to pick an eye to align with the sights. Some people close the other eye, some are pretty good at ignoring it, etc.
What games actually do is line up the gun smack in the middle of the screen. In real life that would be equivalent to lining up the gun with the bridge of your nose. In VR it causes significant eye strain because of the distance between the stereo images (unless you employ some DoF to blur out objects very close to the camera).
So in VR mode you have to offset the gun. The nice thing about the Unity SDK for Oculus is that it exposes IPD, interpupillary distance, which can be configured in some apps that ship with the SDK. So if you want to line up the gun with one eye, you offset it either left or right by the IPD (or is it half the IPD? I can't remember which one off the top of my head) to line it up with one eye.
Of course then you have to expose a setting for which eye you want to use ;)
The biggest challenge at this point is resolution. Even at 1080p things are going to look blurry and pixelated, and that becomes a challenge when there's someone even moderately far shooting at you (they look like a vague blob in the distance in VR). What we really need are 4k+ screens for VR, but this is both more expensive and also bigger strain on graphics.
-
They aren't exactly the same thing, but it many ways they accomplish the same thing... immersing you in the virtual world. That was my point. I haven't tried the Rift but I have tried similar units (custom systems), and they are nice but in many ways the large 4K monitor is better overall. Sure I will probably try the Rift too when it comes out, if the price is reasonable, but after seeing gaming on a 50 inch 4K montor, I am no longer expecting goggles to be the way to get surround immersion. Part of my point about being better all around is that when the game is over and you're back to general computing use, this monitor gives all sorts of general computing enhancements as well. If you do photography, seeing 8 million pixels up front on a 50 inch monitor is just like being there where you took the picture in the first place. It immediately multiplies the impact of your photos by 5 times. If you're a programmer or computer power user, being able to have lots of windows open and put them anywhere without having to dodge multi-monitor bezels, is really nice. After using this monitor for two weeks, I thought, "this is the way monitors are supposed to be". It is the most natural way to use monitors I have ever tried. The 50 inch size is not over-whelming at all. The Rift with it's 720p resolution, and working towards HD, won't give you nearly the detail of 4K (4 times HD), even though it will let you do head turning to pan, etc. One comment above was that the Rift made him sick/dizzy. This never happens with a large 4K monitor, at least not to me... there is no head-turning dizziness, just nature big screen immersion. Even my wife who thinks stuff like this is a waste of time, said "amazing!" when she saw ESO online beta on the screen.
Now that HDMI 2.0 specs are finalized, 4K monitors will come out in greater force and with lower prices by the end of the year (at least that what tech sites are predicting). Likewise I can say to you, "if you haven't tried a 50 inch 4K monitor, you can't claim they aren't better that VR goggles". The Seiki 4K 50 inch is on Amazon for $699 right now... a steal of a price.
-
I *can* claim they aren't better than VR goggles when it comes to VR, for the simple fact that they are NOT VR.
Oh sure, they're probably f***ing amazing when it comes to actually using it as a monitor.
What VR gives you is true 3D depth perception, among other benefits. You don't realize how awesome that is until you try it. It gives the virtual world a true sense of scale - I've never realized just how huge and majestic Minecraft can be until I strapped on a Rift and played it. It was truly awe-inspiring. You just don't get that with a big fancy monitor.
-
Yes, you DO get it with a 4K monitor, but in a sightly different way. I also have a 3D TV and it gives a different effect but it the 3D effect isn't necessarily better than super high resolution. But it doesn't have to be one or the other. There's no reason anyone couldn't have both. You can't claim anything if you haven't tried it. I have tried both. I'm not at all trying to put down Rift or anything similar and I ask that you don't snuff a 4K monitor if you haven't tried one. I'm just offering an alternative choice, or an ADDITIONAL choice. I think it's superb and I'm sure others would find it great as well.
-
I'm not trying to snuff 4k either. It sounds AMAZING, as far as monitors go.
But it's no VR ;)
-
Omni treadmil + rift + motion sensing rock + playing while naked + in game penis physics = truly immersive gaming
-
If I had to watch cavemen dicks, I probably would rather have it NOT in virtual reality.
Also without Facebook support.
RIP Oculus Rift
-
would you like to share this moment on facebook?
Agree x 1
Disagree x 1
Optimistic x 1
Funny x 2