[Semi-Off-Topic Drama] VorpX ShaderHacking, or How I got Banned from VorpX forums...

[RAGEdemon]

Hi guys,

I thought I'd share a related experience....

Ralf of VorpX has made shaderhacking possible in his VorpX driver. Currently the functionality seems to be basic where one can disable shaders quite effectively, but he is working on being able to modify them at some stage down the line like our shaderhackers do.

It works decently well, as most VorpX titles have broken shadows etc in my experience. You select the shader which disappears once selected, and then you can select what to do with it almost exactly like our shaderhackers do.

He claimed that VorpX's shaderhacking is "complex" even when it doesn't allow any fixing from my knowledge - only disabling - whereas our 3DMigoto and other shader hacks are apparently "basic", even though they make games work perfectly with properly fixed shaders at proper depth.

I have mentioned that he might be able to learn how to fix shaders by talking to one of our friendly shaderhackers.

Anyway, I requested further detailed documentation on the various features, which the current brief documentation doesn't elaborate on - stating that perhaps people might learn and form a VorpX community.

He replied with sarcasm and the usual condescending tone which most forum dwellers will be familiar with.

I pointed out that his reaction was disheartening and toxic, and quoted him word for word, saying that "this is the kind of toxic things I was talking about". He obviously didn't like me quoting his nastiness because he quickly edited his post and quickly deleted my post with his quote in it. He claimed that I was personally attacking him (simply by quoting him and saying that this kind of thing was toxic).

He then threatened to ban me if I 'personally attacked him again'.

I replied: The so called "heinous personal attack was quoting you verbatim and pointing out that it was not nice". Apparently this statement is also a personal attack:

BAN; posts deleted.

Looks like he has edited his own posts to make them look nicer now...

Relevant screenshot:
https://i.imgur.com/daqwIXR.png
Topic is still up if anyone is bored enough to read it...

Moral of the story: People get angry when you call out their nastiness and will then ban you under false pretext / edit their posts and edit your posts, to make themselves look good while making you look bad... wow... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

No doubt we'll likely see him here soon...

[helifax]

Yes yes yes! We all know the that you are
Hahaha

Cheers!
Helifax

[ThinkVR]

"No doubt we'll likely see him here soon... "

Right, he will, but only to clarify something that you might have misunderstood, or at least got mixed up in your post above. I really don't share your passion for creating internet drama, so I have the decency not to cite any of your e-mails. You know exactly why you have been banned (for two weeks to let you cool down a little). As far as I'm aware you got banned elsewhere before. Al these mean, nasty people who totally misunderstand you, being the angel you are.

Let's better focus on the matter at hand instead:

The shader editing options in the menu that you have discovered are not new in any way. That's how shaders are treated by vorpX since the dawn of time.

In addition to that since a little while there now is shader replacing, currently DX9 only and ALPHA though, a lot of that is still subject to change. The basic principle here is the same as with 3D-Vision shader hacks, the implementation however is quite different since things aren't the same 1:1 in VR. vorpX does more than just shifting vertices left and right a bit to create stereo, which has to be considered when doing replacement shaders, making the task more complex. I "claimed" it to be more complex for vorpX because it is.

When things are ready you can be sure that there also will be examples and documentation, which I believe was your original concern.

Hope that helps.

[schwing]

No doubt we'll likely see him here soon...

That's the last thing we need right now.

[ThinkVR]

Too late, sorry. But I promise to not bother you any longer than necessary.

[RAGEdemon]

...and *POOF* there he is

As far as I'm aware you got banned elsewhere before.

Ah yes, indeed I was banned for 2 weeks from the nVidia forums, for the heinous crime of advertising to our 3DVision community to migrate over to these very MTBS3D forums that you now speak on, and which now the entire 3DV community enjoys, thanks to Neil and others who made it possible. Indeed, what a villain I was!

You know very well that you banned me not because of any made up 'personal attacks', but because I quoted your nastiness and called you out on your toxicity.

The proof is right here in the last post in this screenshot. The very post that you banned me for and deleted Ralf:

https://i.imgur.com/daqwIXR.png

I even warned you in that very post that I had taken a screenshot, because it was obvious what you were going to do.

