I think there's actually been a resurgence of shared screen gaming, it's just in the indie game market (Towerfall, Nidhogg, Samurai Gunn, Mercenary Kings, etc.)
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Microsoft has purchased $100-150 million worth of Agumented Reality patents
- Thread starter DieH@rd
- Start date
I think there's actually been a resurgence of shared screen gaming, it's just in the indie game market (Towerfall, Nidhogg, Samurai Gunn, Mercenary Kings, etc.)
ChosenPredator
Banned
I've been seeing alot of the Cortana in your room suggested that would be pretty neat
1.21Gigawatts
Banned
But why not use the superior actual reality instead of a video feed of the actual reality?
Why AR and VR in the same device? Only because the abbreviations sound similar?
Phire Phox
Banned
Nintendo to announce Virtual Boy 2 in the coming days
Not surprised, AR has more daily-life applications than VR and MS is way more than just gaming.
I'm with you.
There are many games being released that could have a more immersive experience with simple effects such as atmospheric, color temperature, induced speed, and seemingly projected visualizations.
With Kinect maybe it would allow you to interact with those visualizations. Just imagine something simple such as a Tetris-like puzzle game that looks like its right in front of you in your living room and you're moving pieces with your hands.
I keep imagining it with Forza Horizon 2, with its rumored weather system on top of the day and night cycles, and using the camera outside your car. It could add a layer of color to the room, give a greater sense of induced speed, and add atmospheric effects like rain and dust.
Or with Halo it could look like bullets and laser shots are going right by you on top of atmospheric effects, or even provide some sense of peripheral vision. HUD displays would be neat.
I think there are additional applications such as watching movies/TV and setting a mood in your room with simple color changes.
Whatever comes of it, I see room for both VR and AR. Not sure why there are detractors on either side.
I'm with you.
There are many games being released that could have a more immersive experience with simple effects such as atmospheric, color temperature, induced speed, and seemingly projected visualizations.
With Kinect maybe it would allow you to interact with those visualizations. Just imagine something simple such as a Tetris-like puzzle game that looks like its right in front of you in your living room and you're moving pieces with your hands.
I keep imagining it with Forza Horizon 2, with its rumored weather system on top of the day and night cycles, and using the camera outside your car. It could add a layer of color to the room, give a greater sense of induced speed, and add atmospheric effects like rain and dust.
Or with Halo it could look like bullets and laser shots are going right by you on top of atmospheric effects, or even provide some sense of peripheral vision. HUD displays would be neat.
I think there are additional applications such as watching movies/TV and setting a mood in your room with simple color changes.
Whatever comes of it, I see room for both VR and AR. Not sure why there are detractors on either side.
Yes, HUDs like that are a first step, but I think there's a lot of distance between them and something you can comfortably wear and interact with.
KoopaTheCasual
Junior Member
It's more than that even. With Facebook pushing VR, and Google pushing AR, we're looking at an trans-industry push for the new media form. Pretty exciting to see which catches on first/more.
seentursch
Member
VR is obviously much more immersive, but I don't know how many games I personally feel I could play with it. AR seems to have more broad applications that just about any game could use.Turning my TV into illumiroom or projecting 3D images like water splashing on the glasses could be useful in any game. If they make it affordable and lightweight I could see it working well.
SmokedMeat
Gamer™
So AR is basically what we've seen with 3DS and Vita? Pasting a game in my world? Don't see how that's nearly as awesome as me being placed in the game's world.
How though? That just doesn't make sense to me how we will multitask between both unless your talking 20 to 30 years in the future maybe.
cough Gaikai cough
soulassssns
Banned
There are a number of major tech hurdles to overcome in wearable computing generally, but the biggest one for AR is battery life. You need lightweight batteries that are very small and have a good life - turn on video & wifi on Glass and you get about 30-45 mins life.
This isn't an 'ideal' to aim for like wireless for VT - it's essential for AR.
Regarding applications, while I can see some for gaming it's most likely going to start in professional environments like logistics, healthcare, manufacturing & tourism (art gallery & museum guides).
This isn't an 'ideal' to aim for like wireless for VT - it's essential for AR.
Regarding applications, while I can see some for gaming it's most likely going to start in professional environments like logistics, healthcare, manufacturing & tourism (art gallery & museum guides).
soulassssns
Banned
Should have guessed this is how MS would react. Buy patents.
Lol. If you look at the history of Sony's research you find it is the result of innovation yes.
Lol. If you look at the history of Sony's research you find it is the result of innovation yes.
Well, I get the virtual space interaction being a ways off in general. Wouldn't that be more inline with holographic and or laser projection with tracking style technology though? AR, to me, just seems like adding a hud/UI overlay and wants to be incorporated into other technologies depending on what the desired end user effect is supposed to be.
Edit: Laser projection/tracking kind of like this being a fledgling step.
BRocknRolla
Member
Very curious to see if we'll see a VR/AR split. I'm not sold by either idea as it stands, but if Google and MS are pushing AR while people like FB, Sony, and Valve push VR, it would be interesting to see where tech goes. Obviously AR seems like the sort of thing that's only tertiarily related to gaming, but I'm more curious about the big picture, societal implications of which tech gets more adoption.
InaudibleWhispa
Member
That's the latency of Kinect tracking a whole human body by creating a 42 joint skeleton mesh. If they were to have an AR or VR solution, they would simple track IR LED's in the VR/AR hardware for head tracking, like Morpheus and Oculus are doing. The camera tracks at 30fps at 1080p. I doubt that couldn't be improved upon at lower resolutions.
