TouchMyBox
Member
They need to halve the weight, double the field of view, and double the resolution for this thing to be a "must-have".
That said, my buddy's HMZ is very very neat.
That said, my buddy's HMZ is very very neat.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Sony announces HMZ-T2 3D Personal Viewer
- Thread starter Pachimari
- Start date
Haint
Member
Personally, I'll be surprised if they don't straight up rip off the Rift for their next foray. It's much cheaper to build, they have the ability to build/source cutting edge displays ahead of the curve, and they undoubtedly have shit tons of research invested in gyro's, accelerometers, and any kind of motion tracking you could imagine. There's zero reason to continue with a large, complex, and cumbersome device like this when the Rift has proven the potential market as a Playstation device is many times larger. Oculus sold like 8k units in 30 days as a literal unknown completely out of nowhere, I'd like to find out how many T1's Sony moved in a year. As a Playstation branded device, they could replicate any kind of functionality with virtual environments (e.g. a movie theater, a computer desk, or a game room) to get around the FOV and non-supporting content.
You're talking about basic stereoscopic 3D content needs though. If you want to apply them to an augmented world realistically, you will need more work. There are of course more researches done to reduce headaches and other undesirable effects at the same time. It's not just "No Cross Talk". ^_^ The work done for 3D visors in general, including 3D content development, will be applicable for AR, VR and regular displays.
Field of vision is not the only thing that is interesting. I don't see the Rift direction as the only future moving forward. They also have to solve the comfort and price issues, like everyone else.
1. Likely some time after the release of the consumer version of the Rift - when there are competitors doing similar things to what the Rift is doing.
2. Developer rift will be 640x800 per eye - but consumer version is targeted for larger screens... in the region of 2.5x1.5k (or 1250x1500 per eye). Which admittedly will provide lower PPI than the TMZ series.
But using the optics of the rift and the display tech of the TMZ - it's not unfeasible to get an 8k (let alone a 4k) display in future VR devices.
When you get to that point... what's the point of this technological pathway? It's not VR - it's an alternative to normal 3D flat panel displays. But because of numerous comfort and usability factors, it'll remain extremely niche.
How big can the market possibly be for people that want a traditional screen that only they themselves can use? I mean... there's a pretty significant overlap with people that can get access to screens in rooms with locks on the door.
3D is a buzzword, it was introduced with HDTVs into the mainstream and will die in the mainstream.
3D video is bad for software development since it's enabling halves the performance.
Augumented reality does not require large processing thus is suitable for mass market because it's feasible to do with moble devices such as example in 3DS camera with stuff flying. That is more of a simple stuff that doesn't interest me as a gamer nor as an enthusiast.
Various virtual reality products and proclamations have been made, those were all cheap shots for a quick buck, they had no real technological basis nor any goal ... mhmh what's that, I smell something, oh yeah, Onlive is a fine example of those.
Even all the documentary stuff you see on TV talks about virtual reality, many of that is being good ol TV BS, all these people talking but nobody hadn't done anything, that's because they don't know, the big manufacturers don't have content for it. They don't even care unless they can sell it for their own profit.
This is pretty much the time all gamers should be again thankful to John Carmack, and ofcourse Oculus. This is a noble cause, and it so deserves that those guys who are the best for the job are really part of it.
Nintendo is similar, hardware is designed by the feeback from software engineers and other staff, they don't hire part time hardware people and put them in charge, they don't contract somebody to do something for them, they heavily direct and supervise with whom they partner or cooperate for anything, the AMD/ATI GPUs, those are all co-developed chips, nothing gets decided without nintendo's approval or discussion, PS3 is a living disaster in that aspect, the system was designed purely by hardware people who obviously have no idea about gaming software, they lacked crucial feedback and direction.
3D will pretty much die slowly, slowly because it will be exploited by the HDTV industry which has plagued PC by which 16:10 is only a small niche now, these manufacturers are so going to pay now.
3D is gone an VR is here. 3D content doesn't interest me, I don't watch movies (hollywood propaganda)
a 6" microdisplay? impossible, it would be a 10000mm² chip (a classic microdisplay is a chip between 100 and 200mm² like CPU/GPU)
futur of VR will probably be laser
So you're looking at 2014 before any kind of volume VR is in the market. So let Sony play slightly conservative with a simple display (if you can call a HMD conservative), and let's hope they build support into PS4 for a more gamer oriented device - eg the HMZ-T3 which in theory would be due in winter 2013.