Are you now going to claim that I doctored the screenshot?

Luckily, you have no petty administrative powers to edit my posts and ban people under false pretext in this place, like you did on your forum

[ThinkVR]

You won't provoke me into continuing yet another childish debate with you. Sorry.

You know why you got banned. Use the two weeks to cool down. You also know that I will happily answer any future suggestions you may have. Just leave out the drama whenever you don't get the answer you want to hear. Better for me, better for you. Everybody wins.

[helifax]

/grabs popcorn!

[ThinkVR]

Not worth getting up to grab some. As far as I'm concerned this ends right here.

RD is a certified angel. I'm a mean, nasty, semi-corporate dickhead who takes away his freedom of speech. All good.

[RAGEdemon]

Leaving other matters aside for the time being for higher mutual goals that benefit everyone:

Introductions:

I am sure you guys know of each other, but I don't know if you know each other personally.

Ralf, Let me introduce Helifax (Octavian), the single handed creator of the 3DV OpenGL wrapper, and amazing 3DV fixes such as Doom 2016. He is now making amazing progress on Vulkan. Helifax is one of the smartest guys I have ever met, and we all learn things from him regularly. He is one of our community's many shining beacons.

If you would be so inclined, you might wish to befriend him and maybe he might wish to share some trinkets of his vast knowledge which you might be able to apply yourself in VorpX... if Helifax wanted at all to share, that is. You might even be able to come up with some kind of cross licensing/profit sharing or similar agreements, I don't know - all up to you folks.

Helifax, this is Ralf - the creator of Vorpx. The software itself is pretty good - one of the 2 best 2D->Geometry3DVR gaming softwares on the market (the other being Bo3b/Paul's HelixVision).

Where you guys go from here, if anywhere at all, is up to you...

edit: Autocorrect typos

[DJ-RK]

@RAGEdemon: To be fair, you DID dare him to ban you. I'd probably do the same, being the crotchety bastard I am today!

[ThinkVR]

You would indeed if you actually knew the whole conversation. Probably for life instead of two weeks to cool down.

[helifax]

Leaving other matters aside for the time being for higher mutual goals that benefit everyone:

Introductions:

I am sure you guys know of each other, but I don't know if you know each other personally.

Ralf, Let me introduce Halifax (Octavian), the single handed creator of the 3DV OpenGL wrapper, and amazing 3DV fixes such as Doom 2016. He is now making amazing progress on Vulkan. Helifax is one of the smartest guys I have ever met, and we all learn things from him regularly. He is one of our community's many shining beacons.

If you would be so inclined, you might wish to befriend him and maybe he might wish to share some trinkets of his vast knowledge which you might be able to apply yourself in VorpX... if Helifax wanted at all to share, that is. You might even be able to come up with some kind of cross licensing/profit sharing or similar agreements, I don't know - all up to you folks.

Halifax, this is Ralf - the creator of Vorpx. The software itself is pretty good - one of the 2 best 2D->Geometry3DVR gaming softwares on the market (the other being Bo3b/Paul's HelixVision).

Where you guys go from here, if anywhere at all, is up to you...

Thank you RAGEdemon,

I am always up to discussions and collaboration
I personally don't like RED TAPE in general. What I do like is learning, understanding and trying to solve problems! (Not necessarily through coding, but this is 90% of the time, my activity ^_^. From the rest 5% it's playing games obviously ^_^ And 5% for the rest. This reminds me, I actually haven't played a game in 2 months now Really need to play LastOfUs2 - I know, I know about all the bad thingies about the game - but I must experience it for myself ^_^).

Sorry to derail a bit up there, but yes I am up for any discussions & collaborations. I do own VorpeX (as I call it) and I think it's an awesome piece of software with great potential!

Cheers,
Helifax

[russellk]

I'm getting old and forgetful but I'm sure Ralf has been on here before, or at least on the old forums.

I remember it being cordial and there being some positivity about future collaborations.

I hate to say it, but I don't get the point of this post at all. If helifax or Ralf and others want to talk then fine, but this reads a bit like a vendetta to me. Again, my memory could be failing! Lol.

