Dismiss Notice
Some Razer services have been impacted due to the unique circumstances COVID-19 has created. We apologize for any inconvenience and appreciate your understanding during this critical time.

Join the OSVR Community

Discussion in 'OSVR Discussions' started by technokat, Jan 6, 2015.

Share This Page

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. technokat

    technokat Director, Social Marketing Staff Member

    OSVR_1000x500.png

    Introducing the Open Source Virtual Reality ecosystem, an open platform that is backed by industry leaders to push the boundaries of Virtual Reality through collaborative innovation. With the aim to bring the best VR gaming experience, OSVR transcends the usual barriers by being accessible to all. If you are interested to learn more as a gamer, a developer or a partner, #FreeYourMind and join us on the new OSVR Facebook and Twitter.

    Facebook: www.fb.com/OpenSourceVR
    Twitter: www.twitter.com/OpenSource_VR
     
    schinmm, Akshay PL, nexhia and 2 others like this.
  2. Medrilan

    Medrilan Active Member

    I was really looking forward to getting into some VR action, actually holding off my Samsung VR order for hopes that Razer would be making a VR headset. Unfortunately, I see this. It's great that Razer is backing it and all, but idk how I feel about this. I was REALLY hoping that Razer would actually MAKE the headset. Oh well, guess I'll shop around some more.
     
  3. Kageofctr

    Kageofctr New Member

    Sign me up!
     
  4. technokat

    technokat Director, Social Marketing Staff Member

    Side note - do you like the sexy orange theme?
     
  5. Medrilan

    Medrilan Active Member

    Yeah I thought the change of theme was really cool. Like, how it shows EVERYONEs name in orange, and all the site links and everything, rather than just your post. Really cool
     
  6. Mapsle

    Mapsle Well-Known Member

    I honestly just checked f.lux to see if i messed up the colors myself... :oops:

    But after knowing it´s supposed to be this way: Nice touch!
     
  7. Mapsle

    Mapsle Well-Known Member

    @Razer|Technokat
    Would it be possible to sync the insider page with the colors of the peripherals in the future?

    It´s completely unnecessary, but it would look awesome! :D
     
  8. Dagonzaros

    Dagonzaros New Member

  9. Beigelotus

    Beigelotus Member

    I prefer the green :D orange is not my thing :D
     
  10. nanias

    nanias Active Member

    Yes green all the way, but "chromatizing" is nice too!
     
    schinmm likes this.
  11. DannyS

    DannyS New Member

    I am really happy to see them step up and make a uniform software for all VR devices. I saw this as a problem when I started coding for my Oculus Rift, when all different VR devices would need to be created individually but with this, I see it being a great thing for VR in general. Any idea when we get to play around with it and use it to develop with?
     
  12. dethus

    dethus New Member

    All i need now is learn how to make games :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:
     
  13. This is exactly what we do not want or need. any kind of *-killer in the VR world is only going to hurt us. We shouldn't want to alienate the community built up by the Rift, nor the people who paid for it, by insisting that this 'kill' it.

    We should be operating with the goal of making them interoperable, I feel. The more options people have, the better things will be for the VR community -- but only if that competition doesn't result in someone getting tossed to the wind.

    If it comes down to game devs being forced to choose to either support the Rift or support OSVR (or expend additional resources supporting both), then VR is going to be in for an incredibly rough ride.
     
    DanBNZ and Mapsle like this.
  14. Medrilan

    Medrilan Active Member

    I agree. It's kinda like the xbox- exclusive, or Playstation- exclusive games in a manner. It just hurts people in the end.
     
  15. w9jds

    w9jds Active Member

    It is pretty sexy.
     
  16. w9jds

    w9jds Active Member

    That is why it isn't meant to compete. That is why it is open source. It is meant for ALL VR systems and a means to improve all of them. The only reason there is a unit is because they want to give you the option to get into it right away without building your own (with the open source hardware specs).

    The whole point is to further VR technology as a whole. Kudos to Razer and their partners for this.
     
    Mapsle likes this.
  17. I agree, but I am deeply curious as to why Oculus, the current biggest player and effectively the 'face' of the VR industry, isn't among the list of participants in this initiative.

    Standards don't work properly unless *everyone* participates and provides their own input on them. This is why the web development world is such a bloody mess, with Apple not interested in participating at all, and Google only interested in pushing their own standards and effectively ignoring everyone else's contributions.

    If the industry players don't agree to cooperate, it will only make life harder on developers and create industry fragmentation.

    As some additional examples:
    Kinect and other depth cameras. There are a number of different frameworks available for working with these devices, and each has its own set of required device drivers. As a result, any given application will only work if you have the right driver/framework installed, which locks you out of using applications that have any other set.

