It's interesting how a lot of commenters are writing "Relativity" instead of "Relativty". I also fell for this at first.
Makes it easy to mistype the url, if you were to visit it later on.
Relativty – An open-source VR headset
51–60 of 235 posts
Re: Relativty – An open-source VR headset
#52Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can we just go back to calling resolutions by their height?
That doesn’t really help, as while typically it’s assumed the aspect ratio is 16:9, that’s not always true, making such a scheme ambiguous. Listing vertical resolution with aspect ratio is fairly sane, though. Or use standardized specific resolutions (e.g. FHD, QHD, 4K UHD).
These specifications don't mean anything for a lot of people. To me they sound like marketing buzzwords that companies use to try to sell me inferior products. I'd much rather have them say 2k than any of the "FHD" abbreviations.
Re: Relativty – An open-source VR headset
#53Earlier quoted context omitted.
That was never a thing so we can't go back to it. A resolution is 2 dimensional height + aspect ratio works. But for all the popular resolutions we have a standardized short form like FHD/QHD/XGA/VGA but these obviously cant cover every existing resolution. Like for example the one from the article 1440p 1:1 there is no standardized name for it.
When widescreen LCDs were starting to replace 4:3 LCDs and CRTs, the screens were described as 720p, 1080i, etc. It wasn't until 4k was a thing that screens were described by their width instead of height.
The "p" is kinda interesting because it used to convey useful extra information (presence of Progressive Scan), but now that's simply a given in almost every context. So the "p" has sort of degraded into nothing more than a signifier that someone is writing about resolution.
"c" could mean Colour. Bob uses a c2160p monitor!
Re: Relativty – An open-source VR headset
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
Having 1440p screens would have been great two years ago. The baseline currently is Index with 1700ish vertical pixels, and competitors such as HP and Pimax have pushed past the "4K" (2160+) pixel mark. Disclaimer: I'm a sim game enthusiast and don't play any titles where the game designer can just change the gameplay mechanics and UI to work on screens with a low PPD.
> Disclaimer: I'm a sim game enthusiast and don't play any titles where the game designer can just change the gameplay mechanics and UI to work on screens with a low PPD. I'm sorry but that sounds like pure snobbery. With the same PC running the game, and only changing the display, any game can be adapted to anything by changing gameplay mechanics and UI.
Then it's no longer a systems-level simulation but an arcade game with a sim-like physics.
However, you are correct in the sense that most racing and flight sim folks tend to be entitled snobs who have spare money to throw around. Many have spent money on a RTX2080 Ti card when the non-titan edition could not run games in VR at high enough frame rates. Most are going to be upgrading to a 3080 as soon as it comes out this fall.
Re: Relativty – An open-source VR headset
#55Earlier quoted context omitted.
That doesn’t really help, as while typically it’s assumed the aspect ratio is 16:9, that’s not always true, making such a scheme ambiguous. Listing vertical resolution with aspect ratio is fairly sane, though. Or use standardized specific resolutions (e.g. FHD, QHD, 4K UHD).
These specifications don't mean anything for a lot of people. To me they sound like marketing buzzwords that companies use to try to sell me inferior products. I'd much rather have them say 2k than any of the "FHD" abbreviations.
At least FHD almost universally means 1920×1080 and is googlable. This is less true for QHD / QHD+, unfortunately.
Re: Relativty – An open-source VR headset
#56Can I point out, that's a nice domain name.
Re: Relativty – An open-source VR headset
#57This might be a fun weekend project to work on, but cannot be built for $200. The displays alone (and their driver PCB that accepts DisplayPort) cost $195. They are also not 2K but rather 1440x1440 (or 2.0736M pixels). Maybe the displays were cheaper when they built this. They also hookup a 6-axis tracking chip (MPU-6050) to an Arduino board and feed it to a PC via usb. Even if tracking was working perfectly, this wo…
I think the (repeated) note that you can downscale to 1080p displays is how you are supposed to do it under $200. They note themselves these displays are $150-$190 so it's not like they are hiding something.
Re: Relativty – An open-source VR headset
#58Good luck to them, and I've bookmarked it to keep tabs on it in future, but that is an infuriating and in my opinion - very poor - choice of brand name.
I agree that "relativity" isn't a great name: it's a mouthful at 5 syllables, and I don't see a logical connection between the name and the product. But I don't understand why the name would be infuriating. Can you explain?
The name is "Relativty" without the last 'i'
That's the issue. It's an awkward 4 syllables.
Re: Relativty – An open-source VR headset
#59Ever since Facebook bought Oculus I've really hoped something like this would spring up. I really really want it to succeed and would be happy to back it on Kickstarter or similar. How do we ensure that these projects don't end up being bought out by Facebook or Google?
I have mixed feelings about the Oculus and FB’s ownership. I would like an open platform but I appreciate both the more than adequate Oculus hardware and some excellent VR experiences created by both Oculus and many 3rd parties. I might still buy a manufactured open platform system, depending on available experiences. I would also definitely buy an “Oculus 2” that had a higher resolution screen and slightly lighter w…
You mean 3? We're already on Oculus' second generation.
Re: Relativty – An open-source VR headset
#60Can I point out, that's a nice domain name.
Did you notice it's missing the final 'i'?