First person shooters suck a lot [and it's hard to innovate]
1–6 of 6 posts
Re: First person shooters suck a lot [and it's hard to innovate]
#2Re: First person shooters suck a lot [and it's hard to innovate]
#3Re: First person shooters suck a lot [and it's hard to innovate]
#4I couldn't easily find a simple introductory paragraph giving me the gist of what it was. Even after watching the video, I could not figure out what it is.
So here is what I imagined it to be:
Laser tag with camera equipped phones. You wear this coded tag which can be recognized from a decent variety of incidence angles. When you "fire", your camera takes a photo, the software identifies if the patch is within a certain zone and updates some central database with who got shot, how near the hot spot and the target gets points taken off. If you die, you get notified.
I would have gone with a color patch on a white t-shirt - more robust detection.
Re: First person shooters suck a lot [and it's hard to innovate]
#5linkbait for some game. and apparent comment spam from http://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=camilosoto
about linkbait, what's wrong with linkbait?
Re: First person shooters suck a lot [and it's hard to innovate]
#6I have to say, it was remarkably hard for me to figure out WHAT this was. I couldn't easily find a simple introductory paragraph giving me the gist of what it was. Even after watching the video, I could not figure out what it is. So here is what I imagined it to be: Laser tag with camera equipped phones. You wear this coded tag which can be recognized from a decent variety of incidence angles. When you "fire", your c…
Every one got is own tag: and camera don't takes the photos, it's in real time in the video streaming :)
about color patch, no, it's not a more robust detection and can generate far more fake positive. It's one year we are working on it in six people, so we know a little about this stuff ;)