But don't you still see your nose when wearing a HMD?
The parts closest to your eyes, but not the tip, I'm guessing. If it IS like wearing ski goggles with blinders on.
But don't you still see your nose when wearing a HMD?
"Pre-order now and get a day one VR nose job!" -ubisoft
Yea, that's a good question. I don't have an HMD to test out, but it'd be great if somebody did. I would guess that the FoV should definitely allow to at least see that far to our inside(while looking straight ahead).But don't you still see your nose when wearing a HMD? Or is it blocked off? In which case you'd actually want the inside of the nose section of the HMD to be painted - you want to see it out of the corner of your eye, not in the screen.
The parts closest to your eyes, but not the tip, I'm guessing. If it IS like wearing ski goggles with blinders on.
Some of the subjects played games containing the virtual nose, while others played standard versions. They were not told that the nose was there.
"Surprisingly, subjects did not notice the nasum virtualis while they were playing the games, and they were incredulous when its presence was revealed to them later in debriefings," Whittinghill said.
Great. I can't escape my big nose in real life being in my field of view, and now you all are invading my VR life!!!!!
Sounds pretty neat actually. Maybe an on/off for FPS games?
Edit: They're calling it "Nasum Virtualis". That's so cool and scientific! Lol
But don't you still see your nose when wearing a HMD? Or is it blocked off? In which case you'd actually want the inside of the nose section of the HMD to be painted - you want to see it out of the corner of your eye, not in the screen.
Interesting, but 2.2 seconds?
Then you'd smell horrible.
Great. I can't escape my big nose in real life being in my field of view, and now you all are invading my VR life!!!!!
I find it interesting that I am never conscious of seeing my nose when I look straight forward, but according to the article that's just because my brain is tuning it out. And apparently you aren't conscious of the nasum virtualis either.
Yea, that's a pretty useless improvement that could easily be a margin of error. But I think it says more about the experience/software than it does about the effectiveness of this technique.Interesting, but 2.2 seconds?
Yea, that's a pretty useless improvement that could easily be a margin of error. But I think it says more about the experience/software than it does about the effectiveness of this technique.
Though I mean, if we continue to chip away at the problem, small improvements could add up and we may well find that in 20-30 years or so, we can get away with a lot of stuff we cant now. Kind of like the development of a race car. Try and improve in every little area you can find, and while the individual improvements aren't worth a whole lot on their own, the sum of all the improvements can prove significant. Basically, VR needs to be tackled from every angle. Its still a very fresh field so there's no doubt a ton of room for improvement.
I wonder if it'll be possible at all to trick the internal ear someday, maybe with pressurized headphones or whatnot.
That could be some pretty powerful stuff.
I first read the title as "Inserting a virtual finger in VR nose..."
Ragarding FOV, i'm very prone to motion sickness with FPS games, and for me it's virtually impossible to play FPS on console because of the narrow FOV.Yes. It's called a Galvanic Vestibular Stimulator.
But it's not exactly safe for general home use.
Regarding this research. Interesting stuff. I know motion sickness is largely a result of vestibular (inner ear balance/movement) and vection (how visual information moves across your retina to provide you with movement information of your head/eyes/body) mismatch.
There are several techniques you can employ to reduce the mismatch. I suppose this falls into the category of reducing visual information bandwidth... and thus the degree of vection mismatch. A more salient example of such a technique might be to forcibly reduce the FOV. If the FOV were tiny like 20 degrees... I predict that vection mismatch becomes much less of a problem for most people.
Given that we generally want FOV for presence... I think the more robust motion sickness reduction measure might be to bring in the holo-grid whenever vection mismatch above a certain threshold occurs. The hologrid provides a fixed frame of reference that allows your brain to hook onto the motion expectation of that fixed frame rather than the moving frame. Which is why cockpit sims seem to be more salient for most users as far as VR goes.
Ragarding FOV, i'm very prone to motion sickness with FPS games, and for me it's virtually impossible to play FPS on console because of the narrow FOV.
Ideally i need a FOV between 90 and 110 degrees, to not get sickness (and still i favor games where you don't have to jerk the camera around a lot).
I'm not sure narrow FOV would help.
Also, on a more general note, i think dialing back visual stimuli to match the stationary inner ear, is just a band-aid, short term solution.
Striving to employ it in the long run, i see as a defeatist attitude, and something that would greatly limit the boundaries of VR.
That's why i would like them to go the opposite direction.
This thread has me paranoid about the shape of my face because I can only see me nose if I look down at it. I'm not properly prepared for this VR future.
I'm fairly certain that nose in the example image is on backwards.
Right eye sees the left side of the nose, left eye sees the right side...
What reasonable and realistic solutions would you have for going in the opposite direction, accounting for cost of technology and development and developer justificaiton for implementing support, etc, etc.
I mean... if I'm interpreting you correctly - you mean to make VR incorporate more motion in order to match the visuals. Problem is, if you want VR to have a broad userbase, you have to account for most reasonable user scenarios which don't include significant amounts of space (or money). You want a broad userbase so that developers can justify more elaborate fully featured experiences.
The alternative are various brain/sensory stimulation tech like the galvanic vestibular stimulator.
Skull joke!The concept seems a bit weird as I don't see my nose most of the time.
Skull joke!
I agree with you, it's why i'm saying on the short term they have to bring down visual to match body.
In long term (20/30 years) however i hope we can find a better solution that will not be as limiting.
If its an option and you pick size or colour then why not
people cant complain then, and i think it makes sense
Findings showed the virtual nose allowed people using the Tuscany villa simulation to play an average of 94.2 seconds longer without feeling sick, while those playing the roller coaster game played an average of 2.2 seconds longer.
For people that do get simulator sickness, does this mean they are more prone to getting nauseous while doing activities that require goggles, such as snow boarding?