I've been making some tests with an older version of it and it was already really capable.
And it got better so I might just try to port my old tests and see what happens at some point.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Anza

Quoting: TheSHEEEP

Quoting: AnzaBut even now, there's some cool stuff coming out because people are working to get VR working properly on Linux. Basically that was something that simplifies sharing displays on multi-seat setup much easier.

If I'm able to explain it correctly, it's way to lease the display to a program that wants exclusive (but still revocable) access for a display, while making sure that client doesn't have access to the clients running on the real X server. X server or kernel can revoke the access at any time and control comes back to the X server without any disastrous issues.

Sounds interesting, multiple separate X sessions at the same time are a really something that is missing at the moment. Not only for VR, but in general. A few weeks ago, I was in a situation where I would've really needed that...

In some form it has been possible for long time. Oldest one around is to make all monitors separate X displays. Makes things pretty cumbersome though as clients programs can't be dragged between the displays and which display programs end up is determined with an environment variable. And setup can't be really changed dynamically. Getting rid of the setup requires editing configuration file and the restarting the Xorg server.

Xephyr was somewhat more practical, it's basically a window that contains another X server, ie. nested X server.I don't think I have ever tried to play games with it though. But in theory it could be possible at it should have GLX support now. I don't think mouse is locked inside the window though, which for some games might not be practical.

Ah, what I needed was to have two X sessions with only one monitor (or rather, on a laptop with no spare monitor around). By switching the contexts using the good old Ctrl+Alt+F1-8, I tried to start another X session on one of them.
The funny thing is that I remember me looking around in Lynx (!!!) about how it could be achieved. What I don't remember is why I needed that in the first place...

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Eike

Quoting: TheSHEEEPI don't see where a VR device offers that much more functionality than a monitor + controller/mouse.

Right. It's you who doesn't see this.

You pulled that sentence out of context, which is amazing, considering you quoted the next sentence right after that... You can read them as "I don't see... except for...".

Quoting: EikeYou seem to be trying to refute that VR devices will replace everything - but I'm asking again, who even said that before you were trying to refute it?

I already answered that question. What do you want from me? :S:

Also... it was you who can imagine that VR devices will eventually replace everything.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: AnzaBut even now, there's some cool stuff coming out because people are working to get VR working properly on Linux. Basically that was something that simplifies sharing displays on multi-seat setup much easier.

If I'm able to explain it correctly, it's way to lease the display to a program that wants exclusive (but still revocable) access for a display, while making sure that client doesn't have access to the clients running on the real X server. X server or kernel can revoke the access at any time and control comes back to the X server without any disastrous issues.

Sounds interesting, multiple separate X sessions at the same time are a really something that is missing at the moment. Not only for VR, but in general. A few weeks ago, I was in a situation where I would've really needed that...

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Eike

Quoting: TheSHEEEP

Quoting: EikeYeah, that's why people replaced their little Nokias with big Smartphones. Oh, wait...

I hear you say "But these do way more!"
Yes, just like VR devices.

Not a valid comparison.

Then why did you bring it up?

As an example of a technology that spread widely because they made people's lives easier and are less cumbersome than what came before.
Of course an average smartphone is bigger than an old Nokia. But it does not only replace that Nokia, it also replaces (at least partly) having to carry a laptop around. Or accessing your emails at home, doing onlinebanking, etc.
Do I really need to tell you that or are you just desperately trying to prove me wrong in something?

I don't see where a VR device offers that much more functionality than a monitor + controller/mouse. For gaming, or generally anything where being "inside the first person" has an advantage, sure. But that's just a small fraction of things that classical monitors cover.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: EikeYeah, that's why people replaced their little Nokias with big Smartphones. Oh, wait...

I hear you say "But these do way more!"
Yes, just like VR devices.

Not a valid comparison.
Smartphones are carried around just like old Nokias. They are bigger, but still fit in pockets, jackets, etc.
I had/have both, there really isn't much of a difference.

And those that really are too big simply don't sell much - or are tablets, which is a completely different thing altogether.

But here, we are talking about something that supposedly replaces monitors at some future point in time.
Which, again - for all the reasons I wrote above and more - is just very unlikely.

Have this situation, outside of gaming:
A team of marine biologists are on the ocean, letting their mini-robot into the depths to do some research.
The drone is piloted by one of them - via VR (a good use case, I'd say).
The others are not sitting by idly. They are analyzing the data that is gathered live by the drone and also watch the live images (cause it's interesting!).
How will they do all of that at once? All sitting in their chairs, having VR-headsets on, using their VR-Excels and VR-Browsers? :lol:
Probably not. They will be in front of their own monitors, analyzing, while also looking at the big one that displays what the pilot is seeing (and possibly more).

Quoting: Eike

Quoting: TheSHEEEPWhat I care about is the claim that this tech with limited use-cases is THE FUTURE.

Who said that, apart from yourself?

Not too many here, actually.
I just made that point as it comes up time and time again in too hype-y articles, discussions, etc.

Some of the people here just saw their big hobby attacked by me calling it a gimmick and jumped in its defense, going all "you're just a negative nancy, mememe" on me for daring to have some points (none of which have ever been disproved, btw) that do not exactly speak in favor of VR ever becoming a really big thing.

I don't actually care too much about VR, funny enough.
Calling people out on their BS is a hobby of mine, though, if you were about to ask about why I'm still doing this.
I'm actually having a good time.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: scaineWeird - you still think this is an argument. Like you're "right" and we're all "wrong". If I don't like olives, do you really think you can argue my position on them? That you can argue their case and I'll be like "Woah, you're right! I need to eat more of these delicious olives! I've been wasting my life not eating them!".

I like olives.
Other than that, the "metaphor"/example didn't really work.

Quoting: scaineMove on. I'm excited by the notion that I can play VR on Linux. Really excited, because I've tried it on Windows and it was (for me) an incredible, game-changing (literally) experience. You're not. That's all there is to it. Your "facts" don't matter to me, clearly, since I've tried it and still love it, right? (Sorry - didn't read any of the rest of your post/facts, since... well, why bother?)

I couldn't care less if you love it or not.
If you still think that this is what I'm arguing, you have fully failed to get what I'm saying.

What I care about is the claim that this tech with limited use-cases is THE FUTURE. The thing that will finally replace those monitors, mice, ...
Because that is just incredibly unlikely, for all of the reasons I wrote above. And probably more.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: beniwtvThat's not a fact. Did you try the new wireless Vive Pro yet to know how heavy it really is? What about all these new battery technologies that make them very light that are being developed as we speak? What about other future developments? Remember - computers used to be the size of a house!

Again, Moore's Law. It has been disproved. There is a natural limit to how small things can be.
But it doesn't matter, my main point is, it will always weigh more than nothing and will always require you to put something on top of your head. Which will always be more than putting nothing on your head.
Big breakthroughs and replacements of current tech are only established if something is LESS cumbersome, not more cumbersome. See cars, smartphones, etc.
Getting into VR will always be more cumbersome than just looking at a screen.

Quoting: beniwtvAgain, that is not a fact - but your opinion. Plenty of people that played VR vs non-VR disagree with you here, and find the experience way better, including gameplay-wise. There's some cool things you can to with the VR controllers - specially the Occulus Rift ones - that aren't possible (or more cumbersome) with your keyboard and mouse. Like moving fingers, picking things up, moving / rotating them around, etc...

There seems to be a confusion here about what gameplay is. I might have misused the term, or you did, or it is just one of those terms that are too broad.
What I meant was NOT controls (which is what you describe), but game mechanics. AI, player motivation, short/mid/long-term goals, basic game mechanics, various calculations, etc. All of these need to work regardless of how the player views or controls it all.
Again, look at games like EUIV, StarCraft, Sonic, etc. Being in VR changes nothing about how those games work, therefore it cannot improve them on that level. That is not an opinion.
Neither is it an opinion that extra effort is required by developers of those games for very little gain.

Quoting: beniwtvYes, you need a bit of space to take full advantage of VR, which is a fact well pointed out. I barely have space, but I'll make sure to have space when moving into a new house. But here you're assuming again that people don't have space and don't want to make space, which honestly, again is your opinion.

An own house?
How nice for you. Too bad the majority of people live in (rather small) flats in cities...

And how many people exactly do you think are willing to make the space for VR? Except for gamers/enthusiasts?
Again, remember this is supposedly the "future way people will view/experience things", replacing normal screens and monitors. Nobody has given any point as to why the average person should care. And the average person is very much required for anything to be "the future".

Quoting: beniwtvAgain, your opinion. You assume everyone wants to have other things running while playing VR, or hates not being able to interact with the world around them while playing. And honestly, grabbing a drink you can still do when taking a break while playing...

It is simply a fact of life for the majority of people that you cannot really be in your own sphere for large amounts of time. People have families, jobs, responsibilities. Most people I know are happy if they can find one day on the weekend they can spend with their hobby. The rest of the time, they can maybe spend time with their hobby while also having to be somewhat involved in other things.
Only few can afford that VR kind of isolation often. And for something that can only be done rarely, why would you spend the cash?
Anything that wants to be a truly big deal (see above) just cannot be that situational. This is not an opinion.

Quoting: TheSHEEEPWrong. Calling people for what they are behaving like is simply the truth and I will continue to do so. If you think me short-sighted, call me out on it, I'll gladly disprove that.
Let's not get to the kindergarden level of "let's all say nice things only", please. That doesn't lead anywhere useful. I rather have people speak their mind than trying to be nice for the mere sake of being nice.

Quoting: beniwtvWhoa! If you don't want to have a civilized discussion, but instead insult people, then let's just stop right here. Because THAT really doesn't lead to anything useful.

If you think that civilized means holding back because someone's feelings could get hurt and nicety for the sake of nicety, then I can only fully disagree.
For me, that sounds like kindergarden, not a discussion among adults. Sometimes, steam must be vented, and I am rather a willing target of that than to try and force others to hold back what they truly think. Nor will I let others hold me back, it's not like I frothingly throw tantrums around ;)
If we all did your form of civilized, we would live in a society of mutes, because everything that could be said, could hurt someone. Better to let things out and allow people to grow in the face of adversity.

I was always more of a Klingon, really. What can I say? Deal with it.
Or ignore me. I do not care too much, either way.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Eike

Quoting: TheSHEEEPThere's a small increase in immersion due to the hardware, but due to the player just looking at the field, that is very, very limited.

I don't know why it didn't work for you. But you must have noticed that it's hugely different for many people. In fact I cannot remember a single one, in real life, online or journalist not having experienced a huge increase in immersion. For me personally, it was like having stepped into the monitor after more than three decades of sitting in front of it. That's what VR is all about.

That point was made for non-FP games.
For first person games, I agree with you, it does increase the immersion.
Personally, it is not an immersion that I really need - for me that comes from gameplay mechanics, storytelling, etc. I guess this might be simpler for other people?
How I look at the world - that is just a window. If I move the mouse or hold that controller toward an item - it is just an input command. And the mouse is way more reliable - just looking at some Twitch streamers trying to grab stuff with the Vive controller. Seems to be a challenge on its own - though I would expect improvements with tech advancements here.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: scaine

Quoting: TheSHEEEP"Passionate argument about something they hate

You don't like VR, we get it. This isn't something you can actually argue about though, you know? You have your opinion, other people have theirs.

Ahh, the good old "I'm all out of arguments, so let's make all these facts opinions so I don't have to discuss them any more".

The only opinion part about what I'm saying is the part where VR will never be the widespread, replacement-of-current-peripherals thing some make it out to be. That's obviously in the future, and while I base my predictions on logic, I haven't quite reached prophetic levels yet ;)

But all the rest is not opinions, it is facts.

Wireless can be done, but that introduces a need to keep your headset charged. Which introduces the need for a battery of some kind. Which increases the weight. Even if the devices do get lighter as a whole, there are limits to how light they can be, Moore's Law has been disproved years ago. There will always be that.

Games not specifically made for VR, but just supporting it cross-peripherals (VR is not a platform, it is a peripheral) can never be a significant improvement gameplay-wise, yet require effort by the developer to support VR. There will always be games not supporting VR because it wouldn't make sense to support it.

The other way around: Games made specifically for VR could always be made working for monitors as well. There is no movement my head can make that cannot be imitated with mouse & keyboard.

Space: The "full body" VR experiences (which offer significantly more than just sitting with the headset) require a ton of space. Most people simply don't have that space or are not willing to spare the space. For some proper movement that doesn't feel restricted, you'd need at least 2x2 - 3x3 meters. That's the size of a trampoline. Compare it to the space PC & monitor needs.

Price: The better the tech gets, the more expensive the devices will be. They do get cheaper with time, but just as every proper hardware, they will remain on a not-cheap level. And that will always be in addition to the PC/console - which already cost quite some dough as well.

No multi-tasking. When I play a game, I like to have something else running on my other monitor. Maybe a guide, maybe something entirely different. I can always have both in my view at the same time. And I can interact without problems with the world around me, too. Like looking at someone when talking to them. Or grabbing a drink. Good luck with any of that while you have the VR headset on...

I'll stop here, but there's more. And all of that combined should already make it clear to any neutral observer that, no, VR will most likely not be the widespread current-tech-replacement some make it out to be. It is simply not practical enough. It will remain something for people with the space and money to make use of it.

And no, I don't hate VR. That's something you came up with to not having to bother disproving any of my points. I'm neutral about VR. I might even buy a device, would like to try it out once Star Citizen comes out. Or rather, IF it does...

What I do hate is human stupidity and mostly baseless hype.

Quoting: scaineRegardless of where you stand on the subject though, there's no need to get personal. Calling people sheep, or narrow-minded/short-sighted for not agreeing with your opinion only undermines your own position.

Wrong. Calling people for what they are behaving like is simply the truth and I will continue to do so.
If you think me short-sighted, call me out on it, I'll gladly disprove that.
Let's not get to the kindergarden level of "let's all say nice things only", please. That doesn't lead anywhere useful.
I rather have people speak their mind than trying to be nice for the mere sake of being nice.

View this comment - View article - View full comments