• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

360 Degrees Eyefinity

S

sikanx

n00b
Joined
Oct 26, 2009
Messages
60
lets say if you put like 8-10 monitors so that it surrounds you,



WOULD YOU ABLE TO SEE THE BACK BY JUST TURN UR HEAD AROUND?
 
If they did some sort of IR head tracking, maybe.

But I think there might be a practical limit of how many monitors you could run. I don't see the point of having monitors behind you that you can't even see. Unless you dedicated an entire room as a game room. That would be a serious project.
 
it'd be pretty real world-like.

i think as the reslution gets wider in Eyefinity, the game just reaches out more to left and right, and eventually reaches 360-degrees

not sure tho!
 
itd be awesome for first person shooter, lets say u can constantly check whos behind u
 
sikanx said:
itd be awesome for first person shooter, lets say u can constantly check whos behind u
Click to expand...

Personally I think it would be easier just to use the current method of whipping the mouse around to see who is behind you instead of jerking your neck out of place. Some online FPS's are intense enough without the added whiplash hazard.
 
Yeah I don't need to consult a chiropractor every once in a while because I jerk my head around causing stress on the neck, just to game. LOL.

Realism ultimately comes down to a certain extent on what is fun and practical.
 
sikanx said:
itd be awesome for first person shooter, lets say u can constantly check whos behind u
Click to expand...

How would that work for a first person shooter? The whole concept of turning around is because its in the first person. Unless you, right now, can see behind you without turning around?
 
The only way I can see having monitors in 360 is that guy w/ the game gun on youtube playing FEAR. He hooked up a nintendo wii mode to the end of a nerf gun, and a 7'' LCD at the end, so you literally point and shoot in the game. A 7'' LCD view limitation could be lifted by projecting all around you. But how much it will cost and who will fully support something like that may not make it worth while to do by yourself.
 
MooCow said:
Yeah I don't need to consult a chiropractor every once in a while because I jerk my head around causing stress on the neck, just to game. LOL.

Realism ultimately comes down to a certain extent on what is fun and practical.
Click to expand...

This. The DigiScents iSmell failed for a reason.
 
SeegsElite said:
How would that work for a first person shooter? The whole concept of turning around is because its in the first person. Unless you, right now, can see behind you without turning around?
Click to expand...

I think somebody else already mentioned there would have to be some sort of head tracking hardware involved to pull this off. So when you turn your head your character is turning ingame.
 
ew1075 said:
I think somebody else already mentioned there would have to be some sort of head tracking hardware involved to pull this off. So when you turn your head your character is turning ingame.
Click to expand...

+1 for this explanation. You'd definitely need some sort of method of tracking the person's head/body movement. Someone could probably ghetto rig something using some Wii controllers if they really wanted to....why not? I've seen Wii controllers pop up all over the place recently (ex. see recent news post about weather lady using one for her broadcast).
 
i think screens should wrap around you to a certain extent but maybe not behind you. i would say its acceptable to have them to 180 degrees. then all that FOV might not look so out of place?
 
SeegsElite said:
How would that work for a first person shooter? The whole concept of turning around is because its in the first person. Unless you, right now, can see behind you without turning around?
Click to expand...

Yes, some, perhaps most humans can infact turn their head around to see behind them, without turning their whole body at the same time. Whipping the mouse around real quick is a workaround so that you don't start running in a different direction when you turn your view, it works well enough that going to the effort of 360deg panels would be a bit silly at the moment. So yeah it'd work, but you'd probably have all kinda of wierd stretching due to the huge FOV.
 
No.

Not unless the game renders to a 3D surface more complex than a frustum plane, your upper limit will be 180 degrees as the width of the projection plane approaches infinity.

Eyefinity is great, but I find the game support lacking. If you keep your rendering to a simple plane, the way it works in 99% of games, then, valuing correct optics and geometry, you are restricted to a flat monitor surface as well. Tilting in those side monitors screws things up because the game renders under the assumption of a flat screen. AMD shows that they understand this, as their Eyefinity setups are usually flat.

The solution is to effectively render to a piece of geometry proportional to your screen setup, side deflection angles included (if you choose to set it up that way, and I see that almost everyone does). I haven't seen many games that are able to do this, but as an example, recently Live for Speed added support for this method.

AMD may have something really cool with Eyefinity, and the devs should support it properly!
 
Why would some kind of head tracking system need to be in place? Games do not work this way. Real life doesn't work this way. You look with your eyes and/or turning your head, then you react by moving your body. The same concept would be instead of moving your body after seeing whats behind you, you look to your front screen and move your mouse. I think this is much more realistic and causes less dizziness, but that is just me. I do think its unpractical to have that many screens though, but I think multiple screens are unpractical for any home gaming use because I have neither the space nor the money for this setup, and I dont want to look like a nerd.

And just for the record, people who are saying you would need a head tracking system, by that logic you would even need one for Eyefinity. But you dont need that type of system... You look at the side screens then move your mouse in the direction you see something. Taking it further, even with one screen you look at the corner of the screen and move your mouse to that direction if you want to move to where you just looked. There is no type of tracking system required.

If I'm wrong, someone please correct me. But I think the OP was misinterpreted. I understand why it could work and be more immersive (is that a word? my spell check says its wrong).


PS: A head tracking device would be more like the old virtual reality games where you wear a head mounted screen/device. This is a different concept in my opinion
 
360 I don't think would be possible. That would require something called a cylindrical mapping which no game engine that I'm aware of uses. The problem with cylindrical mappings is they don't properly represent vertical distances.

The game engine fulstrums all use conical mapping (similar to a lens on a camera) When you stretch the angle really wide, the sides become distorted like a fish-eyed lens. You can mathematically "depinch" a fisheye lens. But this in itself has drawbacks and still only has 180 FOV.
 
So, playing 3rd person MW2, does this mean I could turn around and look myself in the face? :eek:

:D
 
The limit for a first person shooter should be however much you can turn your head without turning your body. The mouse turns the gun/body, your head is....your head.

Of course, you can practically look behind you by turning your head so....sure why not.
 
i was expecting a image to load seeing how there is 2 spaces between his 2 lines.. >_>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top