cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

2160×1200 Everyone is fine with that?

sarfios
Honored Guest
Hey folks,

Is everyone fine with the final resolution of 2160x1200? I've heard a lot of blahblah, how resolution is not everything in VR, but as owning DK2 right now and having 1920x1080

These 90 hz are the biggest improvement? worth to even consider getting it?

I know a lot of people will start saying how shallow I should be for care for that only but... really not even 1440p? We've waited 3 years for almost for that?

It's clear that in order to adopt the VR from the masses and become a thing in the future it should be more accessible and stuff... but ffs we had 1440p from a mobile PHONE VR back in 2014, but in 2016 we will get less than 1440p for DESKTOP?

WAW

I guess VR won't be ready in the next 2-3 years, when 10/14nm CPU/GPU start popping up and having 4/5k phone displays available.
382 REPLIES 382

shadowfrogger
Heroic Explorer
It would be great if more(at least some) games were developed on PC as the primary platform then ported\scale down to consoles. Companies use to do it that way in the ps1 and before era. The development time between consoles and PC has at least lessened.

PC only titles can be highly successful, but it's hard for money hungry publishers and also indie devs to not consider adding 20% to the game development cost to convert to console and extend the reach of their game to a massive market. That is okay by me, I just wish they spend more money on making a much better PC version with improved features and the standard settings we need. We have to download week 1 mods in so many cases for just the basic settings that can be changed in config files ffs.

Yeah, most genres don't need the cpu processing power, But devs could really focus in on some cpu dependent features if they only had to worry about PC. What would be good if made of VR games used some of the wasted cpu power since devs know everyone has a decent quad-core. I doubt it however since it's something devs don't normally do and I'm not entirely sure what you could do for the FPS genre with extra CPU.

Call of Duty is a bit like the Transformer movies(since infinity ward left), there is a market for that type of boring block buster stuff. If people want that, they have needs too. Yes it's better if companies didn't look at the current market and base a game from that instead of just doing a great game
Visit my amateur homegrown indie game company website! http://www.gaming-disorder.com/

Anonymous
Not applicable
Here we go: Just release: http://www.tomshardware.com/news/unreal ... 29973.html

So no one cares, huh :P?

RonsonPL
Heroic Explorer
"Mradr" wrote:
Here we go: Just release: http://www.tomshardware.com/news/unreal ... 29973.html

So no one cares, huh :P?


Please point me to the page you're referring to, because I've read the text on the linked page and found nothing that would say anyone cares about proper PC VR.
Animation aids are good, but the rest... some not important stuff about lighting, shadows, automatical weathering and dirt accumulation in a scene, some particles stuff, and obvious steps toward VR support, of course with mobile at least equally important for Epic, if not more.

I didn't read all that 70 pages though. 😉
Not an Oculus hater, but not a fan anymore. Still lots of respect for the team-Carmack, Abrash. Oculus is driven by big corporation principles now. That brings painful effects already, more to come in the future. This is not the Oculus I once cheered for.

RonsonPL
Heroic Explorer
Meanwhile:

months ago: Palmer Luckey:
"We can not have any higher resolution, since higher res means even worse SDE"

today:

John Carmack:
adoroo asked: I can´t stand pixelation! Please tell us that there is no more the "screen door effect
John Carmack's response: On GearVR? Try de focusing it a bit. Otherwise, you may need to wait for 4k displays."

https://twitter.com/ID_AA_Carmack/statu ... 4684452864

Could it be:
Palmer said what he said because he was taught well about how PR works and he follows the guides he was thought.
John said what he said, because he, as he often does, disregarded the strict and stiff orders from PR/Facebook bosses?
?
If I had to bet on one of two options, I would bet that Palmer didn't lie. But I do think the chances for scenario above are higher than 0%, so worth a thought.
I don't think John would ever mixed SDE with pixelation due to lower res. That guy clearly wrote "SDE". John would not missed it IMHO. Not a chance.
Not an Oculus hater, but not a fan anymore. Still lots of respect for the team-Carmack, Abrash. Oculus is driven by big corporation principles now. That brings painful effects already, more to come in the future. This is not the Oculus I once cheered for.

r00x
Adventurer
I'm not sure how to interpret Palmer's comment on SDE really. It seems counter-intuitive that raising resolution would increase SDE for a given screen size. True, pixel density and pixel pitch are distinct from each other, but it can't be true of all displays that the pixel pitch shrinks more than the increased density would compensate for.

It may therefore be that on *some* of the panels they were testing, higher-res models actually exhibited worse SDE because the pixels were of such a fine pitch (i.e. lots of dead space between them, even though there were more pixels). The only ways to overcome this would be:


  • Use a lower-res panel with larger pixel pitch to reduce SDE

  • Use a higher-res panel and take measures to mask SDE (which I believe is their approach for CV1 by putting a filter in front of the display. You can put a matte screen protector/film on the DK2 panel to reduce SDE in the same way.)

  • Find/wait for market to produce/pay for design and production of a panel of higher res but with a favourable, large pixel pitch for minimal SDE

  • Use a higher-res panel that is of *such* high res that any SDE issues are insignificant (there are simply too many pixels for the grid to be visible to the eye, even if the pixel pitch is very small compared to the dead area on the panel). This would likely necessitate 4K panels as a starting point, as implied by John Carmack.

MrMonkeybat
Explorer
All displays with sub pixels have SDE pentile sub pixels are the worse. Cresent Bay and Vive just reduce it by have optics that blur them together a bit. I would not take what Palmer says as gospel go back far enough and you can find quotes from him saying OLED is not appropriate for VR and position tracking is not necessary.

Anonymous
Not applicable
r00x is mostly right though but I will throw in my exp with higher resolution and the current refresh rate from a few HMD I've tested. It seems that SDE is worst as you increase resolution with in the same size box. You don't see this if you are just looking at a 4k phone, but up close with lenses it seem to show. I have a feeling it is do to the dead space between the pixels as well and that it is increasing do to the fact the eye was catching the pixels as they change and where the pixels broke up at that created "waves" making the SDE show just as clear as if I was on the DK2 screen. The image quality went up for sure, but the SDE was still there.

Also, as the screen quality increase, the less it felt fluid. Now, they were using a 60hz screen, so that might have been it, but it sure felt weird as I moved my head and saw the "waves" follow by a little bit of "lag".

So there is something about it, but I'm not sure as that subject is above my head at that point. I like to have a higher resolution, and I think they can do it once hardware catches up, but unless they can fix that ~ I am sure people would cry that the SDE was still there. Also, didn't they say they would need something like 24k by 24k just to remove the SDE to the point it wasn't noticeable? xD That's crazy!

danknugz
Superstar
SDE will always be an issue because it is a problem inherent of using lenses and putting your eyes so close to the screen. It is a fundamentally flawed design IMO. Yes I guess you could say wait for 24K pixelspace, but in reality, VR will continue to suffer from SDE and other health related issues stemming from having your eyes so close to such a rapidly refreshing/strobing screen.

Only when VR progresses past using lenses, for example something like a helmet based HMD with a much larger screen that sits 3 or 4 inches from your eyes and still covers your entire FOV without using lenses, will things like SDE be manageable.
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing on forums?

Anonymous
Not applicable
"danknugz" wrote:
SDE will always be an issue because it is a problem inherent of using lenses and putting your eyes so close to the screen. It is a fundamentally flawed design IMO. Yes I guess you could say wait for 24K pixelspace, but in reality, VR will continue to suffer from SDE and other health related issues stemming from having your eyes so close to such a rapidly refreshing/strobing screen.



CV3-5 might have the answer to help lower it a bit as we move on to custom flexible screens that might allow us to increase FOV while decreasing the need from the lenses as it bends the image around our eyes instead, but even then ~ idk ~ I don't think we will ever be "happy" about it, but as things continue going forward ~ they will get better and I think that's the answer to the question.

YoLolo69
Trustee
Screens in VR devices are placeholder for future technologies coming like projecting directly on eyes. All problem resolved, complete FOV, eyes tracking, real focus, etc. I don't expect to see in ten years an Oculus device using same screen technology 24K or upper. At that time we will laugh when we will see a CV1 in a museum 😉

“Dreams feel real while we are in them, it's only when we wake up that we realize something was strange.” - Dom Cobb

"Be careful, if you are killed in real life you die in VR too." - TD_4242

I7 10700K,  RTX 3070, 32GB DDR4 3200Mhz, Oculus Rift CV1