Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

John Carmack Developing Oculus VR Games

John Carmack is developing games for Oculus VR headsets, reports Engadget based on a conversation with Oculus Rift's Brendan Iribe and Aaron Davies. Carmack joined Oculus Rift as their CTO last year while maintaining ties to id Software, the developer he co-founded a couple of decades ago, but it seemed his game development days were at an end when he later departed id before this news that the itch remains. "He's working on a lot of exciting tech," Iribe tells them. "But, his heart and soul and history certainly lies in the game-development side." Iribe compares this to how Epic Games supports the Unreal Engine with internal development. "That's always been Epic's philosophy. And it's what allowed them to make what they made," he explains. "It's certainly been id's philosophy in the past. It's been John Carmack's philosophy -- you gotta eat your own dog food here, and develop internal content also." He wraps up by telling them they will be hiring more game developers in the next six to 12 months to support their plans. Thanks CVG.

View
37 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >

37. Re: Exactly.... Jan 9, 2014, 11:25 Quboid
 
The first commercial release will probably be 1920x1080. It might be 2560x1440 if it's cost effective in time but I can't see it being higher than that for a few years - and that's the whole unit, not per eye.

If it's true that you need to be maintaining around 90 FPS for this to be properly responsive and immersive, then anything above 1080 isn't going to be relevant for a while any way, at least on my system. Pushing it up to 1440p or 2160p/4K isn't going to benefit me a great deal if textures, models, view distances and suchlike are turned way down.

Maybe in a few years, the Oculus Rift 2 will come out with a 4K display (1920x2160 per eye) and we'll have dual Nvidia Geforce 990 16 GB graphics cards to push it. I can understand waiting for this - although by then maybe you'll have an 8K monitor and not want to downgrade again - but I believe that they are making what is realistically the best they can make with the available hardware both to make the device and for us to feed the device pixels.

I think that the Rift 1 will be flawed and might prove more of a novelty than anything but there are signs that the technology is getting there and if the Rift shows signs of sustained success, expect the Rift 2 to be joined by an Nvidia SHIELD HMD and a Razor Cobra UHD HMD and so on. I hope the Oculus Rift is a good device in its own right but what I really hope is that it proves that the technology is good enough or very close.
 
Avatar 10439
 
- Quboid
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
36. Re: John Carmack Developing Oculus VR Games Jan 9, 2014, 11:11 HorrorScope
 
eRe4s3r wrote on Jan 9, 2014, 00:52:
That said.. a "See through" functionality needs to come one way or another. Using the rift now is akin to sitting in the actual virtual reality. That's very immersive, and very bad if you want to say, grab a coffee cup ;p

Worst case you flip it up and drink. Plenty of other sports/professions have this same issue, since we never sat around thinking of any possible side affect, you never heard Motorcycle Helmet guy shy away from the hobby because if he were to drink, he'd have to flip the shield up. That said if they can come up with a way great, if not we'll survive.
 
Avatar 17232
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
35. Exactly.... Jan 9, 2014, 10:29 Shataan
 
"Why in the world would I want to go backwards to 1/2 1080p"

Imho if TODAY... if today we are talking less than 1920x1080 per eye? Then there is absolutely no point in considering the RIFT.... as far as I am concerned. In a few months I am getting Asus new Swift 2560x1440 120 hz monitor with G Synch. Why would anyone wanna turn back the clock and go backwards with their viewing quality? And if this is the case with the Rift, it is only the case cause they are trying keep production costs down. This didn`t work so well 15 years ago, did it? Nope. But boyos we sure got a cool futuristic looking headache simulator HMD. ;p

A smarter thing for them to do with the Rift would be to re pioneer VR headsets.... and release a better quality view screen setup.... and initially take a loss much like Sony did with the PS3. Look how many PS3s are out in the market now. I have 2. It all depends on what they are actually trying to do in the end. Make a fast buck by cashing in on a VR HMD that ultimately still isn`t ready for prime time? Easily done cause there are loads of fan bois already ready to pony up for the Occulus, even if it doesn`t deliver.

