Infinitap Games

VR is a hot buzz word. What does it mean for games? What does it mean for game developers? Can I start a developer diary off with a cringe worthy B-movie style acting?

You will discover all of the answers in the below video!

Ah, everything is red and dark and blurry! VirtualBoy is scary.

VR can be awesome. But if it's done as a gimmick, it'll suck. Think of the motion control stuff: It could complement a game, but instead devs make/are forced to make gimmicky titles that have to sacrifice gameplay to fulfill some contract's conditions about its use. VR could end up similarly. So, completely ignoring the technical issues, I'm afraid devs will not really work with it, at least at the start of its implementation. I suppose that's what you may also mean with VR not "really being the best fit" with some games. But, yeah, there'll be games that'll be VR pretty much for the VR as a gimmick's sake alone.

What's "bleed" mean in this context?

Last console generation? Yeah, I'd agree, that's nonsense. Technology marches on. Maybe, just maybe this one will stay around for a while, but how could there ever be a "last" one?

That video was so real, it was like I was sitting right in front of you!

I liked the Virtual Boy alright, but it's hard to think of it as VR when it doesn't have any sort of head tracking. Really, the only thing more VR-like about it than other stereoscopic 3D (3-D WorldRunner, 3DS, etc.) is that it blocks out external light. Most games didn't even have a first person perspective.

I hope that Facebook funds some AAA games when Oculus Rift comes out. If we had that combined with strong indie support, I think it could drive decent adoption of the hardware.

You gotta be careful, you can get lost in those virtual worlds and never be able to find your way back to reality!

This video of a guy playing Mirror's Edge on the Oculus Rift really makes me interested to see what it can do: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVdZh03ju6U
That's a pretty fast paced game so wonder how smooth it actually is in person. He doesn't say exactly how he has it set up, just that it took a while to configure everything.

I'm also curious to see how it will be with fatigue and eye strain like you mentioned. From what I know of how the Oculus Rift specifically works, flicker shouldn't be an issue at all since the screens are built in, right? I'm still wondering about things like vergence-accommodation conflicts (your eyes focusing on a "3D" object that appears to change in depth but your eyeballs still converging on a screen that's a flat 2D surface). I don't have any experience with 3D games, but 3D movies in theaters have never failed to make my eyes hurt almost right away, and I think that issue is a big part of the problem. I don't know if it'd be better or worse in a game. There are some dry and technical studies out there investigating the issue, but there doesn't seem to be a solid consensus yet given how new everything is:
http://www.journalofvision.org/content/8/3/33.full
https://secure.pacificu.edu/vpi/publica ... ngetal.pdf
http://www.journalofvision.org/content/11/8/11.full


It feels like we've been hearing about the Oculus Rift forever though. Wikipedia estimates late 2014-early 2015 but who knows because it's Wikipedia!

gagaplex wrote:What's "bleed" mean in this context?

Sorry, I totally forgot where I used it in the video. Can you remind me?

gagaplex wrote:Last console generation? Yeah, I'd agree, that's nonsense. Technology marches on. Maybe, just maybe this one will stay around for a while, but how could there ever be a "last" one?

Even if we didn't need any more processing power (which will never happen), by switching to newer architectures, they can get much better energy efficiency as well as smaller form factors. They always shrink the die on the APU chips they have, but given 10 years, they could do a much better chip.

Plus, if they stop making new consoles, they won't be able to keep selling hardware, which has poor margins at the beginning (except maybe this gen), but can be VERY profitable during the tail of the generation.

ranger_lennier wrote:I hope that Facebook funds some AAA games when Oculus Rift comes out. If we had that combined with strong indie support, I think it could drive decent adoption of the hardware.

I think VR will mostly survive based on strong indie support for the first few years. Facebook would essentially have to devote $100 million for a game development budget to make a game that is designed around VR and probably wouldn't work without it.

The problem is, they would essentially have to write that $100 million off because there is no way the market would be big enough to support the budget of the game. Assuming it's Steam only, they only get 70% of the profits, so they'd need to sell 143 million in revenue. At $50 a pop, that is close to 3 million units at full budget. If there were really NOTHING else, they could hope to get probably about 1/3 market penetration, so they would need 9 million units out there for there to even be a CHANCE to make their money back. I think they will focus on smaller non-AAA experiences that really sell the strengths of the experience.

RightClickSaveAs wrote: I'm also curious to see how it will be with fatigue and eye strain like you mentioned. From what I know of how the Oculus Rift specifically works, flicker shouldn't be an issue at all since the screens are built in, right?

Flicker is not an issue, but there are a host of other issues:
* Ghosting
* Color banding
* Motion sickness - I think this would be pretty rough when playing Mirror's Edge in fist person

With respect to vergence-accommodation, I suspect if you only look forward, it would be better because you know where the player is looking and the display is optimized for that. If you look to the side, I think you may be screwed because they don't have eye tracking. Long term, I think they want to create eye tracking systems, which would hopefully get rid of that problem.

So maybe you won't get eye aches- just motion sickness? hahaha, I'm not sure that's better.

When I get an Oculus Rift,I'm going to get a VirtualBoy emulator and try all my old games that I am too afraid to play on the actual hardware.

Maybe Facebook would worry about losing money funding a AAA VR game, but since they spent two billion dollars on Oculus, presumably they're taking a long term view of this. Gamers make the most sense as early adopters of a VR platform, but it won't happen without compelling content. Losing a few tens of millions of dollars on a game to jump start the market is far better than having your VR product flop right out of the gate.

matt wrote:

gagaplex wrote:What's "bleed" mean in this context?

Sorry, I totally forgot where I used it in the video. Can you remind me?

From 3:15 onwards, about 3D TV: "...or they have high contrast and high contrast, even with the passive glasses that have a ton less bleed than the active ones, there's still some bleed-through..."

Losing a few tens of millions of dollars on a game to jump start the market is far better than having your VR product flop right out of the gate.

I think it's really hard to greenlight a project like that, and they might stand to lose even more than that on a game. Apparently Destiny cost $500 million to make!?!?! Maybe next gen budgets are crazier than I thought. The other problem is that Oculus is probably releasing in the next year, and there is no way they can make a AAA style game between now and launch.

From 3:15 onwards, about 3D TV: "...or they have high contrast and high contrast, even with the passive glasses that have a ton less bleed than the active ones, there's still some bleed-through..."

Oh sorry, right. I mean bleed from the left eye image to the right and vice versa. With active glasses, the screen has to change from one eye to the other at 120 Hz. LCDs can't change that fast, so you get some bleed in from the other eye's image. With passive glasses, I think the polarizing filter isn't perfect, so some light gets through for the other eyes.

The actual term I should have been using is crosstalk. For more information on crosstalk and active vs. passive, you can read this. I read it before I purchased my 3D TV, and it was one of the reasons why I decided to go with the less popular (but better) passive 3D.