VR is the thing you want - Monitors is so last century

[MarkDH 234]

This is one of them. China is apparently very hot for VR and is big on breaking the 4k HMD barrier  https://vrworld.com/2016/08/31/meet-first-4k-vr-headset/

 

Ah okay. Actually only 2K but still a big improvement.

[HiFlyer 9,358]

Ah okay. Actually only 2K but still a big improvement.

 

Another approach to the problem is this: https://www.technologyreview.com/s/601941/nvidias-eye-tracking-tech-could-revolutionize-virtual-reality/

[PaulFWatts 100]

Sounds good, can you point to this?

 

 

Hi Mark,

 

Do a Google search "4K VR" and you can read a multitude of articles on this.  There are already a few manufacturers who have already brought them to market.

 

Kind regards

[MarkDH 234]

Another approach to the problem is this: https://www.technologyreview.com/s/601941/nvidias-eye-tracking-tech-could-revolutionize-virtual-reality/

 

Yes, I would say this is definitely the most promising technology. Mostly because it scales well - given that the hi-resolution image is a fixed size regardless of display size, you can go almost arbitrarily big. In fact I recall reading about a room-sized version of this in Howard Rheingold's book Virtual Reality. That would have been in 1991, so I guess it's taken a quarter century for the technology to catch up!

Do a Google search "4K VR" and you can read a multitude of articles on this.  There are already a few manufacturers who have already brought them to market.

 

All the ones I could find either used 4K displays divided in two or twin 2K displays. Those are '4K displays' only in the marketing hype! And don't forget, some of these displays (like the Star VR) are trading resolution for a wider FOV. At teh end of the day, the Star VR will use a 4K display but will have resolution about the same as the Rift. So it's a different compromise - fuzzy display but proper VR FOV. I'm not knocking any of these things, but they're still just increments on the way to a truly compelling experience.

[PaulFWatts 100]

Yes, I would say this is definitely the most promising technology. Mostly because it scales well - given that the hi-resolution image is a fixed size regardless of display size, you can go almost arbitrarily big. In fact I recall reading about a room-sized version of this in Howard Rheingold's book Virtual Reality. That would have been in 1991, so I guess it's taken a quarter century for the technology to catch up!

 

All the ones I could find either used 4K displays divided in two or twin 2K displays. Those are '4K displays' only in the marketing hype!

 

 

Hi Mark,

 

This is why I said in my original post "That 4K is on the horizon" and why I am not rushing out to buy now.

 

When one of the "name" brands develops true 4K then I will be putting my money down.

 

Kind regards

[MarkDH 234]

This is why I said in my original post "That 4K is on the horizon"

 

Yes, fair enough

[HiFlyer 9,358]

For somebody who is in no way, shape or form ready (for whatever reason) to pay current prices for an Oculus or Vive, but is curious and fairly tech-savvy, you might be able to use your phone as a HMD and play VR through your computer via RiftCat. https://riftcat.com/vridge

 

 

 

Might be a good way to dip a toe into VR, and yes, it will work with FSX and Flyinside. (depending on your phone and computer)

 

 

[Alpine Scenery 1,609]

How much different is VR from a proper 3D Projector setup?

Seems like the 3D on a projector would be better due to the higher resolution?

 

I have a Benq w7000 I use in 3D with a 100" screen sometimes, it is the best way to fly when your eyes can handle it, but it's not something I'd do every single flight.

[HiFlyer 9,358]

How much different is VR from a proper 3D Projector setup?

Seems like the 3D on a projector would be better due to the higher resolution?

 

I have a Benq w7000 I use in 3D with a 100" screen sometimes, it is the best way to fly when your eyes can handle it, but it's not something I'd do every single flight.

 

Essentially the difference would be presence and immersion.

 

The contrast between viewing the 3D world through a viewport, and actually being in that world. 

 

Probably the next best thing to having a home cockpit.

[Alpine Scenery 1,609]

But I get 1080p in 3D on a projector and I don't even notice wearing the glasses (have glasses that float on my face pretty much).

 

VR is like lower res and some people get tunnel effect where there mind knows  they are looking through glasses?

 

No?

[HiFlyer 9,358]

But I get 1080p in 3D on a projector and I don't even notice wearing the glasses (have glasses that float on my face pretty much).

 

VR is like lower res and some people get tunnel effect where there mind knows  they are looking through glasses?

 

No?

 

Its kind of an apples and oranges comparison. I've had 3D glasses before, in fact everyone in the family had their own pair! They were cool, and the 3D was good, but in the end, you were still in a room. A wall or something on one side, possibly an interested dog on the other...... A sleeping cat on your keyboard......

 

You are in your home.

 

In VR, its completely different. Your home disappears and you're completely surrounded and immersed in the simulated world. The dog is gone, the room has been replaced..... I've even taken a quick sip of soda and almost placed it on the non-existent console of my Starship before catching myself.

 

I've gotten up and walked around the inside of my ship and craned my neck to look out the windows..... (watch out for the stairs)

 

Another thing is the sense of scale. On your computer screen, that mile long starbase is just another interestingly shaped game object. In VR, that damn thing is A-MILE-LONG!! 

 

You skim close to a sun and crane your head waaaaaaaaay back to look up at the humongous size of it stretching nearly unimaginably far into the distance......

 

Its just not the same, and you really have to see it to understand. Is the resolution a problem? Yeah, it could be better, but there are definitely compensations, and those are presence and immersion.

 

And scale!!

 

[scotchegg 4,186]

For me (as I'm sure with many), it's just a question of when. Could anyone give, or redirect to, a brief "state of the nation" about VR in 2016 / 17?

[Alpine Scenery 1,609]

Yah, I think I agree with "when" more than "now". It's not ready yet, I won't be satisfied with the current setups.

[HiFlyer 9,358]

For me (as I'm sure with many), it's just a question of when. Could anyone give, or redirect to, a brief "state of the nation" about VR in 2016 / 17?

 

Well there is the previously mentioned "4K" VR

 

And, there's wireless VR: https://www.engadget.com/2016/10/07/oculus-santa-cruz-headset-impressions/

 

[PaulFWatts 100]

Wireless VR would be fantastic however enormous bandwidth would be required for 4K per eye (which is where I hope VR is heading).

 

Not sure if current wireless technologies could handle this but who knows in a few years time.