-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
GDC Expo: hands on impressions/media of Project Morpheus (Sony VR)
- Thread starter chubigans
- Start date
Remember, Media Molecule's next game is about 'recording your dreams'... :3
(It better f-cking happen. I mean, VR MM.)
Freeman
Banned
Remember, Media Molecule's next game is about 'recording your dreams'... :3
(It better f-cking happen. I mean, VR MM.)
MM is the best at this kind of thing, their Vita game justified all hardware decisions.
Yeah I seriously doubt this for many reasons, the biggest being the higher price that would be required and I'm not even sure it's possible to wirelessly stream what's needed for good VR at this time. It's going to be a while before a wireless VR headset is on the market. Hey if Sony can pull off some magic, then I'm all for it obviously.
Maybe the author misheard or the person that told him misheard.
serversurfer
Member
Perhaps. The resolution of the Camera at 120 Hz is slightly lower than the Eye at 60 Hz 640x400 vs. 640x480 but even still, 18 ms just seems like a long time to update the display, especially for Oculus running OLED at 75 Hz.
And what about the inertial sensors running at 1 kHz? Are they not being used as the primary input? If not, why not? Seems like if you're only responding to motion detected by the camera, there's no point in having the inertial sensors at all. I assumed they'd be the primary motion detectors, and the camera would just come by and error-correct 60-120 times a second. Why include the super-fast inertial sensors if you don't respond until you get input from the slow-ass camera? =/
KZObsessed
Member
So with the combination of Morpheus + Move you can cut a guys arm off and beat him to death with it?
Sold.
Sold.
I want these tech demos Sony...make it happen
Said in another thread: no need to release a new Move. That little EXT port at the bottom of the current one might come in handy. Think the STEM system controller (replace STEM module with Move).
You'd also end up with a TWO triggers device (the attachment one, and the Move one) which might double as a smaller version of the SharpShooter.
TheRealTalker
Banned
the move demo from E3 2009 lives on!
cyberheater
PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 Xbone PS4 PS4
when i look at this
i see
We see him kill people. All he sees is that he's patting puppies.
Tripolygon
Banned
Huh. The Associated Press got a private demo of some of the fruit of the NASA collaboration - a walk on Mars. I guess that's the perk of being The Associated Press. They thought it was the most immersive of the demos too.
http://www.wcnc.com/entertainment/251285391.html
http://www.wcnc.com/entertainment/251285391.html
TheJollyCorner
Member
I am clueless to all of this kind of tech, so go easy on my ignorance, but watching that Castle gameplay made me wonder:
would it be feasible to create some kind of 'glove' solution for gaming with VR, making grasping/holding/using a trigger finger/etc. feel more fluid?
Yeah, yeah, PowerGlove and The Lawnmower Man jokes aside, it's just one of the first thoughts I had while watching.
I guess some kind of controller (be it Move or DS4) would still be needed to initiate character movement, but I'm just trying to wrap my head around grabbing at things in an all-encompassing environment like VR by pressing a button when your hands might automatically want to react naturally.
would it be feasible to create some kind of 'glove' solution for gaming with VR, making grasping/holding/using a trigger finger/etc. feel more fluid?
Yeah, yeah, PowerGlove and The Lawnmower Man jokes aside, it's just one of the first thoughts I had while watching.
I guess some kind of controller (be it Move or DS4) would still be needed to initiate character movement, but I'm just trying to wrap my head around grabbing at things in an all-encompassing environment like VR by pressing a button when your hands might automatically want to react naturally.
Fully motion tracked haptic suits are a possible outcrop of commercial VR applications.
Just the hand is possible of course, but yeah, the implementation requirements would be such that the device would need to be a major standard to be supported on a console. One of the advantages Sony does have is they can target DS4, Move/Navi, Move/Move. The fewer additional accessories the better, heavily splintering an already sub-group of consumers is really not good.
Just the hand is possible of course, but yeah, the implementation requirements would be such that the device would need to be a major standard to be supported on a console. One of the advantages Sony does have is they can target DS4, Move/Navi, Move/Move. The fewer additional accessories the better, heavily splintering an already sub-group of consumers is really not good.
