• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Why has Microsoft's IllumiRoom not picked up more interest?

loaf of bread said:
It doesn't seem like it has much practical uses except for weather effects really.

Honestly VR is the endgame for gimmicks. All gimmicks are made around immersion and VR is the ultimate form of that. I don't see how anything can surpass the immersion that comes from having all your vision being the game and being able to look around and with motion controllers be able to have movement too.

Why would I want to pay more for a gimmicky impractical projector when I can buy a probably cheaper VR headset that will figuratively put me right into the game world and let me look around and even turn around to see behind me in 360 degrees.
Click to expand...

Pretty much this.

VR to me has always been the endgame for computers being used to simulate anything (game or whatnot). For me the idea of being able to be in a virtual world that really was virtual, that was the goal for games and simulations (but, I'm coming from the POV that the uses I enjoy most for a computer are simulating things, whether it be flying a plane, being in a fantasy world, surviving a post apocalypse world, etc).

This would get you closer, but not as close as VR would. The only closer thing than VR is actually hooking up the computer to your brain and causing your brain to actually believe it is in that world.
 
I don't think it's supposed to compete with VR. This is for those who don't want a headset or those who have more than one person in the room often, I'd think.

I seriously don't get how you guys are thinking it really has to cost a lot. Couldn't this just be a cheap 480p projector that gets a stream using Wi-Fi Direct from a nearby One? And you would just start it up, it would say "Adjust the size of the black space in the center so that none of the blue light shines on your television." Then bam, you are ready to go. It just has to be a cheap projector with maybe perspective adjustment. It's not supposed to give you a clear picture outside your TV as if you have an HD projector expanding your TV (that's rather idiotic. If you want a screen that big, you need a projector bud). It is just supposed to give light details for the most part so that your peripheral takes in the effects.

Couldn't this easily be done for $150 in a year or two? I mean, you can get little HD projectors for less than $60. Add in the Wi-Fi Direct and go.
 
I don't know, if I had a projector, the last question I would be asking myself would be, 'but what if I only want to use a tiny fraction of the 15 foot screen available to me?'
 
CannonO said:
But you people are talking like it is supposed to be a high end hd projector instead of just cool lighting atmosphere. It is just there to bring lights off the screen for your peripheral vision.
Click to expand...

To be fair, Illumiroom IS supposed to be a high end HD projector and not just cool lighting atmosphere. We already have cool lighting atmosphere with Ambilight (which takes general color values and extends them across the walls to compliment the gameplay,) That gives perhaps some minimal sensory feedback on blood hits or shoots, but that only works if the game itself flashes or shows red in a hit. That also that is an extremely "low-resolution" effect, it's literally 100+ lightbulbs total. If you're going to get something that affects your gameplay with FOV expansion or indicator effects (like the bouncing grenade that warns you better than the game's indicator arrows usually can where an explosive has dropped since your view is supposed to approximate your head and the grenade is at your feet) rather than just complimenting it, I would guess that it would need to be a more complete technological solution.

But you're right in saying that this isn't pie-in-the-sky technology.

Also, you might be able to get some of the same visual feedback effects with a laser projector instead of a full-on video projector.

Sir TapTap said:
Seems the primary benefit is simply increased FOV, something VR gives at a lower price point, with better immersion and no external factors (lighting. room color, distances), plus VR has other stuff like stereoscopy and head-tilt view control. I have no idea why anyone would pursue this when VR is already making highly effective devkits.
Click to expand...

But really, are you going to stick your head in a helmet for hours at a time to play all of your future games? Maybe, if it's amazing and the motion sickness is overcome, but I'm leery of VR and I have played with Oculus.

Also, technology like Illumiroom and Ambilight has potential value for everybody playing the game or watching the movie, not just the one user. It's just a projector on the ceiling for the most part, an innocuous addition to your living room, not something you need to find storage for and clean and worry about (dust the lens, I suppose,) something that once installed doesn't need to worry about wires and connectors and all that (wireless VR will be great, but it's not what's shipping any time soon,) but when you turn it on it brings its wow-factor. And it's an optional experience, if you feel like playing a puzzler or platformer you don't need to turn it on and cut the shades but if you just bought Half-Life 3, that's a game you'll want to kick on the lighting and turn up the surrounds and treat very special.
 
SlickShoesRUCrazy said:
COuldn't that all be achieved with AR glasses?
Click to expand...

Not a bad idea. Although there are a few problems. The AR glasses being made right now put the picture in the center, like a floating TV screen. I'm not sure they have the ability to project around your periphery to as great effect, if at all? (Although saying it again, resolution is much less an issue when you're projecting peripheral stimulus.) You wouldn't be able to do the full-context effect either because you'd need the TV frame to be perfectly lined up with the cut-out of the extended projection, so you're limited to just contextual cues like explosions and indicator warnings and such. Also, again, for it to be a totally immersive effect the game has to render the image in realtime rather than the device post-processing what it can interpret of the action (though with AR glasses maybe you could get away with a lot less resolution and detail since it's so close?)

But still, I like it. Not sure if it's doable, but if it is, it's a winner. Practical, no installation, potential for immersive and/or assistive effects, expensive but not unreasonable technology (and prices will fall... but then again, you would need two screens instead of one as most AR products do today,) no need for dimming, nothing obnoxious for fellow housemates. Compelling idea.

ORA-glasses.jpg

(*Imagine this, but with the surrounding glasses being the picture and the center square is the clear vision spot.)
 
CannonO said:
Couldn't this just be a cheap 480p projector that gets a stream using Wi-Fi Direct from a nearby One? And you would just start it up, it would say "Adjust the size of the black space in the center so that none of the blue light shines on your television." Then bam, you are ready to go.
Click to expand...

But then, you're not talking a cheap projector. For a projector to "project" black (or more realistically for it to not project light in an area, at least as low as its contrast thresholds allow,) it would need to be a good projector. A cheap solution would drown out your TV with glare.

(Also, the device you're talking about, an LCD projector with WiDi, is probably a ways away still from being $150 even cut to the bone. And I'm not sure what you'd get out of 480p, it might be good enough but it also might be a fuzzy and distracting discrepancy of detail.)

I am surprised though that it doesn't seem like indie tinkerers haven't shown (that I know of) a DIY knock-off of Illumiroom to show the viability of the concept with available and cost-effective technology. And I agree with you, we don't need top-of-the-line components and we don't need to treat installing a projector as this rich man's dream, if you have surround in your home entertainment center I'm not sure a box like you're describing is that extravagant an addition to the parlor.
 
CamHostage said:
But then, you're not talking a cheap projector. For a projector to "project" black (or more realistically for it to not project light in an area, at least as low as its contrast thresholds allow,) it would need to be a good projector. A cheap solution would drown out your TV with glare.

(Also, the device you're talking about, an LCD projector with WiDi, is probably a ways away still from being $150 even cut to the bone. And I'm not sure what you'd get out of 480p, it might be good enough but it also might be a fuzzy and distracting discrepancy of detail.)

I am surprised though that it doesn't seem like indie tinkerers haven't shown (that I know of) a DIY knock-off of Illumiroom to show the viability of the concept with available and cost-effective technology. And I agree with you, we don't need top-of-the-line components and we don't need to treat installing a projector as this rich man's dream, if you have surround in your home entertainment center I'm not sure a box like you're describing is that extravagant an addition to the parlor.
Click to expand...

How did Microsoft handle the blank space in the middle for the TV? Do we know?

And I thought Wi-Fi Direct-ready dongles were pretty dang cheap (pretty sure I read it once in a discussion about AirDrop using it on all the iOS devices now).

That said, I don't see this being a smash hit anyway. It might not make up the cost of developing it well. I think people would mostly be split between VR and not wanting to buy peripherals, with some finding Illumiroom worthwhile at whatever price it is.
 
CannonO said:
How did Microsoft handle the blank space in the middle for the TV? Do we know?
Click to expand...

Well, they didn't "handle" it, which was one of the problems if I remember right? When you calibrated the system, the TV would have a black masking image in the projection beam, which worked OK but I believe would have been a problem if you had a less high-quality projector.

On the other hand, everybody's freaked out that the cost would be this expensive projector AND a Kinect-style camera, but except for complex effects where the room cannot change, the Kinect could be used to scan once and then removed. (Unless IllumiRoom is doing a texture-based effect with your room, generally it can get close enough as living rooms don't change all that much usually.) The Kinect itself is mostly needed for calibration because a normal camera has difficulty with a TV's bright edges and shiny surfaces, but once it's calibrated, a cheap normal camera could do for most of these effects even if say objects are moved on a bookcase.

By the way, you can read about IllumiRoom's procedures and concepts and testing practice on the Microsoft IllumiRoom breakdown white paper. Some neat little factoids in there, including one untested concept for a horror effect where only certain elements are used in the projection to maintain elements of surprise (I could also see it screwing with the watcher, so like since it scans your room, it could every once animate a spider crawling out of your bookcase or some other Sanity Effect.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Why don’t more super heroes have their own games?
35
609
Griffon replied
Shenmue 4 trailer; stabilized the source and picked out some interesting elements
2
51
925
Gonzito replied
Tom Warren: Microsoft has been working on converging Xbox and Windows for more than a decade. Schreier discussed original Project Helix in 2016
Social  2
58
749
Mulsanne88 replied
  • Locked
Sony has to pick up the slack
2 3 4
168
4K
FrankWza replied
Crisol: theater of idols review. Meh horror game that has alot of issues that add up the more you play. 'Long review inbound'.
Opinion Spoilers 
5
173
Sebastian1295 replied
Top Bottom