[ThinkVR]

@ Helifax: I'm easy to reach if you want to contact me.

I'll say upfront that I'm a bit sceptical about the frame sequential approach you seem to take If I understood everything correctly. I got eaten alive when in the very distant past I just announced that I'd like to do that for vorpX. Actually I even pushed back the first vorpX release to do proper single frame 3D instead.

However, I'd be happy to get in touch with you any time, maybe we can figure something out. Just shoot me a message via the contact form on the vorpX website and I'll get back to you.

[helifax]

I'll say upfront that I'm a bit sceptical about the frame sequential approach you seem to take If I understood everything correctly. I got eaten alive when in the very distant past I just announced that I'd like to do that for vorpX. Actually I even pushed back the first vorpX release to do proper single frame 3D instead.

Sure.. if you can't reach a high enough FPS it will be problematic. It's certainly not ideal, but it will have to do for the time being. Duplication of drawcalls and corresponding targets requires a lot of time to code it. It can always be added later, depending on the maturity of the project and how many people use it. Spending 500 hours for example, to make it work only for 2-3 games is not a good investment.

Cheers,
Helifax

[ThinkVR]

Perfectly understandable. Personally I considered the solution also good enough back then. I just got virtually butchered over it by people who didn't, and I have to admit they had valid reasons. so I'm very, very careful in this regard. For VR you would need 100% stable 90fps at all times to avoid at least the worst glitches. That's a pipe dream in demanding games for anyone with mid-tier hardware. Also not even at 90+ it would work good enough with all headsets.

Anyway, I didn't really think this through yet, but maybe making users aware of the inherent issues could be a solution. If you are interested, just get in touch.

[Lizzard]

I always get excited when I see so many influential guys in the same place. In the end our passions lead us here. Irrespective of our differences in nature or acuteness. I still dream of that day where stereoscopic gaming leads the gaming industry. You guys have the potential and believe you could achieve this while working together. To many here stereoscopic gaming was a great success up till now. But globally not so much. Too much competition and strife. Virtual Reality is where many things come together. And I hope there will be one umbrella for enthusiasts one day.

Ralf, if i may ask, how many active subscribers do you have on your side?

[ThinkVR]

TBH I'm not really a huge fan of fusing S3D gaming and VR. Being a windsurfer for the better part of my life this feels pretty much like trying to fuse windsurfing and kiteboarding. To the casual observer both are about gliding over water driven by the forces of nature, but in fact both are different enough that most who actually do it prefer one over the other. Same for S3D gaming and VR in my opinion.

[Lizzard]

At the heart of innovation you will find diversity. Diversity is a great thing. But with it domination and strife is often the problem. Without innovation businesses fails. At this point in time what game developers need is to have the ability to utilize more cores. This allows them to reach photo realistic quality at much better performance. At the center of this you have the API's. The developers who masters this will come out on top. But you also want something that is more future proof and affordable. Which is why I can see your focus is on the right priorities when it comes to price/performance. This attracts more gamers. And this is what Virtual Reality/Stereoscopic gaming needs. Vulcan will become fundamental in Virtual Reality's future. And this is what I had in mind with umbrella. It includes team green and team red. This might also revolutionize VR on consoles. Which we are probably going to see with the new PS5.

Helifax is busy with stereoscopic development for Vulcan. Although I cant speak for him it is my hope, and believe many others here, that you would be part of this development. If it was up to me I would have attracted the scattered developers of Ignition too. They've also perfected some really good tools and methods.

Just my 2cents amid the semi off-topic drama =)

[ThinkVR]

No contradiction as far as modern API's are concerned. Helifax knows how to reach me, whether he thinks that could make sense for him or not, isn't for me to decide. Either way you can be sure that I'm not sitting on my butt in regard to modern APIs. Guess I harrassed those who feel harrassed by me long enough now though and also my peronal time budget for reacting to slightly childish semi off-topic drama is somewhat used up, so I'm out of here again.

[DJ-RK]

TBH I'm not really a huge fan of fusing S3D gaming and VR.

Says the guy who made the first piece of software that converts 2D gaming into a fusion of S3D & VR.

[RAGEdemon]

As important as knowing what to say, sometimes it is important to know when to stay quiet - for example, when there is the possibility of greater good for all.

I had hoped this would be one of those times... clearly I was mistaken - with all too tempting invites such as:

You would indeed if you actually knew the whole conversation. Probably for life instead of two weeks to cool down.

People are not stupid Ralf - I must admit however that it is ridiculously hilarious that you still try to convince people of imagined excuses for your tantrum even with hard proof staring you in your face

I do wonder though - as alluded to in the past, a lot of people have mentioned that you may be on the spectrum simply due to the raw obliviousness and lack of self-awareness you seem to often exhibit, - and I have often defended you at these times, but perhaps they have a point; - my condolences if you are.

You had earlier said "this ends right here" - and I had given you benefit of the doubt - but indeed, if you wish to continue, I eagerly look forward to reading your reply

@RAGEdemon: To be fair, you DID dare him to ban you. I'd probably do the same, being the crotchety bastard I am today!

Haha you bastard, you would
Indeed, a wise person said that it's exceedingly easy to prod an ego to act against their own best interest

[ThinkVR]

@RD: No further comment. As far as tantrums are concerned I leave the conclusion to the reader.

@DJ-RK: That is a bit of a misconception, I think. Stereo rendering is a part of VR, although I would argue it‘s not even a strictly necessary one. If I close one eye in reality, I‘m still fully immersed in the world. Same thing in VR, VR in principle can also work one eyed (of course being better in stereo). Just talking about me.

Obviously extremely unpopular opinion here: I never got the appeal of stereo gaming on a monitor. When I bought a pair of ELSA 3D glasses 20 years ago, I used them maybe five times. Not because the tech wasn‘t there yet, but because of the inherent minification and puppets in a box effect, which I experienced as total immersion killer. You could say what many of you here like about monitor S3D, which is totally fine, of course, didn‘t add any value for me.

VR on the other hand, as in being inside a game, got me the second I tried it, with or without S3D. Long story short: S3D is a subset of VR (and vorpX), and not necessarily the most important one, although that of course is pretty much a matter of taste and personal preferences. That is also reflected in the amount of code in vorpX dealing with S3D and VR specific things BTW. Stereo related code is not the biggest part of vorpX by a long shot.

[DJ-RK]

@DJ-RK: That is a bit of a misconception, I think. Stereo rendering is a part of VR, although I would argue it‘s not even a strictly necessary one.

I dunno man, I can respect a difference of opinions on a lot of things in what you said, but I would argue that you're objectively wrong here.

Virtual Reality (key word being Reality) is essentially using a digital apparatus to stimulate as many of the human senses into thinking that stimuli is real. In reality, if we use both our eyes we see in 3D. If you put a headset on me where I can see with both my eyes, but it's a 2D image, then I'm not going to be fooled into thinking it's reality, I will immediately notice the lack of depth, and therefore one of the primary goals of Virtual Reality has failed. Doesn't matter if I can still get immersed to some extent, that doesn't change the fact that by literal definition S3D IS a vital aspect of VR.

[masterotaku]

Not because the tech wasn‘t there yet, but because of the inherent minification and puppets in a box effect, which I experienced as total immersion killer. You could say what many of you here like about monitor S3D, which is totally fine, of course, didn‘t add any value for me.

Toyification is optional. It's just dependant on your convergence setting, which can be changed quickly with a hotkey.

The way I play most games with my monitor (and sitting fairly close to it to not need prescription glasses), the world inside the monitor feels huge. Certainly not puppets in a box.

[ThinkVR]

I dunno man, I can respect a difference of opinions on a lot of things in what you said, but I would argue that you're objectively wrong here.

Think of one eyed people, or (more widespread than one may think) those who have no/limited stereoscopic vision. They can experience VR just as good as everyone else. Stereopsis is just one cue the human brain derives depth from. It's probably the dominant one for near distances, but overall there are over a dozen different depth cues the brain can utilize, only a fraction is based on stereopsis. In the distances it becomes irrelevant entirely since it only reaches so far.