I'm not all that clued up about the technology (and limitations of) microdisplays. How do they work and what are the functional limitations of making them that big? How big can they get? What's the difference between that tech and more traditional LED/LCDs?
I mainly use them as an example of pixel density in technology... that it can indeed, get extremely dense.
What's your point? I dont understand when people make these posts, If would be a mod I would ban these.
It does not contribute anything useful to the discussion, it's rather annoying to see rubbish like this plaguing the text, all makes it even harder to read through the fast pacing threads.
I've seen like ... 10 since I got here, this is the first time I had said something about it.
As a former T1 owner this announcement is disappointing. I welcome the weightloss but its still too heavy. FoV could be better still (yeah, I know they are going for a cinema experience).
I'd welcome any improvement to the adjustability and the quality of the optics.
I'd welcome any improvement to the adjustability and the quality of the optics.
I think we'd all like it if Sony could get their act together and properly marry up all their disparate branches of technology.
I think it's not unreasonable for us to lack faith in Sony's ability to do so.
Sure they've got a new guy in charge. But stringer spent 7-8 years trying to do exactly that... and it's still a shambolic organization in those regards.
Those are typically double posts (or users editing out their previous post to include nothing). This happens because we can't delete posts on GAF.
A stealth Sony troll post at its finest.
It was demonstrated next a Bravia and a Samsung LED(with a sticker on the Samsung logo saying other LCD brands )and it completely blew both out of the water, the image is super sharp and the black is way way darker like a Kuro, the Bravia and Samsung one were very dim next to it,it was like the New iPad screen next to a 3DS screen.
I think VR will remain a niche at these prices. $300 for the dev kit is one thing, but $500-$1000 for the consumer model is going to place it out of the reach of a lot of people. I'm excited for the retail model, but I also realize that "retail" is likely to mean "online only" for the foreseeable future.
HMZ use microdisplay, Oculus use little display
microdisplay is produce like microprocessor, little display is produce like TV. it's two very different technology (with different PPI, microdisplay have 10x superior PPI)
Oculus particular approach need a 6" display, not realy compatible with microdisplay (microdisplay is typically under 1")
They look sturdier for sure. But those straps weren't the cause of so much discomfort. It's the lack of weight balance and pressure sitting all on the forehead (and nose if you were unlucky) that made the T1 so uncomfortable.
I inferred as much from what you said before - question is what is it about the tech that makes it unsuitable for such a large size?
It's a chip you say... so the lack of feasibility I imagine is simply the fact that it needs a silicon wafer (and one that large is too expensive to be practical)... or is it something else?
yes
theoreticaly you probably can make 6" microdisplay but it's 73x the size of the HMZ microdisplay
Just doing a bit of quick research, but having trouble finding where people are getting the information that the HMZ uses a microdisplay.
What's most commonly cited is OLED. A quick check on microdisplay (LCoS or SXRD) in Wikipedia shows that the technologies are not mutually compatible and can't be mistaken for each other.
Is it not at least theoretically possible to take whatever secret sauce Sony is using in their high PPI OLED in these, scale them up to a 6" panel?
What would the point be? There's no content that could take advantage of that resolution.
It would probably be possible to build such a 6" OLED (which would have 8k resolution or so), but it would likely cost an arm and a leg.
Generally, I think people don't understand the differences between a personal Movie Viewer and a VR headset. Sony, with this, want to sell a consumer product that you plug your existing devices (blu-ray player or consoles) into and which gives you a high-quality cinematic experience without the cinema. As someone said earlier in the thread, it's like a headphone for eyes.
A high-FoV VR display, especially one based on leep optics such as the Rift, is very different. While it's true that with ultra high resolution displays (which won't be here any time soon) and the correct software processing you could watch legacy content in a virtual environment, it's still not something you could just use with your existing devices.
Generally, I think people don't understand the differences between a personal Movie Viewer and a VR headset. Sony, with this, want to sell a consumer product that you plug your existing devices (blu-ray player or consoles) into and which gives you a high-quality cinematic experience without the cinema. As someone said earlier in the thread, it's like a headphone for eyes.
A high-FoV VR display, especially one based on leep optics such as the Rift, is very different. While it's true that with ultra high resolution displays (which won't be here any time soon) and the correct software processing you could watch legacy content in a virtual environment, it's still not something you could just use with your existing devices.