I am clueless to all of this kind of tech, so go easy on my ignorance, but watching that Castle gameplay made me wonder:
would it be feasible to create some kind of 'glove' solution for gaming with VR, making grasping/holding/using a trigger finger/etc. feel more fluid?
Yeah, yeah, PowerGlove and The Lawnmower Man jokes aside, it's just one of the first thoughts I had while watching.
I guess some kind of controller (be it Move or DS4) would still be needed to initiate character movement, but I'm just trying to wrap my head around grabbing at things in an all-encompassing environment like VR by pressing a button when your hands might automatically want to react naturally.
A glove that tracks finger/hand/palm motions is technically feasible, I'm sure it's been done in the lab more than once, but whether it's ready or desirable for a consumer experience might be another matter. Wearing a glove might introduce a bit more friction for the user vs just picking up a controller - but maybe if the experience was really worth it it would be worthwhile.
That said, with Move, I think you have a pretty natural feeling of grabbing something via the analog trigger on the back. You can have a pretty nice feeling of squeezing your palm shut to, say, grab something, and can control to what degree you close a virtual hand. It's not quite as abstracted as a binary button press with two hand states (open/shut).
backbreaker65
Banned
Project Morpheus and Naughty Dog
https://twitter.com/Neil_Druckmann/status/446740175209500672
Neil Druckmann
‏@Neil_Druckmann
Spent downtime at the airport brainstorming #ProjectMorpheus ideas with @bruce_straley. Conclusion, you can make the ultimate horror game.
Bruce Responded.
Bruce Straley ‏@bruce_straley 49m
@Neil_Druckmann troll.
I hope it's not made in jest, I would love to see what they could do.
https://twitter.com/Neil_Druckmann/status/446740175209500672
Neil Druckmann
‏@Neil_Druckmann
Spent downtime at the airport brainstorming #ProjectMorpheus ideas with @bruce_straley. Conclusion, you can make the ultimate horror game.
Bruce Responded.
Bruce Straley ‏@bruce_straley 49m
@Neil_Druckmann troll.
I hope it's not made in jest, I would love to see what they could do.
backbreaker65
Banned
Opps already posted.
Tripolygon
Banned
Project Smith
Such polarizing opinions on the underwater demo. From "one of the worse unconvincing demos" to "the best looking vr demo ever". Ha that's gaming journalism.
Can't get hits with: "It was ok"
Locomotion for non-cockpit type games will be an interesting problem to tackle. Moving with an analog stick works well enough but it does disconnect you from the experience a little. I'm afraid there aren't many other practical solutions though. I've hooked up a Wii Balance board and used it as a WASD replacement but I didn't like it. It sounded good on "paper" but it ended up feeling pretty weird and imprecise.
But WASD/Left analog isn't the biggest problem. Body rotation is. When you press forward, where does your character go? Do you tie it up to where you're looking at and lose the ability to walk and look in different directions? That's assuming you even have 360° tracking, which Sony has, but then you have the cord which is a bit of a deal breaker anyway.
So what most people do right now is to continue using the right analog (without pitch) to turn around but it really makes you feel like crap after a while. A lot of people, me included anyway. To some people it's even an instant "get this thing off my head" moment.
I've been trying a few things in Unity.
One simple thing that sounds terrible but that helps a lot with motion sickness is to "blink" the camera while spinning around. You could simply close your eyes yourself but I've tried it and curiously, it's more work than it sounds!
I've also tried implementing a "turn button" that rotates your body orientation in the direction you're looking at. If you think about it for a second you'll wonder what happens when you want to recenter your head but I also rotate the camera gradually in the direction you're turning which you counter when re-centering your head. I have a hard time explaining it but it works!
It gets some getting used to though. It's pretty good for slow experiences and non-gamers but for core gamers with years of traditional controls experience, it kinda feels weird and slow when you have to rotate quickly.
What I prefer so far is getting rid of strafing. Or putting it as a modifier or something.:Hold a trigger to strafe or put it on the right analog... somewhere else. We don't strafe all that much in real life anyway. So up/down on the left analog to walk forward/backwards and left/right to rotate. So you only really need one analog, and it leaves your other hand free to aim and whatnot.
Graphics Horse
Member
Was wondering about this stuff earlier, very interesting. Considered a turn button that aligns you with Move controller rotation, not sure how that would feel. And yeah nobody sidesteps fast unless they're doing ballet, it's important to have sidestepping for natural obstacle navigation but should be very slow, encourage people to look sideways while moving forwards if they want to 'strafe'
Sessler's impressions:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EtyixbwZxE4
Interview with Anton Mikhailov:
http://youtu.be/K3BHKBm8o3k
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EtyixbwZxE4
Interview with Anton Mikhailov:
http://youtu.be/K3BHKBm8o3k
Neuromancer
Member
serversurfer
Member
Okay, first off, I'm sorry; I didn't realize I was supposed to watch the video.
Here's what I don't understand about Palmer's comments. First, he says the only reason they're running at 75 Hz now is because it's not currently possible to drive OLED panels any faster than that. But Valve are driving their OLED panels at 95 Hz, right? So WTF? Is Abrash not willing to share the secret of fast displays, or what?
Second, he says that 90 Hz is the bare minimum for low-persistence displays. He's the expert, so fair enough, but people seem to be pretty pleased with their 72 Hz low-persistance display, so wouldn't that be the "bare minimum," by definition? =/
World: This is amazing!!
Oculus: The Hell it is. Go buy a fucking PlayStation, peasant.
Which brings me to my next question. Why do they seem so intent on making their market as small as possible?? 75 Hz seems plenty fast, but no, they're going to increase performance demands by another 20% "just because." Abrash himself says 1MP per eye is sufficient, but no, they're going to double that resolution "just because."
People are arguing about whether the PS4 is powerful enough to deliver presence with sufficient IQ. If we assume Sony are targeting 1MP at 75 Hz since that seems to be "good enough" for most people then why would Oculus demand their users provide a box with 240% of the performance of the PS4 just to deliver the same image quality?
I've heard that only 10% of Steam users have a box even equal to a PS4. That means 90% of them don't. I don't know enough about GPUs to know at a glance what GPUs offer ~240% the performance of a 7850, so somebody help me out here How many Steam users have a GPU in that class? 5%? 1%?
Why do they want to limit their market so severely? Do we have any historical data to help determine how quickly new GPUs filter down to the masses? I've heard the 7850 described as a "mid to low range" GPU, so I assume it's relatively old, and yet only 10% of users have that or better, so it sounds like it doesn't filter down very quickly.
Can anyone explain why exceeding the reference spec is so important to them it motivates them to ignore 91-99% of the PC gamers out there? Are they just ceding everyone but the "hardest of the hardcore" to Sony, and are instead going Apple-style with boutique pricing and stuff?
How does this make sense to anyone? Why purposely make your already tiny market even smaller, and for so little tangible benefit? How can they be profitable if they ensure their entire market size is only 3M users, compared to the 100M PS4 owners Sony can court? What am I missing?
And I'm not bashing here. Palmer seems like a good kid and I'd like to see them succeed. I'm just baffled by their seeming efforts to make their product as niche as they possibly can. How is that a good idea for a fledgling product trying to help create an entirely new industry? =/
I think Oculus are in a tough position. They want to position PC VR as a clear step up from consoles, so they want to have much nicer specs, but it is going to limit their market notably.
I don't think it's 'just because', there are reasons for it, but I think it's a poor decision personally.
I don't think it's 'just because', there are reasons for it, but I think it's a poor decision personally.
the one thing i really prefer about sony's headset is the lack of pressure on the bridge on the nose. i've had my nose busted up enough times that if i have any downward pressure on it i start breathing like a pug dog, which definitely seemed like it might turn into a problem if i spent anymore than five minutes at a time with the rift.
You would have hated the Sony HMZ-T1 then lol. Sounds like the feedback from that bettered the product.
Nice to hear someone talk about the audio a bit more.
I think it's encouraging that they seem to have been thinking about ergonomics from a very early stage, but I hope they can reconcile this kind of design with a closing off from external light. They say they're working on it, hope it's doable.
Internally I'm sure they have displays at 90Hz+, but 75 is currently the best they can get in large enough numbers at a cheap enough price for it to be viable for the DK2.
And Oculus simply isn't interested in "good enough" for "most people." From the beginning Oculus's goal has been to blow people away. To make the greatest mass-produced VR headset in the world. A VR headset so good that NO ONE can deny the experience and they simply HAVE to have it.
The new devkit is 350$, that is expensive if you want to bring it to mass market. Not only that but they are talking that they want to upgrade it even more. How many are willing to spend more then 350$ on this thing? It's as if they ok if it goes nitch.
...and the PC beefy enough to run it.
Exactly.
vpance
Member
So that NASA/JPL partnership was more than just in name, interesting. They must have a few Carmack level guys there
OR to be the Betamax of VR?
Well they've claimed previously to be targeting $300 for the consumer version. The DK2 are going to be produced in smaller numbers, which makes it more costly, and it comes with a latency measuring device, which the consumer version won't. CV1 is going to be higher resolution with a higher refresh rate, but it's coming later, and will be mass produced, so it could still hit that $300 target, but yeah, I think they'll be at $350 personally.
It's not going to be mass market, the amount of people with the horse power to do that spec justice late next year will be very small. Their sales out the gate won't be incredible, certainly Morpheus is going to sell far better, but they do need to set themselves apart from Sony.
It was always going to be a high end core gaming accessory, they've just confirmed they're making it a little more high end this week.
You are certainly bashing. You're taking everything you've heard and trying to paint it in the most negative light possible, likely because it makes what Sony is doing look worse(seeing what thread we are in).
1) Valve used different displays and display configuration than Oculus. Oculus cant run *their* panels higher than 75hz at the moment. I don't know exactly what Valve have used or what they are capable of, so I cant comment on that specifically, but its not the same as what Oculus have.
2) Just because 75hz is 'ok' doesn't mean its ideal. Oculus are very passionate about the particulars of VR and what makes a good VR experience. You can read too much into what he means by 'bare minimum' but they are just saying its what they feel should be used.
3) Higher resolutions require higher refresh/framerates to achieve the same level of flicker removal. The minimum for 1080p wont work for 1440p and up. This is the most likely reason for what he's said, because the consumer version will likely be 1440p, which will require the 90hz to have the same effect.
4) Just because there's a few idiots on here arguing that PS4 isn't powerful enough for presence doesn't mean that's what Oculus' stance on it is. Its quite ridiculous to make that jump in logic, because Oculus have said quite clearly that they feel PS4's VR will not only be viable, but also good for them and the VR industry in general.
5) These headsets wont be available this year. Neither of them. Advancements in GPU power will be made during this time, making what Oculus want to achieve more and more reasonable for your typical PC gamers. And don't ignore that 10% of the PC gaming population is still a huge amount of people. Oculus have *always* said that their intention was to push VR tech. This isn't just some stop-gap gimmicky feature for games. This is the start of a revolution and they plan on being at the forefront of it.
6) There is plenty of room for both worlds(PC and console VR) to exist. There's no reason to have this overdefensive, insecure reaction like you've had. Be thankful it exists, just like every *real* VR enthusiast on the PC will likely be thankful of what Sony is doing. We're entering great times ahead. Drop the 'war' attitude and embrace it all. The benefits of having both arenas served is more impactful than a lot of people realize. If it was just Sony, the tech wouldn't be pushed whatsoever. If it was just Oculus, publisher support and mass popularity would be slower in coming.
serversurfer
Member
But wouldn't they be better served by pursuing IQ over resolution and frame rates? If someone sees GTA running on a Titan-fueled Rift and their initial response is, "This looks exactly like the PS4 version " are they gonna be swayed by, "Well, yeah, but notice how much more legible that text is on the billboard down the block? Isn't that amazing??"
Ouch.
But Abrash says presence is binary. Once you achieve it, why not chase something more noticeable and more importantly, more scalable like IQ rather than a resolution bump? Rift isn't gonna make me feel "super-present," and it isn't gonna look any better IQ-wise, so what are they thinking here?
No, hopefully it will start small but the experience and word of mouth will drive the purchase of more high end PC's and PC components as time goes on.