Just wild speculation obviously, but my guess is it all depends on how strong an individual brain weighs different depth cues, respectively how it compensates for the loss of stereoscopy when it becomes unavailable.

[russellk]

I dunno man, I can respect a difference of opinions on a lot of things in what you said, but I would argue that you're objectively wrong here.

Think of one eyed people, or (more widespread than one may think) those who have no/limited stereoscopic vision. They can experience VR just as good as everyone else. Stereopsis is just one cue the human brain derives depth from. It's probably the dominant one for near distances, but overall there are over a dozen different depth cues the brain can utilize, only a fraction is based on stereopsis. In the distances it becomes irrelevant entirely since it only reaches so far.

Just wild speculation obviously, but my guess is it all depends on how strong an individual brain weighs different depth cues, respectively how it compensates for the loss of stereoscopy when it becomes unavailable.

That's an interesting point and I've no doubt it's true, but personally I've always thought that the biggest 'wow' factor to VR is actually 3d, which then goes hand in hand with the head tracking to provide the actual immersion factor.

I suspect that without 3d, vr would never have taken off in any meaningful way. Sorry if that's not that point you were making, I'm on my phone!

[ThinkVR]

Of course it adds to the experience, just like stereo vision adds to the real life 'experience'. The point was that not everyone is the same, so not everyone may experience stereo vision as essential for VR as it is for yourself. I for example can feel 'inside' a game without it.

Admittedly a bit of suicide mission to make that point here.

[Chtiblue]

Admittedly a bit of suicide mission to make that point here.

[russellk]

Of course it adds to the experience, just like stereo vision adds to the real life 'experience'. The point was that not everyone is the same, so not everyone may experience stereo vision as essential for VR as it is for yourself. I for example can feel 'inside' a game without it.

Admittedly a bit of suicide mission to make that point here.

Yep, agreed. To be fair I would never try VR without 3d as I have no reason to, but maybe it would be an interesting learning experience.

I'd like to think that I'm still being fairly open minded though and I'd be surprised if the general population would see the wow factor without stereoscopic 3d. Maybe it's just because I always believed (or hoped) that VR would bring stereoscopic 3d back to the mainstream.

It is without doubt true that the immersion is a combination of factors, so I suppose it comes down to personal preference as to what compromises one is willing to accept. That said, there will be some potential science buried there somewhere.

[DJ-RK]

Think of one eyed people, or (more widespread than one may think) those who have no/limited stereoscopic vision. They can experience VR just as good as everyone else.

C'mon man, it feels like you are REEEEEEAAAAAALLLLLLYYYYY making a stretch to back up your rather apparent and irrational anti-S3D gaming bias than coming up with sound, logical arguments.

No, I don't think it's really valid to argue that because monoscopic people exist that S3D is not a requirement for VR in general, and of course people can somewhat compensate and derive depth in other ways, but that and the fact that some people can't see in stereo doesn't override the fact that an exclusion of S3D in VR would mean that those that CAN see in stereo 3D (ie. the vast majority of the population) would not experience visual fidelity that is comparable enough to reality to be fooled into thinking it's real. Is the entire human population ok with walking around with only one shoe on because cripples and amputees exists? No right? Then why would you argue that S3D isn't important for the rest of the world because it isn't for monoscopic people?

I suspect that without 3d, vr would never have taken off in any meaningful way.

That was actually going to be another counterpoint of mine. Does Ralf REALLY think VR would have succeeded thus far without S3D? Heck, we STILL have people claiming VR is a failure, and a gimmick. But no, VR is succeeding because it has used bleeding-edge technology to pretty much hit the bare minimum of an acceptable level of emulation of reality, and people can appreciate that because it has all the required pieces working together it's the real deal (although still needs to mature)! I guarantee if you took any one single reality emulating feature (like visual depth) away from the VR launch that it would have failed. I'd say that qualifies as another factor in deciding that S3D is a necessity to VR (because it probably wouldn't have succeeded without it).

