11–20 of 42 posts
The craziest part is that this is what it can do _before many people even have it in their hands_. The potential for this tech (outside of gaming even) is pretty far-reaching.
So glad that Jeri was able to get this thing to fruition this go-around amid the pandemic and all of the logistic problems that has created for creating new tech.
I think, AR like this is the future of gaming. VR is a cool idea, but it falls short on so many levels. It looks cool to go into a space that isn't there, but you always have issues with the mismatch of your surroundings and the VR world. Playing Xing, and the recent Myst remake is awesome on desktop, but very tiresome on VR. The haptics are obviously not there and either you can't really walk where you need to go or…
I honestly don't really think it will become a household thing until they develop black-mirror-type contact lenses.
Could we put the reflector on a wall, blow it up, and use it as a window with virtual screens behind it to create a "multi-monitor" set-up like others are trying out in VR right now? Or do the tracking markers have a limitation in how big a rectangle they can follow?
> The resolution is a modest 1280 by 720p > It has a 110-degree field of view With that big of a field of view, and that low of a resolution, I don't think you'd be happy with reading text. But I'm just guessing.
I mean, I don't typically read with the corner of my eye. The eye saccades are relatively central.
I think, AR like this is the future of gaming. VR is a cool idea, but it falls short on so many levels. It looks cool to go into a space that isn't there, but you always have issues with the mismatch of your surroundings and the VR world. Playing Xing, and the recent Myst remake is awesome on desktop, but very tiresome on VR. The haptics are obviously not there and either you can't really walk where you need to go or…
And the motion sickness, ugh. I'm not prone to motion sickness, but for some reason the subtle delays really affect me. I don't quite feel sick necessarily, but if I do VR for about 10 minutes, I feel just kinda off for about 3-5 hours afterwards. It's not a good feeling. I honestly don't really think it will become a household thing until they develop black-mirror-type contact lenses.
I think, AR like this is the future of gaming. VR is a cool idea, but it falls short on so many levels. It looks cool to go into a space that isn't there, but you always have issues with the mismatch of your surroundings and the VR world. Playing Xing, and the recent Myst remake is awesome on desktop, but very tiresome on VR. The haptics are obviously not there and either you can't really walk where you need to go or…
So, not being wrong doesn't necessarily mean you are right. There is a chance the vr world lights up. Hard to really say.
I really don’t think people appreciate the technology of a retro reflective game surface and individual viewers. The concept that everyone gets to look at the game board from their own perspective is simultaneously “of course” and completely unintuitive to folks who are thinking “computer game.” I am not sure why this is but so often the comment from people who see the glasses for the first time is “Wow! I really didn’t know what to expect I guess, this is AMAZING!”
After it is out there, and people have them in their hands, I expect WoC to wake up and say “Holy crap, we could do MtG tournaments with this without renting a venue.” And I give Jeri a lot of credit for holding on to her vision of AR on game boards. That got out of her control at CastAR but here I think it is going to ship as envisioned and be marvelous.
Could we put the reflector on a wall, blow it up, and use it as a window with virtual screens behind it to create a "multi-monitor" set-up like others are trying out in VR right now? Or do the tracking markers have a limitation in how big a rectangle they can follow?
As an anecdote, the CEO of tilt five wrote the guidance software for the Astra rocket that went sideways when an engine quit upon takeoff.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is a different image per eye, so much more precise than that
You don't need perfect separation to get a good stereo effect. My son bought a pack of red-blue 3d glasses and we were looking at anaglyphic images online and enjoying them even though the images weren't perfectly clean. In 3-d movies (Toy Story 3d) there are places where an isolated really bright object shows through cross channels and there some double imaging but it doesn't break the 3d. These work for most people…
That being said, circular polarization off of a retro reflective screen is one of the two state of the art ways of doing step stereo 3d: if you saw Avatar in a modern theater, there's a good chance that was used, so crosstalk should be minimal and much better than with an anaglyph.
[edit]
I should also note that circular polarization is different from the linear polarization that was used e.g. in Disney attractions in the '90s (and thus still used in some of the older attractions). With linear polarization if you tilt your head 45 degrees to one side or the other you will get an even mix of the L/R channels in each eye. Circular polarization does not have that issue.
Though it seems to me with the projector originating from the same plane as the glasses, circular polarization would be redundant. I'm sure the engineers there know more than someone who dropped out of physics after flunking the optics lab though :)