3 ms·
I personally use an Oculus DK1 (it was the only thing available at the time) and play around with three.js + WebVR. You'd be surprised the fun you can have wit
by Bjorkbat 11y ago
I personally use an Oculus DK1 (it was the only thing available at the time) and play around with three.js + WebVR. You'd be surprised the fun you can have with WebGL.
I can't show it off just yet unfortunately, but I made this web player for 360 photos and videos that has a VR mode. It came out better than expected.
Thinking about moving to Unreal next, not necessarily because it can do something that WebGL can't, but because I'm simply interested in that route.
While I'm sure Unity is a fine tool, I've had bad luck with them. I was interested in developing a mobile VR video player for 360 video, unfortunately Unity can't exactly map a video texture onto a 3D sphere, which is pretty much the standard way of making a 360 VR video. You can try taking the individual frames and mapping them onto the sphere as fast as possible, but the frame rate was a poor ~20fps, which I wasn't impressed by. It might be different for video, but last I recalled you should shoot for at least 60fps for VR experiences if you want to avoid the whole motion sickness issue.
I've also played around a bit with Google Cardboard, and I have to admit, it's alright, but at the end of the day it's still a cardboard shell for your phone with special lenses, so if you really want to play around with VR an Oculus DK1 or DK2 isn't that bad.
The Samsung Gear VR is a fine choice too, but only if you already have a Samsung smartphone, otherwise I'd still just recommend you go for the Oculus.
So, those are my thoughts.
- moron4hire 11y agoThere's framerate and then there's framerate (heh). You want to be able to respond to the user's head movements as fast as possible--16ms max (which is 60FPS), but even at that point some rare people get sick. At 11ms, the number of people who get sick drops so dramatically that Valve claims they haven't met anyone yet who does get sick. But clearly, the lower, the better. Some people are claiming 8ms is "necessary"--I think calling it necessary is ludicrous--but I'm sure it would be an incredible experience. How often the scene actually updates is besides that. You could animate the video on the sphere at 15fps and it's not going to make the user sick, as long as you can react to their head movements faster than that. That's kind of the point of the TimeWarp feature that the Oculus Rift provides. You render the scene larger than the Rift is capable of displaying, and then the display driver shows different subsets of it based on the latest motion data, regardless of how old the frame actually is. It's not perfect, but it makes up for a lot of sins.