Must See Kickstarter of the Day

SkribbelKat said:
http://museum.bounce-gaming.net/vfx1.html
Click to expand...
I didn't say HMDs weren't available. I said it never caught on, for obvious reasons. It probably still won't "catch on" as anything more than a niche product.

Doesn't really matter, though. Anyone with an HDMI port can use the Rift (that's, well, everyone), and anyone who knows his way around 3D APIs can write a hook to do the necessary optical corrections. With Unity, Valve, Epic and id backing it, you're probably going to see some sort of native support for it in a pretty large number of games. This isn't 1994, and the Rift isn't some relic from a bygone era.
 
melteye said:
LOL. Lock your door, maybe? Perhaps don't use this item while attending orgies...
Click to expand...

Lock the door?! Only people who are looking at porn lock doors.

wonderfield said:
I didn't say HMDs weren't available. I said it never caught on, for obvious reasons. It probably still won't "catch on" as anything more than a niche product.

Doesn't really matter, though. Anyone with an HDMI port can use the Rift (that's, well, everyone), and anyone who knows his way around 3D APIs can write a hook to do the necessary optical corrections. With Unity, Valve, Epic and id backing it, you're probably going to see some sort of native support for it in a pretty large number of games. This isn't 1994, and the Rift isn't some relic from a bygone era.
Click to expand...

Valve? Don't they just resell everyone else's games and ramble once in a while about how they'll release another HalfLife 20 years from now? Besides, if major developers were so excited about it, then the people trying to sell this thing wouldn't be standing on the Internet's highway exit ramp holding a cardboard sign. Instead they're just getting a tepid head-nod about how it's okay for this to exist.
 
I think some of you guys are waaaaaaaayyyyyyy over analyzing too many what if's. The truth is, a cheap, low latency VR headset is an incredible prospect.

Anyone of those guys could have funded this and who is to say none of them tried? Doesn't take too many smarts to know how explosive the Kickstarter community can be when they get behind something they all want. Look at Ouya.

Go look this fact up. No seriously, go look what I'm about to say up. And that is, people who are wealthy have their wealth not because of how much they make but how well they keep that wealth. All of those guys knew this would blow up and the funding would reach levels that they themselves would be unwilling to contribute. No one knew this better than the inventor.

So much of everyone's argument was moot from the start. There is no conspiracy here. And going forward in life, I would caution this kind of knee-jerk mentality in any future attempts at intelligent conversion you might want to have.

Getting back to this VR headset. WOW ... looks amazing. This would kill eyefinity I would think and I'm totally ok with that even after having just recently dropped $1,000 on 3 x 27" Asus LED monitors. I could really see using this with simulations like Racing or Air Warfare. Even running around in World of Warcraft or Guildwars 2 would also rock.

I have my $300 ready. Hope to see this on the market in late 2013 or early 2014.
 
I'll wait another 10-20 years for them to perfect this tech. so that it is cheap, easy to make, super high resolution, and has developer support... I don't really buy the whole kickstarter bullshit anyway, I'll keep my hard earned cash for well engineered reputable products and let someone else take the risks...
 
the only thing that worries me a little is the resolution atm seems kinda low for being right in your face consumer models could be higher res tho if they got it to 1920x1200 or what ever the correct ratio would be then it would atleast seem more viable not just visually but from a marketing standpoint they could atleast claim 1200p on the box and not in the know consumers could compare hmm do i buy this 1080p 3d monitor or 1200p 3d headset.
 
A lot of medical devices that fit on your face are given away for free for testing purposes to people who normally use similar devices....by these huge medical companies who make stupid amounts of money.

The reason for this is that the stuff needs to fit 90% of the population to be viable. I guess this is part of making the items cheaper and getting bigger margins, etc.

But I suspect that is kind of the reason they are doing this. Let people buy the device, give their feedback on it across the spectrum. If it fits like crap, they need to re-think that or have different sizes. If it makes you sick to wear it, maybe something can be done.

These software companies aren't really experienced in doing that kind of evaluation or setting up those kind of tests in a meaningful way.

It's a cheap way to do a more in depth test, with people who are already pre-disposed to liking the device since they've invested in it. If the people pay for it and then are overwhelmingly against it, there's probably something very wrong.


I'd like to see something like this used for desktop replacement as well as games. Would be pretty awesome to have what amounts to a wall sized work space you can zoom in and out on...movie viewer, etc. Just more convenient to put on and take off, or built into regular glasses where they could be coated and go opaque to show the desktop when needed.
 
Shit. That's got to be the fastest Kickstarter I've ever seen...

They're at roughly 2.7x their goal AND IT ISN'T EVEN THE END OF THE FIRST DAY!