    Eye/head tracking comes in at least three different flavors, such as the proprietary TrackIR. Applications have to implement explicit support for one of them, and good luck getting any arbitrary camera device to work with it.

    There are numerous examples of this type of scenario with native/alt-input mechanisms, and the situation with VR won't be any better unless the industry as a whole nips it in the bud from the beginning.

    Otherwise:
    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Jan 6, 2015
    Mapsle likes this.
  18. w9jds

    w9jds Active Member

    You don't get what I'm saying. It isn't a standard. It isn't meant to take a position and hold its own against other systems. It is meant as like a everyone pitch in to make it better. It has already been stated that this software will support Oculus.

    Like I said the whole point to this is for anyone to pitch in to make the technology better, it isn't about a standard, or a specific brand/product just about VR in general.
     
    Mapsle likes this.
  19. I'm not sure we're on the same page here. What you're describing *is* a standard. I'm not talking about a de facto standard like IE6. I'm talking about real industry-driven standards.

    OSVR seems to want to be a common platform which can support any hardware and will allow devs to write hardware-agnostic code for their applications, supported by the companies relevant to the industry. Basically the W3C or OpenGL except for VR. That's great! That's basically the very definition of a hardware platform standard, and ultimately it's exactly what the industry needs.

    That is, assuming it's handled properly and everyone actually gets on board.

    Right now, the way this initiative was announced felt somewhat awkward. I'm guessing it's because Razer only knows how to do product launches, so they announced OSVR in the same fashion. It's not automatically indicative of a problem, but it's certainly disconcerting when you see announcement of a reference product and more or less working platform before you see any announcement of the efforts to organize to *create* said platform.

    More importantly, Oculus and Samsung aren't on board. I can see Sony not caring since they're only interested in their own console (and, well, they're Sony), but not having Oculus on board has the potential to hurt considerably.

    For one, it means you don't have the input of the household name of consumer VR, and they don't have yours. This is mainly a problem for the developer API. Obviously companies developing similar hardware want to maintain their industry secrets, but platform APIs are different -- they're built with the developers' best interests in mind, and it's better for the whole industry when everyone works together here.

    As an example, the web's touch API was made by Apple without appealing to the w3c, and is in use by basically every mobile site on the planet. Problem is, the touch API is touch-specific (meaning developers need to write separate code for mouse and stylus/pen input), and has a number of issues that generally make it a rather poor API. Meanwhile, much later, Microsoft proposed a new Pointer API standard to the W3C, which addressed basically all the preexisting API issues as well as creating a unified method of working with input events regardless of the physical method. Members of the web development community have widely embraced it, yet Apple doesn't care because they have market share already, and Google doesn't care because Apple doesn't care. Thus, ultimately nobody will use the superior standard because the two largest market share holders won't support it.

    Secondly, and more importantly, this means there will always be a degree of fragmentation, and that's the real killer.

    Given the way Razer has announced this project, you can very well expect that OSVR will only be remembered (by that small fraction of the gaming community that is actually aware of VR stuff) as "that Razer VR thing". That, against the tremendous attention the Rift has gotten, mean it's going to be very difficult to get *developers* on board. Those who use Oculus' own SDK will almost definitely continue to do so, and newcomers will naturally go to Oculus just because they're such a household name (relatively speaking).

    Until Oculus joins the project, devs will continue to develop either specifically for the Rift or for OSVR. Apps made with OSVR will support the Rift, but not the other way around. Meaning that basically, this industry will be in the same unenviable position as TrackIR and its free alternatives, and OSVR users will continually be frustrated by VR apps/games that do not support their hardware because they were built with the Rift SDK.

    Certainly, OSVR may support the Rift, but that doesn't really help the issue, and really it's even kind of backwards -- Rift needs to be the one natively supporting OSVR, not the other way around. OSVR developers shouldn't have to go out of their way to support specific hardware.

    ...I must apologize, as I didn't really intend this to be such a huge wall of text. I happen to feel quite strongly about this particular issue, both as a developer who wants to see the platform come together as best as possible, and as someone who is highly passionate about VR in general. I also don't mean to try to posit this as an issue of OSVR-versus-Oculus either -- on the contrary, I spoke out on the Oculus forums months ago about this very issue, where I took issue with the increasingly proprietary nature of the Rift and its driver/SDK, and urged the community to push for a standardized HMD/VR platform (like OSVR).

    I want VR to thrive and become as commonplace as the mouse and keyboard. For that to happen, the industry really cannot afford to miss a step. This is a period where everyone really needs to do everything possible to work together. OSVR seems to have its head in the right place; I just hope it all works out.
     
    Last edited: Jan 6, 2015
  20. nexhia

    nexhia Guest

    Love the orange! Nice work
     
    schinmm likes this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page