Rage creative director joins Oculus VR
Matt Hooper, the creative director of Rage who departed id six months ago, has joined Oculus VR as the new Director of Development.
Hot on the heels of John Carmack joining the Oculus Rift team, another id Software veteran has gone over to work on the VR device. Matt Hooper, creative director on Rage, is now the director of development at the Oculus Rift office.
Hooper didn't swap id for Oculus, though, as he actually left the company about six months ago. GameFront reports that id has been notably tight-lipped about Hooper's departure, refusing to comment on it recently at QuakeCon.
"We are thrilled to have Matt Hooper join the Oculus VR team as our Director of Development," read a statement from Oculus VR. "Hooper will be working out of the Dallas, TX office. He's a top talent who had been out of id for a few months and ended up being a great fit for the Oculus team. We're looking for more all-stars!"
-
Steve Watts posted a new article, Rage creative director joins Oculus VR.
Matt Hooper, the creative director of Rage who departed id six months ago, has joined Oculus VR as the new Director of Development.-
-
-
-
then meet one
I tried it at GDC this year, and I think it is still very limited in its use and takes a whole lot for its tech to make it actually usable
the resolutions of each screen were pretty low and the shutter speed/frame rate was below average making it feel more like a novelty rather than actual usable product that you can use in real world for more than 15 minutes. (I know they have been working on it constantly to increase its fidelity, but as per the dev kit we have in our studio, it is still NOT usable!)
And I still have not delved into the fact that the dissonance of you not seeing your real world hands on the controller and having your eyes see something completely different is a real hurdle too (it would be WAY worse with the mouse and keyboard situation)
-
-
-
-
-
-
The thing is FPS engines tend to be very narrow in scope. They want you walk down a hall and shoot something. They don't want you to interact or explore. It's why there were all sorts of unreal engine games last gen but they almost showed limits of the engine still like seeing the textures stream in.
For this technology you should be required to be thinking of every possible game from flight sims to adventure games, to FPS. But my concern would be people who only have done FPS games see the tech in a very precise way that doesn't support other goals the same. -
Don't worry about it. Oculus isn't making games, they're providing a framework in which to work. I'm sure they'll provide tech and user experience demos representing the largest variety of games that they can. I wouldn't be surprised if they even worked out a way to view your desktop effectively in the Rift.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
I'm ok with 1000 if it really works and has high build quality. Realistically it is going to exceed the immersion from 3 monitors, so I'm fine with a price point of at least one expensive quality display.
I've been tempted many times to go valcan S on my office and throw down for 3 tvs but I never do it. Partially because I don't want 3 tvs in my office. One device that I can put away that makes 3 displays look pointless.
A grand to build a super immersion racing sim setup? Yea, I'm perfectly ok with a price that high if the build quality and support is high.
-
-
$300 will be a good starter for this. At the moment the focus is the developers, then PC gamers, and most likely console gamers down the road. If you are into proper PC gaming you most likely have a budget towards hardware upgrades and this will just get tossed into the mix.
Console gamers will be the mass market goal, but first manufacturing costs will have to decrease, and get down to a $150 level. Hopefully when that's rolling out an even higher def w/ more features will come out for the PC's which will more than likely be leaving the consoles in the dust with raw power.
-
-
-
-
-