Or are they actually serious, and are gonna deliver an HMD unit that actually delivers, at least 1920x1080 PER EYE!!!?
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
34. Re: John Carmack Developing Oculus VR Games Jan 9, 2014, 03:58 pwatsop
 
Being blind to what's actually in front of me is my only complaint about the rift so far. I'm hoping the next model rift comes with stereo cameras on the front.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
33. Re: John Carmack Developing Oculus VR Games Jan 9, 2014, 00:52 eRe4s3r
 
Vio wrote on Jan 8, 2014, 14:04:
BobBob wrote on Jan 8, 2014, 13:59:
Is it not possible for the MetaPro to go into full immersion mode or is there a potential for an augmented Oculus VR? I'm not trying to knock the Oculus Rift. I would imagine having the ability to experience full immersion or augmented (as a choice) via the same device would be ideal. It doesn't have to be to simply one or the other -- but rather a device that encapsulates both concepts into a synthesis of practical function.

Typically when you apply the Hegelian dialectic (that can be applied to most break-through and popular technologies), there will be something that from evolves from both but is truly neither.

Technically all it needs is two low latency camera's and some hardware that combines the rendered objects onto the video feeds, but I think they would need to enhance their positional tracking since right now in the new prototype it relies on a static camera on your desk tracking ir dots on the head mount.

That said.. a "See through" functionality needs to come one way or another. Using the rift now is akin to sitting in the actual virtual reality. That's very immersive, and very bad if you want to say, grab a coffee cup ;p
 
Avatar 54727
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
32. Re: John Carmack Developing Oculus VR Games Jan 8, 2014, 22:56 HorrorScope
 
Scheherazade wrote on Jan 8, 2014, 19:43:
I meant 'day-to-day gaming'.

Dual 1080p displays is today's tech.
The demoed setup had the 1080p OLED from a [supposedly] galaxy S4. Just throw two of those bad boys at it
(BTW, those screens are on the order of 'tens of dollars' at the OEM level.)

Future tech would be waiting to get a 3840x1080 or 5120x1440 micro display that could be fitted directly in front.
That would be a cleaner solution.
TBH, if they were willing to do that, have Samsung make a custom display for them, I would be fine paying the increased unit cost, just to have a better product.
-scheherazade

Same. I'll take better, but I'm think where they are aiming now is still a reasonable start.
 
Avatar 17232
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
31. Re: John Carmack Developing Oculus VR Games Jan 8, 2014, 22:46 BobBob
 
[VG]Reagle wrote on Jan 8, 2014, 20:08:
OMFG do we really have to listen to carmack yap on for another 20 years????

If it wasn't for Carmack's great accomplishments, you most likely wouldn't be spewing your ignorant hatred right now. The man revolutionized PC gaming. All hail the Carmack!
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
30. Re: John Carmack Developing Oculus VR Games Jan 8, 2014, 21:42 Quboid
 
nin wrote on Jan 8, 2014, 21:34:
[VG]Reagle wrote on Jan 8, 2014, 20:08:
OMFG do we really have to listen to carmack yap on for another 20 years????

Why not? We have to listen to you. Not to mention Carmack being a million times more interesting than you.


There's websites out there* which don't trace their very existence to this man. Maybe you should try one of those, Reagle?

*apparently
 
Avatar 10439
 
- Quboid
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
29. Re: John Carmack Developing Oculus VR Games Jan 8, 2014, 21:34 nin
 
[VG]Reagle wrote on Jan 8, 2014, 20:08:
OMFG do we really have to listen to carmack yap on for another 20 years????

Why not? We have to listen to you. Not to mention Carmack being a million times more interesting than you.

 
http://store.nin.com/index.php?cPath=10
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
28. Re: John Carmack Developing Oculus VR Games Jan 8, 2014, 20:49 Silicon Avatar
 
These things are something I'd really have to try out in person for a few hours to see if my eyes got massive eyestrain just from using them.