HMZ use 0.7" oled microdisplay x2 (OLED microdisplay is a new type of microdisplay)
it's this microdisplay:
http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/News/Press/201108/11-0831CE/
Haint
Member
Well in a discussion about what Sony should or shouldn't be making, it really becomes a question of which concept is better and which has the greater sales potential. Personally, I think there's a much larger audience for a "VR Gaming" HMD than a face mounted 3DTV you can plug anything into. Certainly it's not a stretch to say that most people who bought or used a T1 (with no prior experience) did so expecting something more similar to the Rift than the actual T1. Sony themselves even used the Virtual Theater concept to describe and market the device IIRC. It's kind of like ok, there's the product you really wanted to make--the one your customers really wanted buy--and oh yea, it's also much cheaper to manufacturer and will probably move several times the volume. So why exactly are you showing me a tweaked T1 with the same specs? Obviously we all know it's cause this has been in development since last year, the Rift didn't exist, and they haven't had time to do anything radically different, but you get the point. I don't really think anyone is misunderstanding the use cases, they simply consider one of the concepts so superior it renders the other completely unnecessary.
Naked Snake
Member
You keep bringing this up, but I don't think it bothers most people as much as bothers you. Personally it didn't bother me at all when using my HMZT1. Sure I'd prefer to have headtracking, but I never experienced any nausea or "brain discomfort" from the lack of it. I think yours is an extreme case.
It's not that extreme. I can use my head mount for a fairly long stretch 1-2 hours. But taking off the device, I always feel a strong sense of relief from having my vision tracking naturally again.
Also often, and I'm sure it's not individual to me - I find my head has drifted while playing - of course I correct immediately upon noticing - but the discomfort is there.
Anyway... I don't think what I'm saying is that inexplicable is it? The head tracking can provide functionality that's beneficial to standard media viewing as well as VR.
The simple addition of it would boost the value in the product immensely. I'm sure Sony will sell a few units again... but I sincerely doubt it'll be as popular as even the HMZ-T1.
Source: Sony's Press Centre.
Seems like the big features are that the headphones are not attached, 20% lighter, more comfort customization, sharper displays and the Clear mode for gamers.
Is there any way I can retrofit this new comfort into my original model? (Besides home made dealies)
Edit - Those posts above trying to single people out as the few who did not like to use it very long, they are not. Check AVSforums where even the hardcore had issues with the comfort and length of time you can use. Even if you lie down or try other things to like it, it just isn't comfortable. The screen is stuck in front of you, and the thing is not fun to wear.
Thanks. Looking forward to a chance to see it for myself now
Fixed1979
Member
Yeah, he was quickly ignored.
The Oculus Rift looks pretty neat, but I don't think it will ever hold a majority (or even significant) portion in HMD's market. A startup company entering the tech field will end up getting crushed or bought out before they are able to get very far.
Where did you get 8k? It looks like their at just barely over 6k now and that includes non-assembled kits...
I think people are getting way ahead of themselves on this device, very similar to how people got ahead of themselves on the HMZ-T1.
Canis lupus
Member
Probably around 800 euros again, wich is great. But the previous model was so hard to find!
CloakedPuppet
Member
Yep. Kind of relieved that I don't feel I'm missing out on much by stickng with my T1s. I like the idea of having seperate adustments for each eye though. Some nice little bonuses for folks who've waited to pull the trigger.
Canis lupus
Member
Will the oleds be 1080p? Kinda hoped it could track your head for that VR effect.
No. 720p.
CloakedPuppet
Member
Has a price increase also been confirmed?
Canis lupus
Member
Ah bummer.
If they lower the price to $500 or below, I may bite. Have a bunch of personal 3D videos from my Euro and Alaska trips. Wonder how they will look in HMZ-T2. Something tells me the price may stay high though.
If T2 is only a minor revision, then T3 will probably be quite different.
If T2 is only a minor revision, then T3 will probably be quite different.
Fixed1979
Member
Grab Track IR and attach it to the HMD, it has a lot of support and appears to work quite well.
And while 1080p would be nice, and I'm sure eventually we'll see it, the device makes most signals look really good in 720.
CloakedPuppet
Member
I can definitely attest to that. Although 1080p would have been an OK addition, the picture is beautiful as is.
Shao Kahn Brewing a Stew
Banned
Oculus Rift it is. Here's hoping Rift can be used for movie viewing.
f@luS
More than a member.
U can mod he t1 in 20min to get separate eye adjustments
With the screen resolution on the Rift I can't see why anyone would want to. It's a VR device, and not much else.