I also agree with russelk that stereo 3D along with positional tracking were likely the two biggest components that really wow most people. For most people, VR is their first experience with S3D gaming, and most of those only knew 3D existed in the form of movies (which, as we all know, are severely gimped compared to S3D in gaming), so to see a world rendered in full 3D, with full and proper depth puts them into a world like they've never been in before. Go on any VR subreddit or forum or whatever, and you'll easily find a bunch of people now using some of our communities favorite terms and phrases that we've been saying for years, like referring to 2D as "pancake gaming" or saying "I can never go back to 2D gaming again." To ignore those, and downplay the importance of S3D in VR is just selfish and asinine.

Finally, let me just add that I'm an owner of 2 HMD's, probably 50+ VR titles, and VorpX, so don't think I'm just some S3D purist that's against VR, or against you (Ralf) for that matter. Like I said before, I can respect differences of opinions on everything else you've said, but you pushing this particular debate I just can't oblige because it's clearly fueled by your disdain and bias against S3D rather than logical and rational thought (and, like I hope I've proven, objectively wrong!).

Were you a cyclops slain by some knight in a past life or something? J/k, like I said, I don't have nothing against you... just... ahhh nevermind. You do you!

[ThinkVR]

If you want I was some kind of VR cyclops at first. Out of necessity so to speak. Before vorpX became vorpX it was a little personal project that did nothing but duplicate and lens correct games to display them on my crude DIY headset pre Rift DK1. So my first (gaming) VR experiences were strictly cyclops style. Good times. Worked for me back then, still works for me today.

No problem at all with anyone who sees that differently. And obviously current VR including S3D and all the modern bells and whistles is way better, who would deny that.

As far as my supposed anti S3D gaming bias is concerned, I can assure you there is none. It just never was for me. Figure skating also was never for me, yet I don't have any figure skating bias. I see this whole matter more from a tool developer's perspective and in that regard I have to admit I was happier with the situation that existed before nVidia axed 3D-Vision. I'm sure we can agree on that. To come back to my original windsurfing/kiteboarding comparison: It's as if all windsurfing equipment manufacturers had disappeared and all of a sudden kiteboard manufacturers had to satisfy the needs of windsurfers. Not really an ideal situation.

[DJ-RK]

If you want I was some kind of VR cyclops at first. Out of necessity so to speak. Before vorpX became vorpX it was a little personal project that did nothing but duplicate and lens correct games to display them on my crude DIY headset pre Rift DK1. So my first (gaming) VR experiences were strictly cyclops style. Good times. Worked for me back then, still works for me today.

Well, that explains a lot. As a fellow developer (on a much lesser scale than yours) I've ran into trouble on a few occasions with others based on conflicting views of what's good enough, and what isn't. It's easy for other people to make their opinions on what is and what isn't when they aren't part of the development cycle, but when you're the one at the helm and needing to do the work then you know there's an additional cost to "more than good enough" (often exponentially moreso), and that can color our opinions greatly and may even lead us to bitterness and coldness towards that additional effort involved, and even toward those that want and expect more without knowing the inherent cost of said "more." I'm speaking of my own attitude and behaviour here, not yours, btw, but maybe you can relate... I know I can certainly relate to your position more now that I look at it from that perspective.

No problem at all with anyone who sees that differently.

No problem at all... and although I have just argued against your views (ad nauseam by now, I'm sure), allow me to say that I can understand your arguments as being valid from a different contextual level than the one I was arguing. I was talking about the iteration of VR as it exists in the world today, and you more about the generalized concept of VR; that virtual reality just needs to be enough to make you feel like you're in the game, so even crude technology and methodology is ok as long as a person can get a sense of being in the game. I don't like to look at it that way, because where do you stop? Regular 2D gaming can be considered virtual reality then, or bloody PacMan for that matter (for some, maybe). At least when I look at it from my perspective that VR should emulate reality, virtually, as best and as close as possible (with whatever consumer technology is achievable) it feels forward-thinking and progressive, not a "but where do we draw the line" conundrum. Kinda like a glass half full or half empty thing.

[bo3bber]

I dunno man, I can respect a difference of opinions on a lot of things in what you said, but I would argue that you're objectively wrong here.