That is what I'm worried about more than anything.
 
Avatar 18037
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
27. Re: John Carmack Developing Oculus VR Games Jan 8, 2014, 20:08 [VG]Reagle
 
OMFG do we really have to listen to carmack yap on for another 20 years????  
Avatar 8515
 
I am MUCH MUCH MUCH better now.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
26. Re: John Carmack Developing Oculus VR Games Jan 8, 2014, 19:43 Scheherazade
 
HorrorScope wrote on Jan 8, 2014, 18:58:
Scheherazade wrote on Jan 8, 2014, 16:59:

IMO, the downfall will be if people miss their normal displays.

That will happen if folks have to sacrifice on important features that they are currently taking for granted, but will be forced to face when those features are gone.

Pixel density is image clarity.
Giving up on image clarity is kind of a big deal, for a new display technology.



The reason I personally can't see me adopting the occulus for day-to-day use, is that I already know I'd miss the clarity.
I miss the clarity even nowadays when I have to use a 1080p display, so it's certain that I'll miss it with 1/2 1080p.

Hell, 4K has me more excited than occulus. In a few years a new connection standard will come out that can push it at 120hz, and the GPUs catch up, and I'll be smiling ear to ear.


I'll still buy an occulus, just to mess around with it. But I know (in its current state) it will end up like 3D Vision: Fun for the few hours I used it.

(Best part about 3D vision was finally getting 120hz 2D 1080p flat panel displays... finally catching up to the 113hz 1600x1200 CRTs I was stuck with for so long, eating up desk space.)

-scheherazade

Hey we all have our own things we like. I'm not excited at all for 4k on a flat monitor, if that can make a nice difference in VR than great. But personally I don't feel a need for more resolution.

You mention every day, i'm still expecting to take these off to browse Blue's and to only wear during gaming. Unless someone can prove to me otherwise, however not expecting or asking it do be used for non-gaming type things.

I'm ok with Minecraft gfx vs Far Cry Gfx if the gaming is good and fun. Same will be for pixel density, even though i want it to be quality to. I understand the steps needed to get there and won't poo poo it, otherwise we'd have nothing today. You don't have a 4770K without a 286.

I meant 'day-to-day gaming'.



Dual 1080p displays is today's tech.
The demoed setup had the 1080p OLED from a [supposedly] galaxy S4. Just throw two of those bad boys at it
(BTW, those screens are on the order of 'tens of dollars' at the OEM level.)

Future tech would be waiting to get a 3840x1080 or 5120x1440 micro display that could be fitted directly in front.
That would be a cleaner solution.
TBH, if they were willing to do that, have Samsung make a custom display for them, I would be fine paying the increased unit cost, just to have a better product.




PHJF wrote on Jan 8, 2014, 18:25:
I doubt GPUs (or the reasonably priced ones) will ever catch up.

I remember playing quake1 at 320x200 at 30 fps.

If I fire up gl quake (or whatever engine mod) right now, at 2560x1440 it's many many many hundreds of fps. Pretty sure it pegs at 1000 because 1ms is the smallest integer frame time it can calculate, which limits the readout to 1000ms_per_second/1ms=1000fps.

Tech will move along, like it has.
Unless there's a resource war in the mean time - amongst the powerful nations.

You should see what the modern SLI setups get at 5760x1080. 3X 1080p.
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/geforce_gtx_780_sli_review,22.html
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/geforce_gtx_780_sli_review,23.html

4K UHD (not 4K DCI) is 4X 1080p, not that big of a step up from 3X 1080p.

A 2 or 3 generations down, the top shelf single cards will pull good fps, and SLI mid range will run well too.
Consumer TV adoption of 4K will force GPU makers to cater more to resolution, so it won't be too long.

-scheherazade

This comment was edited on Jan 8, 2014, 20:25.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
25. Re: John Carmack Developing Oculus VR Games Jan 8, 2014, 18:58 HorrorScope
 
Scheherazade wrote on Jan 8, 2014, 16:59:

IMO, the downfall will be if people miss their normal displays.

That will happen if folks have to sacrifice on important features that they are currently taking for granted, but will be forced to face when those features are gone.

Pixel density is image clarity.
Giving up on image clarity is kind of a big deal, for a new display technology.



The reason I personally can't see me adopting the occulus for day-to-day use, is that I already know I'd miss the clarity.
I miss the clarity even nowadays when I have to use a 1080p display, so it's certain that I'll miss it with 1/2 1080p.

Hell, 4K has me more excited than occulus. In a few years a new connection standard will come out that can push it at 120hz, and the GPUs catch up, and I'll be smiling ear to ear.


I'll still buy an occulus, just to mess around with it. But I know (in its current state) it will end up like 3D Vision: Fun for the few hours I used it.

(Best part about 3D vision was finally getting 120hz 2D 1080p flat panel displays... finally catching up to the 113hz 1600x1200 CRTs I was stuck with for so long, eating up desk space.)

-scheherazade

Hey we all have our own things we like. I'm not excited at all for 4k on a flat monitor, if that can make a nice difference in VR than great. But personally I don't feel a need for more resolution on a flat.

You mention every day usage, I'm expecting to take these off to browse Blue's and to only wear for gaming, unless someone can prove to me otherwise.

I'm ok with Minecraft gfx vs Far Cry Gfx if the gaming is good and fun. Same will be for pixel density, even though i want it to be quality to. I understand the steps needed to get there and won't poo poo it, otherwise we'd have nothing today. You don't have a 4770K without a 286.

This comment was edited on Jan 8, 2014, 22:53.
 
Avatar 17232
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
24. Re: John Carmack Developing Oculus VR Games Jan 8, 2014, 18:25 PHJF
 
I doubt GPUs (or the reasonably priced ones) will ever catch up.  
Avatar 17251
 
Steam + PSN: PHJF
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
23. Re: John Carmack Developing Oculus VR Games Jan 8, 2014, 16:59 Scheherazade
 
HorrorScope wrote on Jan 8, 2014, 16:26:
Scheherazade wrote on Jan 8, 2014, 14:56:
Old VR headsets were ass.

Even the Occulus is 'meh' (resolution sucks, even the 1/2 1080p HD version sucks. They need 1080p per eye, or 1440p per eye, to 'wow'.).

Soon as someone makes a 'nice' headset that isn't a fortune, VR will be here.


IMO, the pitfall of some of these products is that in order to make them 'affordable', they nerf them so hard that they're not 'desirable'.

I simply wouldn't bother using a 1/2 1080p HMD, when I have a full rez 1440p monitor. I want the pixels more than I want the immersion.

We each have our desires, I'd give up some rez for immersion any day. I do now when I go to many indy games by choice due to game play enhancement, otherwise I would be EA's and Activisions bitch.

They have said all along where they are and ultimately where they want to be. You can get to the end now without taking steps. The main thing is they do their first release right. If they don't they just sent this back another decade. 1080P to me won't be the downfall if the sum is solid.

IMO, the downfall will be if people miss their normal displays.

That will happen if folks have to sacrifice on important features that they are currently taking for granted, but will be forced to face when those features are gone.

Pixel density is image clarity.
Giving up on image clarity is kind of a big deal, for a new display technology.



The reason I personally can't see me adopting the occulus for day-to-day use, is that I already know I'd miss the clarity.
I miss the clarity even nowadays when I have to use a 1080p display, so it's certain that I'll miss it with 1/2 1080p.

Hell, 4K has me more excited than occulus. In a few years a new connection standard will come out that can push it at 120hz, and the GPUs catch up, and I'll be smiling ear to ear.