Well, funding complete! Let's hope the extra cash makes this a reality sooner.
 
Oh Kickstarter, how you amuse me. Seriously, it seems like everyone is trying to cash in on this Kickstarter wave these days. I really have my doubts about just about anything that requires funding from something like Kickstarter. In this case, the video shows a bunch of gaming industry royalty claiming that this is the "next big thing." If they REALLY thought that, they could have very easily bought the guy out for basically nothing and continued development in-house. I'd like to think I'm wrong here, because the concept is pretty damn cool, but I just really have a hard time believing that a company like Valve, that is looking to break into the hardware side of gaming, could possibly view this as a revolutionary device and not just immediately pay the dude $250k, hire him on for future development, and release their own branded product down the line. If it really turned out to be the next big thing, the ROI for their initial quarter million dollars would be insane.
 
You guys are nuts if you don't get excited about this tech! Could you image a perfect eyefinity immerison without the bevels, without the huge space requirements, plus there is no way this thing would cost even half the price of buying three LCD screens.
I for one am b-boyin' right now.
 
I just want to point out to all the people that said VR wasn't big in the 90's, it won't be now. Yea, well 3D has been around longer than that and it's made a few attempts but with current tech levels it's able to take root, and judging off consumer sales of 3D tv's, 3D monitors, the nintendo 3DS, Imax and other cinema 3D offerings I'm going to say 3D has finally gotten it's bearings and seems to be here to stay. I mean almost every big movie these days is in 3D, but I remember back mid-late 90's when 3D wasn't so popular people would say "meh, been done before and never took". 3D was never believed in, now you can get in in your gameboy lol

Point of the matter is, tech has really come a long way from the 90's, so don't base your assumptions off that. People could carry all sorts of gadgets on them to do all sorts of things and people thought that wouldnt go anywhere, now we live in a society where smart phones are 90% of a persons life.

People also thought books were the shit and reading on computers would never take off back then. I don't know the last time I bought an actual book now a days.
 
Hell, google glasses even, I give it 10 years, 15 tops, before we're all wearing google glasses as if they were today's smartphone. Point is, don't count out the future just because something didn't work in the past
 
Why does this need to be supported by game developers?...its a monitor...or rather just two panels.
This is where it will fall down...through lack of game support.

They should be making it so it is game agnostic like a monitor....forget all the head tracking stuff...just go for a wrap around field of view as they have...with a higher resolution and the option of 3D which would be quite easily done with the two panel design.

They should just stick with standard view movement control options, mouse or game controller....that way they retain game compatibility and in all honesty who wants to be moving their head around while game to the extent that you pan around using a mouse......sounds like a recipe for whiplash.
 
About. Damn. Time.

I've been wanting something like this for years. Good to know that we're getting close. I'm still surprised head-tracking hasn't taken off in PC games. Set up a sensor on the top of the monitor and wear some sort of IR glasses to keep the weight down. Basically a commercial version of this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jd3-eiid-Uw

Combine this tech with a totally head-mounted stereoscopic display and the future is here!
 
Hope this atleast becomes widely accepted. I'm still pissed at how nVidia changed their implementation and 3D stereo got locked down. There were a ton of 3D glasses being sold (Mine cost $8!!!).

If they got the price low enough, the engine developers supported it, and it's not locked down to a specific vendor. I'll very likely get one.
 
I don't understand all of the hate. Some may not like Kickstarter, that's fine. I don't have an issue with Kickstarter personally but that is for another discussion.

The real story here is the device itself. Sure, the resolution may be on the low-side but the FOV is 100º (horizontal) x 90º (vertical)! That basically means that you are almost unable to see the edges of the screen when you put these glasses on. Imagine playing Skyrim or BF3 in 3D on a display that takes up your entire peripheral vision.

Then add the low-latency head-tracking, which is much more responsive than the TrackIR system.

IMO it's a fantastic deal for $300.

For those who still aren't impressed you must realize that this Kickstarter is for the Dev unit. The commercial unit is not slated for release until next year. That unit should have a higher-res screen and by then I imagine that developer support will be ubiquitous.

If you can't tell by now, I am very excited about this and have been following this project for several months. I think once people get a chance to test this out at Quakecon the reviews will be overwhelmingly positive and the buzz will continue to build.

This is going to be big.
 
The gaming industry has little to gain by supporting this project. We should be thankful they are willing to invest dev time with the SDK. People are going to buy the next COD or Unreal whether it supports rift or not. Rift will simply become another one of those badges you see along the bottom of the box art with all of the other Intel/AMD/Nvidia/ATi logos you see.

