Track ir

[Rg 0]

You won't regret getting it for racing sims. It works absolutely great with them, especially the ones that support 6DOF.

Yea, the two I play are GTR and GTL which both have full support. I also play LFS from time to time, so hopefully they will have 6DOF support eventually.

[andersson 285]

www.3dvisor.com

Its not that expensive (549$ ) considering that it is 3d view and also works like trackIR. Add 3d sound headphones and you get a nice experience? Zalman headphones

Its out there if you search, but I suppose most is expensive s**t... www.stereo3d.com

Edit: I must add that I´m thinking of buying this as I need a new computer soon. Thinking that instead of buying an expensive monitor that can handle my 3dgoggles (LCD-shutter) I can put that money into this project.

Does anyone have experience with "real" 3d-goggles? A little to expensive to buy for a test..

[Metal Heart 0]

Hmm, doesn't seem too bad, 800x600 resolution would not be good for an fps like ofp though and the pixelation might look really ugly because the view is probably very large. I'd definately want to try those anyway.

[andersson 285]

800x600 is good considering the small displays.

Yes, it would be nice to try it out.

[Journeyman 0]

Small displays? I would guess that the view that you see would be quite large as Metal Heart says. With this in mind 800x600 doesn't appeal to me at all, 3D or no 3D!

My solution works well for me: Track ir with an F550 Fresnel lens from 3D Lens.com.

Checkout this thread if you haven’t already!

Until there is a better solution I’ll be sticking with this set-up, and the 3D effect is effective enough for me!

[andersson 285]

Hmm... If I`m not mistaken the resolution would be good considering the small displays. 800x600 is quite good on a 15" screen, but useless on a 21" and bigger. So I thought that 800x600 would be good on the small displays, even if you are close to them... Is there any reason to have higher resolution on a 0.59" screen?

Split a screen that is 0.59 inches 800 times and the resolution is good,split a 21" screen 800 times and its not that impressive.

Or have I missed something..?

The refreshrate of 60 Hz is not that impressive, but its better than my refreshrate with shutterglasses

edit: Yes, that fresnell-lens looks interesting. With that prize its cheap enough to test, especially as you can combine that with shutterglasses.

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]800x600 resolution would not be good for an fps like ofp though and the pixelation might look really ugly because the view is probably very large.

The visual impression from that resolution on regular shutter glasses is almost the same as playing on 1024 imo.

I have tested shutter glasses with that resolution and the 3D impression created makes you forget the resolution in no time.

I also run OFP on a beamer from time to time and the max setting for the display used is 1024. Even when playing on a wall of 5m width the image does not get pixalated.

As there are OLED´s used in the displays there is no surreal backlight. I like the approach but I will most likely wait for a projected laser picture for 3D

[funnyguy1 0]

Would be cool to have the ability to zoom in/out while in Ir sight view by moving your head forward and backward...not with scopes of course...And of course the ability to use free head movement, no matter if with alt key or track Ir while in IR sight view...

warrning:my lcd doesn`t work so I have only basic idea of what I`ve just typed and posted...plz try top undersntand

[Journeyman 0]

Hmm... If I`m not mistaken the resolution would be good considering the small displays. 800x600 is quite good on a 15" screen, but useless on a 21" and bigger. So I thought that 800x600 would be good on the small displays, even if you are close to them... Is there any reason to have higher resolution on a 0.59" screen?

That 0.59" screen is to be viewed very close to the head (one for each eye). So it is not the size of the screen that matters in this case but rather the perceived size of the image that you actually see, which I guess would have to be pretty big in order to fully immerse you into the game. I've not actually viewed one, but for their claim of effectively putting you 'inside' the game to be effective it would have to be like viewing a 30" monitor 20" from the face at the very least!  

[andersson 285]

Hmm, yes. Thats true.

Do you think that when its 2 800x600 displays that you will experience it as better resolution?

Explanation..: With shutterglasses you can use 800x600 and get the impression that it is 1600x1200 because of the "2" pictures.

[Journeyman 0]

I guess that the way it works is a bit like Balschoiw suggests that the 3D effect in some way compensates for the lower resolution. Also the fact that you are not seeing the precise same picture with each eye would probably have the effect of blurring out the larger pixels. The question is though does this 3D compensatory effect give you a satisfactory higher resolution on this perceived ultra large image enough to satisfy people like myself who always like to play at resolutions of 1280 or higher? I think that someone is gonna have to be our guinea pig tester and go and buy one so that they can give us some feedback on these displays in a brand new thread!  

However, the fact that these 3D head visor displays are not taking off like hot cakes prompts a certain suspicion from me!

Track Ir on the other hand is making big sales and more and more game developers are making their games compatible with them!    

What is the future of virtual reality displays? .... I guess we will all just have to wait and see!  

Go buy one of these displays andersson and let us all know what they are like!  .... Oh, and most of all if they are worth that price tag!  

[andersson 285]

Quote[/b] ]Go buy one of these displays andersson and let us all know what they are like!

I would love to but I must find me a better job first..

I`m thinking of writing to 3dguru.com and ask them if its possible for them to try. They are always trying out new things...

Quote[/b] ]However, the fact that these 3D head visor displays are not taking off like hot cakes prompts a certain suspicion from me!

Thats why I do not dare to buy one too....

[Daddl 10]

However, the fact that these 3D head visor displays are not taking off like hot cakes prompts a certain suspicion from me!

One reason why those shutter glasses never became mainstream: you need a monitor capable of running at 100Hz (preferably higher) at a good resolution (i.e. 1024x768 or higher) and you need a gfx card (and driver) with support for 3d stereo that is fast enough to render twice the number of images while still keeping the fps high enough.

If the monitor's doesn't support high refresh rates you quickly get an headache, and if the gfx card's to slow you get low fps - and if the driver support is bad or not existing... well, bad luck.

At least to my knowledge only Nvidia supported 3d goggles in some older drivers and it was always a pain in the ass to get it working right. And if you updated your gfx driver... well, bad luck as probably there wasn't a 3d driver for that release.

When you have it working properly it's great. But the existing solutions are crap except under very optimal circumstances.

[andersson 285]

@Daddl Yes. I second that!!! I have had much problems with my shutterglasses! And then I bought an ATI-card without thinking and they do not support them....

But

Quote[/b] ]However, the fact that these 3D head visor displays are not taking off like hot cakes prompts a certain suspicion from me!

That is not about shutterglasses, that is about the VR-helmets with two separate displays. And I`m very curious about them (especially this one) as the price for one of them is about the same as a good monitor, a pair of shutterglasses and trackir.

[Daddl 10]

The shutterglasses are very cheap on ebay (probably because so many people had problems with them - i got mine for 10 Euros two years ago...), and you need a monitor for your computer anyways - which is why it's a bit unrealistic to add that into the calculation, too.

If prices drop into the 200-300 Euros range with proper support (if nescessary) by at least ATI and Nvidia, then I'm sure there's quite a market for such vr devices. Until then it's a lot of money (read: too much) for the casual gamer (which is the majority of potential customers) and people (me included) are more willing to shell out 100 - 180 Euros for a track ir only and rather invest the rest in a better gfx card, for the time being.

[andersson 285]

Yeah.. I suppose you`re right. But it would be nice to try it... (Must get a better job to afford every gadget I "need"... )

edit: had to add an interesting link about z800

edit again: it wasnt that interesting...

edit once again: a review. I think the answer for me is; not yet but the technology is soon there. (3dguru link)

[bravo 6 0]

had to add an interesting link about z800

a review

(3dguru link)

I just seen the new video with Trackir for ARMA (17mb)

I want to buy 1 for me for sure!

But i need to read more about it

Will we have more angle vision

edit: how much € will it cost?

[wolfsatar 0]

interesting device ... good push for more realistic combats ^^

but would i buy it for 129 $ ... ? ill wont pay over 100 € for that ...

[bravo 6 0]

interesting device ... good push for more realistic combats ^^

but would i buy it for 129 $ ... ? ill wont pay over 100 € for that ...

yeah, will the Trackir be more expensive then the game itself?

EDIT: would be nice to have a Trackir video in chopper

@ Moderators: Could this title topic be changed? (Track ir Videos and INFO or something like that? (or diff more complete))

because seem like this subject are invading other threads

[funnyguy1 0]

Nice vid, I hope we`ll see more soon...

Arma has 2d iron sights so looking around while in IS view won`t be possible? I still wonder if we`ll be able to move your head forward and backward to manipulate our fov and the IS/scope size on the screen...

[VISTREL 0]

I'll probably buy it later.

Damn, so much stuff is coming up this year. Armed Assault, Crysis, DirectX 10 video cards, Playstation 3. My wallet is gonna be empty in no time.

[King Haggis 0]

Track IR is fantastic. Just got mine one week ago and I already know I never want to part with it. Not until they make something even better that is...

It will specifically come in handy when flying choppers and airplanes in Arma but I think it might be very useful as infantry soldier as well. Especially when you would use it with a hotkey for turning it on or off in-game. When you need a steady aim turn it off, when you want to take a quick peek around you while lying prone (weapon forward) or running, turn it on by holding a hotkey. Also, with vector expansion, one could stand next to a building and peek around a corner. Maybe that could be implemented as well?

Those who are sceptical about Track IR, please try it, I'm sure you'll like it. Remember the days when we played Doom and Wolfenstein? You didn't have mouselook back then. When Quake came and mouselook was introduced, most players didn't even use the option at first, but later when everybody got used to it, it became a second nature. The extra axis gave you more speed, precision and immersion. Now Track IR gives you an extra addition to mouse look just what we need for a military combatsim. Please try it, you'll love it

So I voted "yes" for Track IR support in Arma.

[shadow 6]

@ Moderators: Could this title topic be changed? (Track ir Videos and INFO or something like that? (or diff more complete))

It could, but then we'd get 5 new topics about general TIR discussion. I think its better leave it as it is. After all, it is the only TIR topic.

[kegetys 2]

Those who are sceptical about Track IR, please try it, I'm sure you'll like it.

I will if you'll buy me one

[Dohtar 0]

Looks nice, however for $180 ArmA should support vector expansion - leaning and vertical movement of upper body (damn usefull for shooting through windows, etc). Looking around itself doesn't justify it's cost for people who don't regulary play fligh or racing sims.