Racer v0.9.0 RC3 released

[Ruud]

Get it at http://www.mediafire.com/file/67b1mep0z1evvbh/racer0.9.0_rc3.7z

Changes:
- Reverted SMD camera up orientation, since it sticked to up even if the car was rolling.
- Added 'uniform float2 resolution' parameter for Cg shaders. Used in the motion blur shaders.
- Added theoretical sprung mass weight distribution under Ctrl-9, see also http://www.racer.nl/index.php?jump=reference/carphys.htm#bodymass
- Motion blur on by default; improved by detecting non-moving objects better.

 

[Mr Whippy]

I'm not sure I'd get much from 3D on a little square/rectangle screen.

Even with my 3d glasses here it's only a novelty really. Very little content is really made that makes it worth using considering it's downsides in my experience. Even 3D editing in Max I tend to go back to flat modelling because the 3D experience isn't so well implemented.
I'm sure it gets good with expensive systems but then they are expensive hehe!


I think Oculus type systems for sims from flight to racing will be the thing worth going for by far!

It's 3D *and* you don't get the whole illusion shattered by realising your sat looking at a screen. Your periphery is filled with 3D content too. Turn your head, yep, still 3D.

Complete immersion in the space you are meant to be in. That is gonna be amazing for Racer imo, and a must. I bet almost every game/sim like this will support Oculus type systems in 2 years time!

Dave

 

[Alex Forbin]

nVidia does have some settings which interfere with the Cg shaders, and add some stuff to render a 2nd view with slightly different vertex positions (read: camera offset).
It does need to use heuristics to find out what is 2D and what is 3D, to avoid 2D dials for example to appear at some depth (instead of just at Z=0, right at the physics screen depth, I suppose).

I've been looking at the Sony HMZ-T2 HMD it has 1280x800 OLED screens and is 3D ready.
If the HMZ-T1 is any indication of cost it should run about $800-900 which is less than I paid for my I-glasses years ago. It's resolution wasn't great but the magnetic head tracking was.
Glad to hear you're looking into it, hopefully you will support some low cost alternatives so everyone can play.
I should also mention the Silicon Micro Displays ST 1080, it weighs in at 180g making it much lighter and smaller than the HMZ-T1/T2, it's displays are full 1920x1080 and at a retail price of $799 it's cheaper as well, the only problem is keeping them in stock they still have a large back order log to fill.

Alex Forbin

 

[Mr Whippy]

I think one of the main goals of the Oculus Rift project was to under-cut such systems, mainly to get consumers at the console kinda level buying into them, and thus making wide-stream support and integration in games a reasonable thing for developers to do.

Ie, Ruud has bought into it because chances are we will all buy one, so it's worth his time. Yet they've been around years and Ruud has never bothered, probably because he knows at $1000 none of us will bother buying them, especially if we can use them on only a few products!


Sounds odd but I think it really is a matter of economies of scale and new tech coming together in an enterprise that will see these things cheaper and better than anything else by a big margin, and widely supported, justifying almost anyone with an interest to go buy one

I'm guessing the commercial ones will be near the res you suggest, if not higher still, but in the $250 range!
They are also heavily optimised for game use, so very low latency, and much wider FOV so you really don't notice the 'edges' when you look around with your eyes


Personally I can't wait

Gonna have to crank up the mirror texture resolution so we can actually use mirrors effectively though

Dave

 

[Alex Forbin]

I think one of the main goals of the Oculus Rift project was to under-cut such systems, mainly to get consumers at the console kinda level buying into them, and thus making wide-stream support and integration in games a reasonable thing for developers to do.

Ie, Ruud has bought into it because chances are we will all buy one, so it's worth his time. Yet they've been around years and Ruud has never bothered, probably because he knows at $1000 none of us will bother buying them, especially if we can use them on only a few products!


