• 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.

Spatial Display's and the future of Gaming

Every time I see someone cite that "Tv's can not possibly need more resolution density" I hang my head in disbelief.

Believe it or not, a plethora of gamer's exist that believe eventually a ceiling will be hit, that the end of the road is within sight!

To this I say, blasphemy.

Enter Spatial Display's :





Holographic display's are only the icing on the cake.

There will be so many disruptive uses for high res display technology we haven't even fathomed just yet.

The technology above utilizes many techniques, most notably, pixel density and multiple layered displays to allow various user's to look at 1 object from multiple angles.

I imagine a day far in the future, and pixel density will still be an issue with some user's "Why would our spatial display's even need to be that resolution" and they will
harbor this belief right up until the object literally jump's off screen and into their immediate peripheral. And then it will finally click, we needed that technology all along.

Bright day's ahead for gaming, bright day's indeed.
 

Tiamat2san

Member
I remember a cool prototype of some kind of laser projector to expand the game outside of the screen for Xbox.
The idea looked cool, I can’t remember the name though.
Edit : found it!



holograms for special effects and some elements would be dope!
 
Last edited:
I imagine, pixel density will eventually be so high on our displays - that your screen will in fact begin to project object's off the screen, and onto your table through sheer pixel dispersity. Let alone allow you to peer inside the image from different angles, with images also popping off screen - utilizing a mere flat display.
 

Krappadizzle

Gold Member
The future is definitely going to be VR. Whether that's playing on a 50 foot screen in your own personal VR theater or just being in the head of your character. VR is the future. Once price comes down and comfort goes up. There's no better way to immersive yourself in a game, movie, tv show, etc. It's all awesome in VR. Watching the Stanley Cup finals in VR sitting on top of the goalie net last year was awesome and I fucking hate hockey. Same with Basketball, watching Lebron running down the court to dunk it into the basket that you are literally sitting on is so fun.
 
The future is definitely going to be VR. Whether that's playing on a 50 foot screen in your own personal VR theater or just being in the head of your character. VR is the future. Once price comes down and comfort goes up. There's no better way to immersive yourself in a game, movie, tv show, etc. It's all awesome in VR. Watching the Stanley Cup finals in VR sitting on top of the goalie net last year was awesome and I fucking hate hockey. Same with Basketball, watching Lebron running down the court to dunk it into the basket that you are literally sitting on is so fun.
And the display's are still not sufficient enough in pixel density!
 

ZywyPL

Banned
Glassless 3D is the thing I mostly desire as a gamer. While 4K, 8K, 120FPS etc. are obviously a great addition and a natural evolution, they don't add as much to the experience as the games literally popping up from your screen.
 

Reallink

Member
These type of displays require the image to be rendered several dozen times to account for all the possible angles that produce the hologram effect. My understanding is that each layer divides resolution, so an 8K display divided by 3 dozen would have the effective resolution of 720p. The display technology itself is likely decades (plural) from mainstream production at TV sizes and resolutions, nevermind the bandwidth, storage, and compute power to drive it. It's definitely cool, but mainstream AR/VR (radically more advanced and streamlined than today's) is likely to beat this by a decade or more, with vastly superior interactivity.
 
Last edited:
These type of displays require the image to be rendered several dozen times to account for all the possible angles that produce the hologram effect. My understanding is that each layer divides resolution, so an 8K display divided by 3 dozen would have the effective resolution of 720p. The display technology itself is decades (plural) from mainstream production at TV sizes and resolutions, nevermind the bandwidth, storage, and compute power to push it. It's definitely cool, but mainstream AR/VR (radically more advanced and streamlined than today's) is likely to beat this by a decade or more.
Considering these display's are available for the standard consumer, I'd say they're ready for purchase. Glasses free 3d was seen as decades away from ever happening and then computer science and the law of accelerating return's dictated otherwise.

I expect, as with the first Flatscreen LED display's that popped up in 2002 at a remarkable 190k dollars, then wound up on display at your local electronics store for 6,000 grand - it will take less than 7 years for these display's to hit stride if they are manufactured to do so.
 

Reallink

Member
Considering these display's are available for the standard consumer, I'd say they're ready for purchase. Glasses free 3d was seen as decades away from ever happening and then computer science and the law of accelerating return's dictated otherwise.

I expect, as with the first Flatscreen LED display's that popped up in 2002 at a remarkable 190k dollars, then wound up on display at your local electronics store for 6,000 grand - it will take less than 7 years for these display's to hit stride if they are manufactured to do so.

Anything's possible, but the fact that 20 years later most high end TV's are still fundamentally unchanged $6000 LCD's tells you all you need to know about progress in the display industry. Manufacturers have tried and failed for decades to produce new technologies at the volume, sizes, and prices demanded (SED/FED, RGB OLED, microLED). It takes several years (plural) of development to update backlight systems (miniLED) or add new color filter layers (Quantum Dots) to existing well worn technologies. Expecting 50 layer holographic displays to be deployed in 7 years seems pretty unrealistic. For starters they will require at minimum a 16K display to produce a 1440p hologram. That would require 36+ PS5's to render games at modern fidelity and moderate resolution/frame rates. PS6 better be a beast. More realistically, I'd say we are around 7 years from real self emmissive Quandum Dot displays (which are effectively just a redesigned Plasma, charges exciding QD particles instead of gas cells) or microLED's.
 
Last edited:
Well the 8k Looking Glass Variant is available for purchase now - the Looking Glass Pro, the smaller variant is 6 grand.

I remember when people used to pay in fact 80 Grand for massive box screens, that weighed 4000 pounds. Like it was nothing - you were ranked and as privileged as the TV you could afford.

Lot's, looooot's of people - owned tv's that were extravagantly priced. Most lover's of film spent well over 20k on a tv as standard practice back in the day.
Even if they had to buy it on lease.

So the price isn't a factor unless you hope to see these display's drop dramatically in price due to mass adoption, opposed to high luxury ranked adoption.

8k Holographic Looking Glass Display - Price : Contact Us (I expect it to be above 35k, making it within price range for tech addict's and coinsures of film)


The real problem would be, the standard consumer can buy it, will the standard consumer have access to content or will they need to be able to create their own content to utilize this technology.
 
Last edited:

the_master

Member
It looks great, and can't wait to check them out. But this is even more limiting than VR. Sems good for displaying one object or small group of objects at the exact distance, so the types of games you'd do with that are limited. Same with movies.

in terma of resolution, this is a different problem, this is rendering different perspectives so multiple screens not just reaolution.
there is still a maximum density needed based on distance to the eye.
 

Alexios

Cores, shaders and BIOS oh my!
Meh, you can get the effect with a shitty old TV and some Wii parts.


Not sure if it's even better to work on such a display for an artist rather than to just view the result there and work traditionally in 2D with different angles and viewports or if they want to work in 3D then go VR/AR to use hand tracking instead of mouse or wacom stuff which are still 2D.
Multiple people interact with this solution while utilizing the entire viewing field.
Doesn't seem to be the case for Sony's deal here, small size, personal workdesk thing, they even explain it does it by eye tracking and shit so it's basically like the above video just with better display and better camera solution instead of that DYI stuff this guy pulled over a decade ago.
 
Last edited:
And in fact, it is the case with sony's solution - as is demonstrated with MULTIPLE PERSONS IN THE VIDEO.

Eye tracking can track multiple viewer's now, unlike your example that is only very specific and does not allow you to walk up to the the screen and peer down at the object as if it is centered in the screen
due to limitation's of the asset's.
 
Every time I see someone cite that "Tv's can not possibly need more resolution density" I hang my head in disbelief.

To be fair, what I think is generally meant with that is the same TVs we have now but just 8k instead of 4k and here I find myself mostly agreeing, like I don't see the use all that much with that. Of course if there IS a genuinely perceivable benefit from higher pixel density other than marketing bullshit, I'm all for it of course, real progress is always good.
 

Zannegan

Member
Even as these technologies become less expensive, I think there's a pretty limited use case for TV gaming. On monitors and handhelds though, that's another story entirely.

And in fact, it is the case with sony's solution - as is demonstrated with MULTIPLE PERSONS IN THE VIDEO.

Eye tracking can track multiple viewer's now, unlike your example that is only very specific and does not allow you to walk up to the the screen and peer down at the object as if it is centered in the screen
due to limitation's of the asset's.
Doesn't the video expressly show it not working for multiple people? As the one person using it moves his head, the watch changes positions from the Camera's perspective (and seems to stretch/skew), which should not happen if it was able to display in 3D from multiple perspectives, that or it's just a bad visual demo.

The second one, which seems like a true holographic display, does appear to work from multiple angles. I wonder if they'll be able to slim it down while keeping the same functionality, or is that an inherent limit of the technology?

Regardless, you can get a lot if the same effect (for one viewer) just with eye tracking. If you could do both eye tracking and glasses-free 3D at an acceptable resolution, you'd be even closer.

Light field imaging and displays are really interesting though. It would be great for sports especially, though I won't hold my breath on that one. The data sizes necessary to feed such a display would have to be much higher, no? They didn't even broadcast in Full HD when last I checked.
 
Even as these technologies become less expensive, I think there's a pretty limited use case for TV gaming. On monitors and handhelds though, that's another story entirely.


Doesn't the video expressly show it not working for multiple people? As the one person using it moves his head, the watch changes positions from the Camera's perspective (and seems to stretch/skew), which should not happen if it was able to display in 3D from multiple perspectives, that or it's just a bad visual demo.

The second one, which seems like a true holographic display, does appear to work from multiple angles. I wonder if they'll be able to slim it down while keeping the same functionality, or is that an inherent limit of the technology?

Regardless, you can get a lot if the same effect (for one viewer) just with eye tracking. If you could do both eye tracking and glasses-free 3D at an acceptable resolution, you'd be even closer.

Light field imaging and displays are really interesting though. It would be great for sports especially, though I won't hold my breath on that one. The data sizes necessary to feed such a display would have to be much higher, no? They didn't even broadcast in Full HD when last I checked.



I believe it state's 1 to the power of 3 here, so 3 users concurrent.

Perhaps with only 1 able to control the object.

 
Top Bottom