As for leg and arm tracking using Kinect's body tracking software, there would be slight lag there, though it might be ultimately worth the tradeoff over a static body. Like the guy said at the Morpheus announcement, they found that clipping a hand through a wall was oddly more immersive than having the arm bend and stop at the wall, while your arm is straight, breaking the immersion. Lag for your head would be sickening (literally), but for something purely visual like a foot or an arm, I'd take it over nothing.
Microsoft invests significantly more in R&D than Sony. $10.4 billion last year, 3rd highest in the world behind Volkswagen and Samsung. The notion that Microsoft can't be bothered to innovate and just buys patents is patently (lol) laughable.
Agreed 100%. Show and prove. I'm not excited at all by any of this right now.
derExperte
Member
Because that's all they ever do and their R&D departments that dwarf a lot of other tech companies are nothing but a myth, right?
Alx
Member
This would be so awesome on an airplane were the windows are replaced by screens and cameras. I would totally recreate the Twilight Zone episode with the fucking gremlin on the airplane wing if I owned an airline. Would be hilarious...
that shit made me afraid of flying as a kid and I would kill anyone who did this to me!
Green Yoshi
Member
It's not just that kind of interaction though. The UI of the device itself and the apps it runs are also hard. I probably use Siri more than most but it can be infuriating, and that has an extremely responsive touch screen attached.
SlickShoesRUCrazy
Member
imo that is were the AR glasses come in. Illumniroom in their proof of concept stage wasn't feasible for the mass market.
jimbobsmells
Member
Yeah it seems like a lot of people are confused between the two.
Dee Dah Dave
Member
I'm interested in both techs. They are very different from each other although share similarities and each has the potential to be cool in it's own right.
flyinpiranha
Member
What are you even getting at? Because they sound the same? Are you trying to be insulting? No, it's not because they sound similar it's because until holographic projection technology is good enough to where you don't need to look at a screen in order to see it (think 3DS/Vita/iPad and NOT just Google Glass) there isn't much that can move forward outside of a small tiny screen in your glasses (like Google Glass), unless of course you fix VR with a camera for AR. See the link below.
EDIT: and your first sentence "But why not use the superior actual reality instead of a video feed of the actual reality?". Show me a device that does this. In order to "overlay" there needs to be a screen whether transparent or not that will display the correct correlation from your eye to where it "would" be. Almost every AR tech we have now involves viewing the 'world' through screen, how else would the software be able to display?
I'm not developing the software, so I don't know. There are people with DevKit1 for OR doing this with webcams. There's not really a point in multitasking between the two, but in the immediate future AR is going to be goggles with a screen, VR is goggles with a screen, they are very DIFFERENT ideals but with very SIMILAR technology involved.
Look here: AR done with (OMG) VR goggles: http://ovrvision.com/
Maybe some. Not me. See the above link. AR done with VR goggles. I find it fucking hilarious people are like 'but that's a screen, you're just looking at a screen" .... what do you think the 3DS/Vita/iPad versions of AR are?
What is the latency of head tracking with Kinect? Not full body but just head tracking?
Again, I agree. Something about fusing tech and reality. I love AR.
Exactly. Or to have better hardware inside of their console.
I agree. Why people would defend this company is beyond me.
Why people would have such a hardon against them is beyond me.
It's less defending and more like pointing out people's trolling/stupidity. I don't care what you think of MS, but to claim that they've never innovated and the only way for them to possibly get into the AR/VR market is to buy other company's patents and technology is just moronic.
davepoobond
you can't put a price on sparks
I think AR might be more advanced than VR. But AR and VR put together would basically be holodecks
ScepticMatt
Member
There weren't, but I can find some for you. Here you go:
Paper 1 (requires acadmic login): http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=4811025
Paper 2 (free): https://www.cs.unc.edu/cms/publications/dissertations/jerald.pdf
John Carmack comment:
http://www.altdevblogaday.com/2013/02/22/latency-mitigation-strategies/
Kinect alone has a latency of 60ms, if leaked specs are anything to go by:
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-durango-kinect-specs-leak
So even though body motion is less latency dependent than head-tracking, it would still be way too high.
/thread
serversurfer
Member
Just to pick a nit, there are three degrees of rotational freedom yaw, pitch, and roll which are measured by the gyros. There are also three degrees of translational freedom movement along the x, y, and z planes which are measured by accelerometers. I'm pretty sure DK1 had both, but the accelerometers were ignored by most devs for several reasons, not the least of which being, inverse kinematics is hard to do accurately.
Back on topic, I doubt 30 Hz is often enough to get error correction from the camera, as I suspect there's a reason Sony bumped their camera from 60 Hz to 120 Hz. Maybe the latency and accuracy tolerances are more forgiving with AR vs. VR though. It'd be pretty funny if MS needed to ship a second camera to track Forteleza.
Sony is researching both. They had a presentation a year go showing a vita being used to map objects onto the real world.
SlickShoesRUCrazy
Member
You know, i use to believe that microsoft was always late to the party also, but if you really look at it, their issue in many cases is being early to the party and leaving before anybody gets there....
They create innovative products, stagnate, fail to react to competition, and take too long to respond to competition.
The two most obvious markets in the last 8 years roughly being smartphones and tablets.
That's not to say they aren't late to the party sometimes, all companies are.
Similar threads
- x2