Sounds odd but I think it really is a matter of economies of scale and new tech coming together in an enterprise that will see these things cheaper and better than anything else by a big margin, and widely supported, justifying almost anyone with an interest to go buy one

I'm guessing the commercial ones will be near the res you suggest, if not higher still, but in the $250 range!
They are also heavily optimised for game use, so very low latency, and much wider FOV so you really don't notice the 'edges' when you look around with your eyes


Personally I can't wait

Gonna have to crank up the mirror texture resolution so we can actually use mirrors effectively though

Dave

I do support Palmer and all he's trying to do, I've been looking for someone to do just what he's doing for years. But I know there have been delays and if someone is looking for a HMD today there are a few available.
The weak FOV was always my problem with my i-glasses, it always felt as though I had one of my old scuba masks on (limited FOV too) over 100 deg will be SO much more immersive. Years ago I used to talk to Jaron Lanier when he was with VPL and the HMD was the main problem with getting VR mainstream, his company had one but it was very primitive and had horrible lag but I still enjoyed it and it made me want VR even more.
I hated "Lawnmower Man" because it gave people a distorted idea of where the industry really was and the disappointment killed VR for years.

Alex Forbin

 

[Mr Whippy]

The 90's VR stuff was good imo, but clearly for people not understanding the strengths/limitations of it then it just appeared as 'crappy' so not much happened with it.

Considering the time that has passed since then it is due a proper re-birth and I really really hope it takes off.

Personally I'd pay £500 for a VR headset that had very high resolution (so it kinda looked like Racer in 1280x720 on my 24" screen and I'd be happy, it doesn't have to be SUPER high res), low lag and a field of view so wide I couldn't really tell there were edges.

There are loads of games and uses for something like that in my opinion. Imagine using Google Street View with one, or just looking at 360 pano's of interesting places in HDR (let it auto-expose etc, it'd feel pretty damn real with high res ones!)

No, it won't replace your 2d screen, or even 3d flat screens, but it's something new that definitely has it's place for plenty of uses for many users I think.


You wouldn't have thought Kinect would sell so well, so imagine a blockbuster game concept with VR support... tens of millions of units! Deffo big business!

Shame the existing VR co's haven't taken the punt as they were in a perfect position to do this too... but I guess like many businesses some just don't innovate or push for new markets as hard as they could/should... hmmmm...

Dave

 

[Alex Forbin]

I agree, it was completely frustrating to see the same cheap hardware with the same high prices with NO innovation year after year.
As for resolution, remember you're dealing with a much higher FOV than your desktop, so
the resolution will appear to be much less. A 3m home theater screen would give you a good idea of what to expect, which is still quite acceptable.

Like you say, the time is right for a rebirth. Think of what smartphone (higher end of course) apps you could develop.
Imagine GTAV with one of these.

It's also misleading I think to tell people this is a great way to watch a movie, even the most ergonomic versions get uncomfortable after a while. Don't bother, spend a few bucks and build a home theater.

Alex Forbin

 

[Mr Whippy]

If they film movies in stereo 3D with wide angle enough to fill say 180deg of your view, then that would be pretty nice use for one.

But imagine the cost in making props/sets to cover 180deg hehe...

Maybe CG stuff would be more viable.

But then we get back to games and Machinima type stuff. Given more time I think we might see a blending of games even more with film.
I remember some of those games that were almost filmed and you had choices as you went along, but they were not so interactive at all really...


I recently bought a 'new' game, Crysis 2, and wasn't all that impressed. Looked great, was an ok story, but deep down the memory of it doesn't sit any more strongly in my mind than those of games like HL1 or HL2 etc.

I think the first games that really use this VR stuff properly alongside some general innovations in story telling, will be pretty damn amazing!

Imagine having Kinect for example looking at your pose, and watching your arms, so you can gesture and point and see 'virtual' arms do the same.
Pick up a gun and aim it, nice...

Actually use doors and climb ladders

It's gonna get pretty interesting I think. Like you say, at LONG last

Dave