Think of one eyed people, or (more widespread than one may think) those who have no/limited stereoscopic vision. They can experience VR just as good as everyone else. Stereopsis is just one cue the human brain derives depth from. It's probably the dominant one for near distances, but overall there are over a dozen different depth cues the brain can utilize, only a fraction is based on stereopsis. In the distances it becomes irrelevant entirely since it only reaches so far.

Just wild speculation obviously, but my guess is it all depends on how strong an individual brain weighs different depth cues, respectively how it compensates for the loss of stereoscopy when it becomes unavailable.

That is actually an interesting thought exercise to me. One of the big conundrums for us 3D enthusiasts has always been why 3D got so little traction. Essentially too few people cared about 3D, and for us as enthusiasts we find it hard to understand, because we enjoy it so much.

Everyone is different, and it's an interesting thought that we 3Dists might just be wired to emphasize stereopsis as the primary form of 3D. Clearly most people are not wired that way, as evidenced by the overwhelming interest in 2D media. When people are playing pancake games, they are building a 3D image in their head as well, based on the other stereo cues in the image. Including specifically head/image movement like when an owl shifts it's head side to side. For me, this doesn't really cut it, but for the vast majority of people the other 3D cues are clearly sufficient. They are immersed, and part of that world.

Don't know of course, it's just an interesting thought that maybe it's just some subset of the population that are wired to emphasize stereopsis. Some 10% of the population cannot see 3D at all, and maybe a different 10% find stereoscopic 3D totally amazing and a must have. The middle 80% can see it, but it doesn't make that much difference either way to them, so that a tiny barrier like putting on 3D glasses is enough to discourage their use.


BTW, you might remember there was a prior VR app that did exactly this, brought 2D games into the VR space, but left them as 2D. They found the stereoizing problem too daunting and research says that stereo vision is actually a minor clue for 'seeing' 3D, so they left the images as 2D. A company called MyDream Interactive made an early version of this idea. It was widely panned as you might expect, and has since been pulled from Steam. I spoke with them a couple of times, and they were dumbfounded that stereo images would matter so much to the VR market. They absolutely expected that being inside the game with proper scale and headtracking would be sufficient.

[ThinkVR]

MyDream, I remember those guys well. Although personally I could sympathize with the approach, it was pretty clear from the start that it wouldn't be enough for a commercial product. Not exactly rocket science to figure out that wouldn't work when every native VR app is stereoscopic, even if one considers that not really essential for oneself.

Maybe it helps to understand the matter a bit better when I describe my theory more detailed. What is clear is that the importance of stereopsis becomes gradually smaller over distance. Nearby, when there is a lot of binocular parallax, stereopsis clearly dominates, at greater distance with less, and at some point almost no noticable parallax anymore, monocular cues like relative object size, line perspective etc. become dominant. This basic principle is the same for everyone (with two healthy eyes).

Where I think individuals are likely quite different is how much weight a brain gives stereopsis overall when fusing all information together and how exactly the transition towards monocular cues works. For me beyond maybe an arm's length monocular cues already become largely sufficient. Stereo still looks fairly different beyond that point until in the distance the stereo effect largely vanishes, but I can do without perfectly fine. For others the point where the brain starts to rely less on stereopsis might be farther away. Just a theory, but does sound quite reasonable to me.

Now in terms of VR gaming one rarely really focuses on things that are less than a few meters away, so there rarely are situations were the loss of stereo matters much to me. Talking to an NPC in front of you or anything comparable looks clearly unnatural, but in most other situations I don't really miss stereo when it is not there. Anyone with a different transition gradient between stereopsis and monocular cues would experience that quite different, of course.

BTW: I'm pretty sure that's something that can be trained (in both directions), just like most things in a human body can.

[BazzaLB]

That is actually an interesting thought exercise to me. One of the big conundrums for us 3D enthusiasts has always been why 3D got so little traction. Essentially too few people cared about 3D, and for us as enthusiasts we find it hard to understand, because we enjoy it so much.

Everyone is different, and it's an interesting thought that we 3Dists might just be wired to emphasize stereopsis as the primary form of 3D. Clearly most people are not wired that way, as evidenced by the overwhelming interest in 2D media. When people are playing pancake games, they are building a 3D image in their head as well, based on the other stereo cues in the image. Including specifically head/image movement like when an owl shifts it's head side to side. For me, this doesn't really cut it, but for the vast majority of people the other 3D cues are clearly sufficient. They are immersed, and part of that world.

Don't know of course, it's just an interesting thought that maybe it's just some subset of the population that are wired to emphasize stereopsis. Some 10% of the population cannot see 3D at all, and maybe a different 10% find stereoscopic 3D totally amazing and a must have. The middle 80% can see it, but it doesn't make that much difference either way to them, so that a tiny barrier like putting on 3D glasses is enough to discourage their use.


BTW, you might remember there was a prior VR app that did exactly this, brought 2D games into the VR space, but left them as 2D. They found the stereoizing problem too daunting and research says that stereo vision is actually a minor clue for 'seeing' 3D, so they left the images as 2D. A company called MyDream Interactive made an early version of this idea. It was widely panned as you might expect, and has since been pulled from Steam. I spoke with them a couple of times, and they were dumbfounded that stereo images would matter so much to the VR market. They absolutely expected that being inside the game with proper scale and headtracking would be sufficient.

Yes, everyone's reality differs. This is the same as the Race sim world whereby no-one ever agrees on what feels real as we all expect different cues to help with our own reality. Any difficiency in those cues provided by FFB, Visual fidelity, G-Forces effect people very differently as the basis for interpreting those cues for ones own reality varies in priority and importance.

This 2D into VR headset is actually pretty cool because I can imagine MS Flight Sim 2020 not being VR ready and I seriously doubt it could render in stereo 3D at anything like an acceptable frame rate.. However, I really would like to play the Flight sim with proper head tracking (absolute necessity in a flight sim if you ask me.. Really helps with landing approach) but I no longer have my Track IR connected due to VR (Plus it doesn work well with Large TVs as a monitor)... So this would actually be a perfect solution for that. So there.. I found a perfect use case for 2D inside the HMD

[drowhunter]

This 2D into VR headset is actually pretty cool because I can imagine MS Flight Sim 2020 not being VR ready and I seriously doubt it could render in stereo 3D at anything like an acceptable frame rate.. However, I really would like to play the Flight sim with proper head tracking (absolute necessity in a flight sim if you ask me.. Really helps with landing approach) but I no longer have my Track IR connected due to VR (Plus it doesn work well with Large TVs as a monitor)... So this would actually be a perfect solution for that. So there.. I found a perfect use case for 2D inside the HMD

you mean this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fc92ULEsIFw

[helifax]

I will not comment on anything above (well except now I understand why VorpEX has that poor Stereo3D implementation and lots of broken effects - Portal 2 anyone?! That thing is broken beyond belief!!! Clearly Geo3D rendering, nor performance, is not a priority, but FOV and ASM + Windows API hacking is )

Anywho, back to the topic!

This 2D into VR headset is actually pretty cool because I can imagine MS Flight Sim 2020 not being VR ready and I seriously doubt it could render in stereo 3D at anything like an acceptable frame rate.. However, I really would like to play the Flight sim with proper head tracking (absolute necessity in a flight sim if you ask me.. Really helps with landing approach) but I no longer have my Track IR connected due to VR (Plus it doesn work well with Large TVs as a monitor)... So this would actually be a perfect solution for that. So there.. I found a perfect use case for 2D inside the HMD

you mean this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fc92ULEsIFw

[ThinkVR]

Very professional. While talking about things broken beyond belief: any chance for proper single frame 3d in your 3d-driver in the future? I could go on with at least half a dozen other things, not in the mood for yet another kindergarten-quarrel though.

Just for the record: vorpX can handle shaders way, way better than 3d-vision without extra fixes ever could, also 3D obviously is just one of the many things vorpX has to (and can) do. It's not just a 3d-driver.

Edit: Sad to see even people who really should know better to partake in these childish forum bitch-fights.