I'll still buy an occulus, just to mess around with it. But I know (in its current state) it will end up like 3D Vision: Fun for the few hours I used it.

(Best part about 3D vision was finally getting 120hz 2D 1080p flat panel displays... finally catching up to the 113hz 1600x1200 CRTs I was stuck with for so long, eating up desk space.)

-scheherazade
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
22. Re: John Carmack Developing Oculus VR Games Jan 8, 2014, 16:37 BazzaLB
 
Cutter wrote on Jan 8, 2014, 13:06:
When I played games they were made from text...if you were lucky! Had to trudge your 286 uphill - both ways - in the snow!

You forgot the howling wind and the fact they weighed half a Ton
 
Lurking on Blues since mid nineties
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
21. Re: John Carmack Developing Oculus VR Games Jan 8, 2014, 16:26 HorrorScope
 
Scheherazade wrote on Jan 8, 2014, 14:56:
Old VR headsets were ass.

Even the Occulus is 'meh' (resolution sucks, even the 1/2 1080p HD version sucks. They need 1080p per eye, or 1440p per eye, to 'wow'.).

Soon as someone makes a 'nice' headset that isn't a fortune, VR will be here.


IMO, the pitfall of some of these products is that in order to make them 'affordable', they nerf them so hard that they're not 'desirable'.

I simply wouldn't bother using a 1/2 1080p HMD, when I have a full rez 1440p monitor. I want the pixels more than I want the immersion.

We each have our desires, I'd give up some rez for immersion any day. I do now when I go to many indy games by choice due to game play enhancement, otherwise I would be EA's and Activisions bitch.

They have said all along where they are and ultimately where they want to be. You can not get to the end now without taking steps. The main thing is they do their first release right. If they don't they just sent this back another decade. 1080P to me won't be the downfall if the sum is solid.

This comment was edited on Jan 8, 2014, 18:53.
 
Avatar 17232
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
20. Re: John Carmack Developing Oculus VR Games Jan 8, 2014, 16:13 Quboid
 
If the Rift shows signs of sustainable success, I'm sure we'll see a Rift Pro with 1440p or more for those who fancy something more and who can afford to buy it and the GPUs it would require.  
Avatar 10439
 
- Quboid
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
19. Re: John Carmack Developing Oculus VR Games Jan 8, 2014, 15:50 Curious
 
Scheherazade wrote on Jan 8, 2014, 14:56:
If I didn't have to sacrifice on pixels, then the immersion would sell it for me.
I would grudgingly give up ~$300 for a 1/2 1080p HMD. (knowing I would try it out just for kicks, then put it on a shelf and never use it again. It'd be money to burn.)
But I would happily give up ~$1000 for a full 1440p HMD. (knowing that it would get used all the time, and I'd get my money's worth)

Scheherazade wrote on Jan 8, 2014, 14:56:
Even the Occulus is 'meh' (resolution sucks, even the 1/2 1080p HD version sucks. They need 1080p per eye, or 1440p per eye, to 'wow'.).

At the $1000 price point, not many people would make the investment. Low consumer adoption equals low developer adoption. I would rather take the $300 glasses and be blown away by the apps and games rather than the $1000 option with nothing to do on it. The Oculus Rift is designed to increase the widespread adoption of stereoscopic APIs.


I can't say for sure until I've tried it, but I do know that the human brain is an amazing image processor. Two 1/2 HD displays will almost certainly be interpolated by your brain into a single full HD display. Let's wait and see.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
18. Re: John Carmack Developing Oculus VR Games Jan 8, 2014, 15:37 Curious
 
JohnBirshire wrote on Jan 8, 2014, 11:17:
These VR headsets were a "craze" 15 years ago, then they disappeared. Suddenly they are reappearing a few years ago, and still only a handful of people seem to care.

Tablets were also a craze 20 years ago that quickly faded. Remember the Apple Newton? Technology just needed to catch up to the point where consumers would have sustained interest.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
37 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo