The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
You may be wondering about what is meant in the title? Well, although games are designed and perceived as 3d worlds, they are still shown on a 2d screen, and are still interacted with in only 2d... usually simply with a "jump" button to allow some 3rd dimensional freedom.
So... how do u solve this? Simple... make a Holodeck!
Ok, so it's not easy- but there is a way...
Does anyone here know Jez San? He's head of Argonauts, and in the top 100 rich list after having sold the hardware part of the company. Anyway, before he sold the company, they reveilled a new display device that escentially projected a 3d image above it! Now... if only they could get an and release it! (Although no news has been heard)
Another idea is one that the US military uses to track its tanks. It's a horizontal screen that you look down onto, but the image is in 3d! Fantastic... if only someone could make a cheap version of it!
The final idea for display devices that I have just remembered is a new type of TV... the program is filmed from several angles, and these are then converted into a signal to the TV, where they are remade... in 3d! Like the virtual boy's display, but only you don't need to look into gogles, and when finnished will be i full colour and high resolution. This idea is being developed by some top Japanese company (I think that it is Toshiba).
Now. How to interact with this world? Well, we've tried 3D gloves, and big virtual reality boxes are a bit big! But thinking about it, all controllers are the same- plastic with coloured buttons on... can no-noe think of something better? Maybe some sort of eye-tracking device that could tell how far away you were looking? Maybe not.. but something needs to be used!
Anyway, my final point. Some of you may ask "Why not play games as they are... anyway, this new 3D environment would be too hard to get lots of people to adopt, and will also alienate so many gamers." The answer is this... "Eventually in the future of gaming this idea will be faced... and conquered. It's enevitable, and this being the FOG means that it's totally relevant"
I'll see u in 50 years when we plug ourselves into games ala eXistenZ ;)
Sonic
So... how do u solve this? Simple... make a Holodeck!
Ok, so it's not easy- but there is a way...
Does anyone here know Jez San? He's head of Argonauts, and in the top 100 rich list after having sold the hardware part of the company. Anyway, before he sold the company, they reveilled a new display device that escentially projected a 3d image above it! Now... if only they could get an and release it! (Although no news has been heard)
Another idea is one that the US military uses to track its tanks. It's a horizontal screen that you look down onto, but the image is in 3d! Fantastic... if only someone could make a cheap version of it!
The final idea for display devices that I have just remembered is a new type of TV... the program is filmed from several angles, and these are then converted into a signal to the TV, where they are remade... in 3d! Like the virtual boy's display, but only you don't need to look into gogles, and when finnished will be i full colour and high resolution. This idea is being developed by some top Japanese company (I think that it is Toshiba).
Now. How to interact with this world? Well, we've tried 3D gloves, and big virtual reality boxes are a bit big! But thinking about it, all controllers are the same- plastic with coloured buttons on... can no-noe think of something better? Maybe some sort of eye-tracking device that could tell how far away you were looking? Maybe not.. but something needs to be used!
Anyway, my final point. Some of you may ask "Why not play games as they are... anyway, this new 3D environment would be too hard to get lots of people to adopt, and will also alienate so many gamers." The answer is this... "Eventually in the future of gaming this idea will be faced... and conquered. It's enevitable, and this being the FOG means that it's totally relevant"
I'll see u in 50 years when we plug ourselves into games ala eXistenZ ;)
Sonic
Page:
PinkPig wrote:
> I wouldn't play any game which was more realistic than just an image
> on the screen. Why? Because an image can be differed from reality.
> A "real" 3D image, if it was good enough, need not.
I
> am quite happy with games as they are now. If we want ultimate
> realism in games, does this include injuries? Maybe one day, if
> manufacturers want it to, it might.
Personally, I think that if
> we want anything more realistic than a flat image, then there is a
> simple solution - The REAL WORLD!!!
Yes, it may be a difficult
> concept to some people, but there is life beyond games, and I am
> quite happy for the most reatistic thing in my life, to be my REAL
> life!
lol... there is indeed "real life" where u can actually talk to people in person. Maybe some people in the Fog should try that once in a while! lol
Now, as for being happy with games now. You never know what you were looking for till you found it. A few years ago people would be happy to play games with FMV sequences far better than the game. No more! Now the whole game has to look that good. Remember before the rumble pack... people only wanted to interact with the game in 2 ways- sight and sound. Now motion has been added to that list, and more will follow.
Trust me... when we play true 3d games then you will wonder how we survived without it!
Sonic
> I wouldn't play any game which was more realistic than just an image
> on the screen. Why? Because an image can be differed from reality.
> A "real" 3D image, if it was good enough, need not.
I
> am quite happy with games as they are now. If we want ultimate
> realism in games, does this include injuries? Maybe one day, if
> manufacturers want it to, it might.
Personally, I think that if
> we want anything more realistic than a flat image, then there is a
> simple solution - The REAL WORLD!!!
Yes, it may be a difficult
> concept to some people, but there is life beyond games, and I am
> quite happy for the most reatistic thing in my life, to be my REAL
> life!
lol... there is indeed "real life" where u can actually talk to people in person. Maybe some people in the Fog should try that once in a while! lol
Now, as for being happy with games now. You never know what you were looking for till you found it. A few years ago people would be happy to play games with FMV sequences far better than the game. No more! Now the whole game has to look that good. Remember before the rumble pack... people only wanted to interact with the game in 2 ways- sight and sound. Now motion has been added to that list, and more will follow.
Trust me... when we play true 3d games then you will wonder how we survived without it!
Sonic
PinkPig wrote:
> I wouldn't play any game which was more realistic than just an image
> on the screen. Why? Because an image can be differed from reality.
> A "real" 3D image, if it was good enough, need not.
I
> am quite happy with games as they are now. If we want ultimate
> realism in games, does this include injuries? Maybe one day, if
> manufacturers want it to, it might.
Personally, I think that if
> we want anything more realistic than a flat image, then there is a
> simple solution - The REAL WORLD!!!
Yes, it may be a difficult
> concept to some people, but there is life beyond games, and I am
> quite happy for the most reatistic thing in my life, to be my REAL
> life!
lol... there is indeed "real life" where u can actually talk to people in person. Maybe some people in the Fog should try that once in a while! lol
Now, as for being happy with games now. You never know what you were looking for till you found it. A few years ago people would be happy to play games with FMV sequences far better than the game. No more! Now the whole game has to look that good. Remember before the rumble pack... people only wanted to interact with the game in 2 ways- sight and sound. Now motion has been added to that list, and more will follow.
Trust me... when we play true 3d games then you will wonder how we survived without it!
Sonic
> I wouldn't play any game which was more realistic than just an image
> on the screen. Why? Because an image can be differed from reality.
> A "real" 3D image, if it was good enough, need not.
I
> am quite happy with games as they are now. If we want ultimate
> realism in games, does this include injuries? Maybe one day, if
> manufacturers want it to, it might.
Personally, I think that if
> we want anything more realistic than a flat image, then there is a
> simple solution - The REAL WORLD!!!
Yes, it may be a difficult
> concept to some people, but there is life beyond games, and I am
> quite happy for the most reatistic thing in my life, to be my REAL
> life!
lol... there is indeed "real life" where u can actually talk to people in person. Maybe some people in the Fog should try that once in a while! lol
Now, as for being happy with games now. You never know what you were looking for till you found it. A few years ago people would be happy to play games with FMV sequences far better than the game. No more! Now the whole game has to look that good. Remember before the rumble pack... people only wanted to interact with the game in 2 ways- sight and sound. Now motion has been added to that list, and more will follow.
Trust me... when we play true 3d games then you will wonder how we survived without it!
Sonic
I wouldn't play any game which was more realistic than just an image on the screen. Why? Because an image can be differed from reality. A "real" 3D image, if it was good enough, need not.
I am quite happy with games as they are now. If we want ultimate realism in games, does this include injuries? Maybe one day, if manufacturers want it to, it might.
Personally, I think that if we want anything more realistic than a flat image, then there is a simple solution - The REAL WORLD!!!
Yes, it may be a difficult concept to some people, but there is life beyond games, and I am quite happy for the most reatistic thing in my life, to be my REAL life!
I am quite happy with games as they are now. If we want ultimate realism in games, does this include injuries? Maybe one day, if manufacturers want it to, it might.
Personally, I think that if we want anything more realistic than a flat image, then there is a simple solution - The REAL WORLD!!!
Yes, it may be a difficult concept to some people, but there is life beyond games, and I am quite happy for the most reatistic thing in my life, to be my REAL life!
Dude, imagine creating a virtual body then having your entire brain controling it,feeling everything from all your senses and pretty much being there.
Then if the computer made some steps you could walk up them in the Virtual world but you'd still be hooked up to a machine like Neo in the matrix.
get the picture??
Then if the computer made some steps you could walk up them in the Virtual world but you'd still be hooked up to a machine like Neo in the matrix.
get the picture??
Bonus wrote:
> Nope because, you woulf feel your leg moving, the suit would not be
> able to prevent you feeling this without tapping the brain.
Thats the point... The suit doesnt stop you feeling yourself move... it allows you too feel virtual objects in the world your interatcing with... picking up cups which only exist within the gameworld... and making it feel as if its actually in your hand... etc...
> Nope because, you woulf feel your leg moving, the suit would not be
> able to prevent you feeling this without tapping the brain.
Thats the point... The suit doesnt stop you feeling yourself move... it allows you too feel virtual objects in the world your interatcing with... picking up cups which only exist within the gameworld... and making it feel as if its actually in your hand... etc...
My rumble pack, doesnt let me walk up imaginary stairs though, I want one of those!!
Actually, devices like the one u speak of exist in a more modest form... and almost everyone in the forum has one...
A few years back scientists wanted people who use robotic hands to feel what they are moving around... So they spend milions of pounds, several years and a few brain cells to create what is now called "The RUMBLE PACK"
Amazing how science affects real life!
Sonic
A few years back scientists wanted people who use robotic hands to feel what they are moving around... So they spend milions of pounds, several years and a few brain cells to create what is now called "The RUMBLE PACK"
Amazing how science affects real life!
Sonic
Nope because, you woulf feel your leg moving, the suit would not be able to prevent you feeling this without tapping the brain.
Bonus wrote:
> But you wouldn't think that you are, because you would know that
> there wasn't a stair case there. You said that if you lift one leg,
> the suit would be able to stop it, as if there was a step there and
> do funny pressure things to you foot to let you think that you were
> standing with one foot on a step. But how do you lift your other
> foot, if you are standing on one leg??
I dont know... I'm not working on the project...
I suspect that once you raise your first leg, the suit applies pressure to the base of your foot making it seem like you foot is on the stair.
The pressure at the horizontal to the knee joint being quite firm... virticallyt being looser, which would make it feel that as you lowered your foot back to the ground that you were actually pulling your body up (especially since the visual stimuli would give that impression as well... even if you 'looked' at you feet)... this would continue ad infinitum
> But you wouldn't think that you are, because you would know that
> there wasn't a stair case there. You said that if you lift one leg,
> the suit would be able to stop it, as if there was a step there and
> do funny pressure things to you foot to let you think that you were
> standing with one foot on a step. But how do you lift your other
> foot, if you are standing on one leg??
I dont know... I'm not working on the project...
I suspect that once you raise your first leg, the suit applies pressure to the base of your foot making it seem like you foot is on the stair.
The pressure at the horizontal to the knee joint being quite firm... virticallyt being looser, which would make it feel that as you lowered your foot back to the ground that you were actually pulling your body up (especially since the visual stimuli would give that impression as well... even if you 'looked' at you feet)... this would continue ad infinitum
But you wouldn't think that you are, because you would know that there wasn't a stair case there. You said that if you lift one leg, the suit would be able to stop it, as if there was a step there and do funny pressure things to you foot to let you think that you were standing with one foot on a step. But how do you lift your other foot, if you are standing on one leg??
Page: