By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
 

?

1080p 158 30.80%
 
60fps 289 56.34%
 
Results 65 12.67%
 
Total:512
Dr.EisDrachenJaeger on 03 January 2014
JoeTheBro said:
SvennoJ said:
Dr.EisDrachenJaeger said:
4k is useless and way too much required rendering.

We need to go 1080p vR

Except for life like VR 4K is still too low.
1080p standard is suited for a 30 degree field of view (SMPTE 30), while with VR you want to have at least an 80 degree field of view, or even upto 120 degrees. (Occulus rift uses a 110 degree field of view) So if you want VR at 1080p quality, you need 8K per eye.

You can ease the rendering load if you have reliable pupil tracking, the human eye only sees sharp in a 6 degree field of view, the rest of your 120 degree visual field is peripheral vision which is more sensitive to motion and flicker but has very poor resolution. So if you render in the highest resolution in a 10 degree field of view with 60fps, and render the rest in low resolution with 240fps, you probably get pretty far in tricking the brain that's it's close to real life. (Assuming the pupil tracking doesn't have significant lag...)

My lips are sealed, but I can post links all I want.

http://www.playstationlifestyle.net/2013/11/14/playstations-rd-magic-lab-teases-eye-tracking-on-ps4-partners-with-nasa-for-ps4-content/

I dont know what Sony is on, but that piece of tech is just asking for a "virtual boy"

And lol lips sealed.

My ass bro. My rear arse..



Around the Network
kekrot on 03 January 2014

Depends on the game. If it's a cinematic adventure game like Uncharted or Zelda I prefer 30 fps just for the cinematic style, and then we can get better graphics.

BUT I started on God of War 3 yesterday (finally!), and the mostly solid 60 fps fits the gameplay well. But that is more of a cinematic game, and then I thought that fps/resolution priority depends on the gameplay...

Conclusion: there will be endless discussion on this topic. I really don't know myself...



Yep.

trixiemafia86 on 03 January 2014

sub HD 60 fps vs 1080p 30 fps



Smartest nam evila

Current Platforms: HighendPC[rip]/PS4/PS3[rip]/Vita[rip]

scoobydoobiemew on 03 January 2014

1080p as long as the game keeps a steady frame rate.



PlayStation Network: paddy2k7

I own PlayStation, PlayStation 2, PlayStation 2 slim, PlayStation 3 60gb, PlayStation 3 slim 1tb, PSP, PS Vita 32gb and PlayStation 4.

Nintendo 64, Gamecube, Gameboy/colour, Advance/Sp, Wii.

JoeTheBro on 03 January 2014
Dr.EisDrachenJaeger said:
JoeTheBro said:
SvennoJ said:
Dr.EisDrachenJaeger said:
4k is useless and way too much required rendering.

We need to go 1080p vR

Except for life like VR 4K is still too low.
1080p standard is suited for a 30 degree field of view (SMPTE 30), while with VR you want to have at least an 80 degree field of view, or even upto 120 degrees. (Occulus rift uses a 110 degree field of view) So if you want VR at 1080p quality, you need 8K per eye.

You can ease the rendering load if you have reliable pupil tracking, the human eye only sees sharp in a 6 degree field of view, the rest of your 120 degree visual field is peripheral vision which is more sensitive to motion and flicker but has very poor resolution. So if you render in the highest resolution in a 10 degree field of view with 60fps, and render the rest in low resolution with 240fps, you probably get pretty far in tricking the brain that's it's close to real life. (Assuming the pupil tracking doesn't have significant lag...)

My lips are sealed, but I can post links all I want.

http://www.playstationlifestyle.net/2013/11/14/playstations-rd-magic-lab-teases-eye-tracking-on-ps4-partners-with-nasa-for-ps4-content/

I dont know what Sony is on, but that piece of tech is just asking for a "virtual boy"

And lol lips sealed.

My ass bro. My rear arse..


I'm not saying or meaning to hint Sony is making a vr headset. I wouldn't dare break an nda on something as big as a potential hardware announcement. I am posting the article because it's exactly what he was talking about. Nothing more.

 

Are you just upset at me because you're not an insider like you act?



Links

Around the Network
SvennoJ on 03 January 2014
JoeTheBro said:
Dr.EisDrachenJaeger said:
JoeTheBro said:
 

My lips are sealed, but I can post links all I want.

http://www.playstationlifestyle.net/2013/11/14/playstations-rd-magic-lab-teases-eye-tracking-on-ps4-partners-with-nasa-for-ps4-content/

I want this http://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/13352595/volumetric-world-display.pdf
Please blink once if that's coming :)

Looks like someone else already has the patent for that
http://www.google.ca/patents/US20120250152



JoeTheBro on 03 January 2014
SvennoJ said:
JoeTheBro said:
Dr.EisDrachenJaeger said:
JoeTheBro said:
 

My lips are sealed, but I can post links all I want.

http://www.playstationlifestyle.net/2013/11/14/playstations-rd-magic-lab-teases-eye-tracking-on-ps4-partners-with-nasa-for-ps4-content/

I want this http://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/13352595/volumetric-world-display.pdf
Please blink once if that's coming :)

Looks like someone else already has the patent for that
http://www.google.ca/patents/US20120250152

Those look legit!



Links

J_Allard on 03 January 2014

60 frames by far, just like this gen.



Dr.EisDrachenJaeger on 03 January 2014
JoeTheBro said:
Dr.EisDrachenJaeger said:
JoeTheBro said:
SvennoJ said:
Dr.EisDrachenJaeger said:
4k is useless and way too much required rendering.

We need to go 1080p vR

Except for life like VR 4K is still too low.
1080p standard is suited for a 30 degree field of view (SMPTE 30), while with VR you want to have at least an 80 degree field of view, or even upto 120 degrees. (Occulus rift uses a 110 degree field of view) So if you want VR at 1080p quality, you need 8K per eye.

You can ease the rendering load if you have reliable pupil tracking, the human eye only sees sharp in a 6 degree field of view, the rest of your 120 degree visual field is peripheral vision which is more sensitive to motion and flicker but has very poor resolution. So if you render in the highest resolution in a 10 degree field of view with 60fps, and render the rest in low resolution with 240fps, you probably get pretty far in tricking the brain that's it's close to real life. (Assuming the pupil tracking doesn't have significant lag...)

My lips are sealed, but I can post links all I want.

http://www.playstationlifestyle.net/2013/11/14/playstations-rd-magic-lab-teases-eye-tracking-on-ps4-partners-with-nasa-for-ps4-content/

I dont know what Sony is on, but that piece of tech is just asking for a "virtual boy"

And lol lips sealed.

My ass bro. My rear arse..


I'm not saying or meaning to hint Sony is making a vr headset. I wouldn't dare break an nda on something as big as a potential hardware announcement. I am posting the article because it's exactly what he was talking about. Nothing more.

 

Are you just upset at me because you're not an insider like you act?

Why would I be upset about NASA?
I dont work for Sony.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPutfGcuqak



UnknownFact on 03 January 2014

Over those two, I prefer stability.

It's for granted that we won't be getting any, so I prefer, for example, 45fps with a higher res than 60fps with a lower one. But I prefer 60 fps 720p over 30 fps 1080p, that's for sure. The balance point is somewhere between the two for me.