Also I see a lot of armchair millionaires here. "Well if I had a successful multi-million dollar business I would just cut a check for $250,000 and give it to them, because why not? I'm a millionaire!" Thats not how it works, and explains why none of you making these assertions are successful 7 figure business owners.

No company is just going to throw money at a project that's not even their's, thats not even public, and which they do not own a part of or will see any return on their investment. I'm sure Carmack thought about buying out Oculus so that they'd ownt he IP, but for all we know it could have been denied by upper management / the board members / whomever. Unless they're going to own it, or own a big piece of it and see a return on investment in the millions, nobody is going to touch it, they'll just support it.
 
bastage said:
Its just a matter of time before this gets done & done right so its in all of our hands.. I for one am excited to see it getting closer.
Click to expand...
Me too. I'll wait to put any money down until I get a nice long demo of it IRL. Seeing people play it and "leaning" forward and such is nice, but... yeah...
 
wonderfield said:
It's slightly more complicated than that.
Click to expand...

Brad+Pitt+Ocean+11.jpg
 
Just to add my 2 cents (which I think someone has commented on before), this unit is a dev unit. The creator doesn't want people to get the wrong impression of the unit because he knows its too low res for a commercial product.

I wasn't going to get one until I started reading this forum thread
http://www.mtbs3d.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=138&t=14777

He's been putting this together in his garage for the last few months, and people like John Carmack started following his thread and helping out.

And yes, the big people who are supporting the project could fund him no problem, but the kickstarter is to see how many other people can get behind the project. The $300 dev unit is pretty much at cost.
 
If your girl walks in on you she won't even see that you're watching porn.

Of course having your dick in your hand might give her a hint.
 
SixFootDuo said:
So much of everyone's argument was moot from the start. There is no conspiracy here.
Click to expand...
No one actually argued that there is a conspiracy. What people here did say was that industry veterans with orders of magnitude more resources than were needed for this project refused to financially support it.

You said that those with money know how to hold on to their money. Everyone in this thread actually agrees with this. Those with money held on to their money because they did not believe in the certainty of the Oculus success. If those with money were holding on to their money rather than to give it to Oculus, then why shouldn't I take a hint from them and hold on to my money as well.
 
wonderfield said:
It's slightly more complicated than that.
Click to expand...


My point being that it really doesn't have to be...a wrap around field of view of higher resolution and 3D capable would be all most would require....and enable it to work with any game and so give it wider acceptance/uptake

The additional head tracking just adds unnecessary complication that requires it to be supported by each game individually and will be the ultimate demise of the unit.

This is a shame particularly when you consider that the amount of repetitive head/neck movement that would be required during normal game play would ultimately be very uncomfortable for the player....sounds great in theory but just give me a wrap around 3d viewer please, I'd prefer to control the look movement with the mouse.
 
technogiant said:
The additional head tracking just adds unnecessary complication that requires it to be supported by each game individually and will be the ultimate demise of the unit.
Click to expand...

Without the head tracking this would not nearly be as useful.
 
McFry said:
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-R77IBkJKyJc/TfeB70t_aGI/AAAAAAAABPA/EkMGx4Ms7Ww/s640/Brad+Pitt+Ocean+11.jpg[/IM][/QUOTE]
Look just like him.

[quote="technogiant, post: 1038999399"]My point being that it really doesn't have to be...[/QUOTE]
For the purpose of getting correct optics, yes, it does. If you want devices like you've described, they're available. The Rift is not that kind of device.
Click to expand...
 
Wildace said:
the only thing that worries me a little is the resolution atm seems kinda low for being right in your face consumer models could be higher res tho if they got it to 1920x1200 or what ever the correct ratio would be then it would atleast seem more viable not just visually but from a marketing standpoint they could atleast claim 1200p on the box and not in the know consumers could compare hmm do i buy this 1080p 3d monitor or 1200p 3d headset.
Click to expand...

From the forum I posted about earlier, here is a quote from the creator (he posted this back in April or so

"I have some plans for making it a viable business later on, but I don't think the resolution or driver support is far enough along to make a push in the consumer gaming market, not just yet. In the meanwhile, I think minimizing the cost barrier to entry is the best thing for the community. If, say, Toshiba releases those 6.1" 2560x1600 panels... Well, expect another Kickstarter project. What I might do is set aside a certain amount for things I can continue to use. For example, right now, I have to borrow time on a laser cutter. Might make sense to build a few thousand dollars into the Kickstarter budget to buy my own laser cutter than I can use to produce parts."
 
kraken0698 said:
Then add the low-latency head-tracking, which is much more responsive than the TrackIR system.
Click to expand...

Proof? I haven't seen any concrete specs for this.

For reference, the TrackIR 5 has 9 ms latency and a 120 FPS sample rate.
 
MavericK96 said:
Yeah, I agree. Epic, id Software and Valve are touting this as the next big thing, yet it still needs a Kickstarter? I don't buy it.
Click to expand...

Pretty much this.

He has the heavyweights of the industry talking about it, yet he could get any cash out of them?
Looks like they're in the wait and see mode with the rest of us.
 
MavericK96 said:
Proof? I haven't seen any concrete specs for this.

For reference, the TrackIR 5 has 9 ms latency and a 120 FPS sample rate.
Click to expand...

From what I understand, the Rift will use a low-latency Gyroscopic-based tracker from Hillcrest Labs. TrackIR only works in a narrow viewing range. I know, I have one. If you turn your head too much with the TrackIR the receiver will loose the signal and headtracking stops. With a gyroscopic-based tracker, that is not an issue.

Also, I remember seeing a video where John Carmack talked about upping the sample rate of the tracker to 240hz with some custom firmware as well. I am not sure if that will make it into the dev unit but if it is just a firmware update then the hardware is capable of it.
 
kraken0698 said:
From what I understand, the Rift will use a low-latency Gyroscopic-based tracker from Hillcrest Labs. TrackIR only works in a narrow viewing range. I know, I have one. If you turn your head too much with the TrackIR the receiver will loose the signal and headtracking stops. With a gyroscopic-based tracker, that is not an issue.
Click to expand...

I still don't know what "ultra low latency" means, but as for the TrackIR, I have one as well and the only time it's lost me is if I turn too far for the IR reference LEDs to be seen by the device anymore. The FOV is not a big issue because you're not going to be standing up and walking around with either of these devices, you're sitting in a chair and there's only so much movement you can make in any direction while sitting.

The Oculus Rift sounds like a cool device, and gyroscopic head tracking would be awesome (I'd prefer that to the IR method of TrackIR, TBH, if it was at least as fast) but I'm still skeptical that it'll actually be faster than TrackIR.
 
A little more info on the head tracking:

"With Carmack's support, Palmer Luckey planned to fund the project using Kickstarter by June 1, but he later moved the date up to June 14 pending negotiations with Carmack and Hillcrest Labs, the company which will likely produce head tracking hardware featured in at least one version of RIFT. This is the same company that supplied Carmack with custom firmware that doubled the refresh rate, based on data he generated from experimenting with gyroscopes."

Link
 
Hillcrest was very receptive to John's prodding, and I suspect they've managed to squeeze every bit of latency possible out of their sensors. I don't think that will be a problem. There's still the latency introduced by the display to factor in, but that says nothing of the actual tracking mechanisms.
 
How do people know the big names are not supporting this? They are going on video saying they endorse it, I'm sure they are buying several developer kits and donating larger sums of money also.

This guy probably wants to own his own company which is why he doesn't want to let just one of these studios fund the project single handed.
 
Vaulter98c said:
Hell, google glasses even, I give it 10 years, 15 tops, before we're all wearing google glasses as if they were today's smartphone. Point is, don't count out the future just because something didn't work in the past
Click to expand...

If Google can manage the invasive privacy concerns of basically having them hanging off your face looking at everything you look at including your boobs (moobs) in a mirror, then maybe they'd have a chance for broad adoption. Ultimately, they need a new revenue stream besides delivery of advertisements in order to have the ability to shed their Creepy Uncle business model, build user trust, and move forward with these sorts of things.
 
Dan UCF said:
How do people know the big names are not supporting this? They are going on video saying they endorse it, I'm sure they are buying several developer kits and donating larger sums of money also.

This guy probably wants to own his own company which is why he doesn't want to let just one of these studios fund the project single handed.
Click to expand...

They are, John Carmack is going out of his way to help this guy out. Back when they were kicking around the idea in June about the kickstarter project, John said he was going to purchase all the doom licenses himself, out of his pocket, to give out with each Rift kit that people purchased. He's also gone out of his way to modify Doom3 to support it, and helped Lucky by showing it off at different conventions.

But the main thing is that this is a dev kit, and devs should be primarily the people who should be purchasing it. Without kickstarter, or with a few big names funding it, he wouldn't be able to gauge how much public support there would be for the project.
 
Dan UCF said:
How do people know the big names are not supporting this? They are going on video saying they endorse it, I'm sure they are buying several developer kits and donating larger sums of money also.

This guy probably wants to own his own company which is why he doesn't want to let just one of these studios fund the project single handed.
Click to expand...

Uh, since when has the developer ever been the one to pay for the product lol? Does iD and Epic give money to Nvidia to help them develop their video card? They only help the dev's are going to provide is implementing the SDK, which does cost time and money so there's your contribution.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top