Re:How big an issue is the nausea problem for VR products?
by stcredzero on Sunday May 29, 2016 @06:16PM
(#11798489)
The trick then is figuring out how to "render black", arguably the hardest challenge for a combined system or even just hmd AR system.
Why is that necessary? I bet I could have tons of fun with wireframe based augmented reality games with zero opacity in them. That would also be a good way to deliver heads-up real-time data.
The military/defense guys probably played around with this before. I'd love to hear their take on wireframe AR.
Re:How big an issue is the nausea problem for VR products?
by coldtea on Wednesday June 01, 2016 @04:06AM
(#11812786)
And yet:
>Nvidia’s CEO reckons the challenges holding VR back aren’t going to be solved for 20 years, delivering a surprising dose of realism to a VR industry creaking under the weight of hype.
The mixed reality continuum doesn't require different displays to provide different types of systems, so the distinction between AR and VR from a hardware implementation standpoint eventually goes away. If you build a VRD for AR then you are 90% of the way towards a combined system that could also work for VR. The trick then is figuring out how to "render black", arguably the hardest challenge for a combined system or even just hmd AR system.
So yes, currently it's an issue with current systems but won't always be the case.
In terms of locomotion, i agree that you can't get there (at least for systems with 6DOF) through systems that are ocular input only and not have the vergence problem. The caveat being if you can build a fast enough photon to cortex system.