Crytek Back to Dinosaur Island Tech Demo
Click here to post a comment for Crytek Back to Dinosaur Island Tech Demo on our message forum
signex
Doesn't look that impressive. :P
RzrTrek
They lost me at VR.
TheDeeGee
At 1:45 the T-Rex stepped in the Water, but no ripple was seen...
Details!
signex
+1 and no reflection! 😛uke2:
Barry J
Crytek can do better than this ? maybe it looks better using VR
FranciscoCL
Tesselated Toad was better.
Barry J
it is virtual reality it wasn't really there hence no ripple
myesilyurt
And the game needs GTX 980?
twtaylor
And you need an Occulus Rift VR set to get the most of the demo. Wallet says no.
Stormyandcold
Not many years to go before we get a proper Jurassic Park game...
TheDeeGee
The one that got canceled looked really good.
feathers632
Well it looks life-size and true to life scale in stereoscopic 3d. Everything looks real.
Oculus is what imax aspires to be.
Look on youtube for Oculus DK2 demos... note that some of them have really sh*t graphics and yet the user is blown away by the experience.
The best way to explain it is:
Conventional gaming consists of player sitting in front of a tiny (50-inch TV) fixed window.
With VR you are actually in the game world and everything is life size. You can be playing some really old sh*t like Quake but it blows you away because you're actually in that world.
There is no imax theater that can deliver a similar sense of presence.
I'm a DK2 owner and will upgrade to Oculus CV1 when it arrives. HTC Vive will offer the same kind of experience. Oculus DK2 uses a Samsung Note 3 screen. For anyone with a modern cell phone even as far back as Galaxy S3 you can get to try it out with a $15 kit on ebay. Oculus for PC is obviously more powerful but the phone VR kits are still very impressive.
feathers632
Nope. Perfectly smooth with 970. With some adjustment it would run smoothly on my 680 but the 900 series has some enhancements for VR.
Denial
You guys realize that they essentially have to target these demos at 90fps @ QHD resolution, right?
I don't really get what you people expect.
feathers632
Oculus runtime allows for lower than target frame rate. The 90 refresh for Oculus CV1 represents an ideal but in reality it can drop way below and still be smooth.
This applies to DK2 and CV1.
Denial
I have a DK2 and when the framerate drops below ~55 fps it's extremely noticeable. Way more noticeable than on a monitor. It might depend on the app, but if my experience with the DK2 is anything then I'm definitely going sticking to games/adjusting settings to get 75+.
And I'm sure that the devs building these experiences are going to cull graphics in order to achieve higher frame rates. It's going to be really bad for VR if people start spending $400+ on these devices and game/app experience is poor.
feathers632
It depends on your system as well as the graphic settings and can also be affected by graphics drivers. The Nvidia 900 series can do the Oculus image warping on a single pass instead of two. Below 55 fps I try to avoid even before VR. I was aiming for 60 back on Battlefield 3 multiplayer.
I've been using oculus on a PC I built back in 2011. I5 2500k and GTX 680. Overclocked.
Elite Dangerous has a sub-forum for VR users and people there in general have very good performance. I do also. I'm able to play GTA V on Oculus at 1080 via vorpx. Fallout 4 also.
When DX12 kicks in there will be a lot more graphics bandwidth even for lower spec GPUs.
Anyone with a more recent GPU with VR specific features (GameworksVR or LiquidVR) will have better performance but my experience of DK2 on my less than new PC is great.
Culling graphics to boost FPS is a good thing. The difference between Ultra and High isn't always apparent.
Denial
Don't get me wrong, my experience with the DK2 has also been incredible. I literally had people asking to come to my house to use it again and again. Naysayers of the tech have no idea what they are talking about - and this is coming from someone who really dislikes 3D in movies and stuff. VR is most definitely going to have a place in the future.
But in order to deliver a good experience graphically, they are going to need to definitely scale back games a little bit. There is a lot of people on this forum that game below 60 fps and the experience in VR is significantly worse than it is on a monitor when you run into low FPS. I imagine that game devs will adjust their VR games to compensate for that and attempt to target a higher framerate by reducing quality.
When a demo like this Dino one comes out, I don't think people should be surprised that it doesn't push graphical boundaries. It can't do that if you want a good experience. I personally think they did a good job here balancing it, the demo looks great to me.
feathers632
Agree. Many games have had auto-detect for graphics so I guess in future we'll see that encompass VR as well. So the auto-detect would see the VR and adjust the graphics according to the PC spec. I think people with no VR experience find it hard to understand why a particular VR game or demo is a big deal. I don't think it's been explained very well by any of the tech journalists or OculusVR. Simpy saying "presence" doesn't tell people anything really.
The graphics on Back to Dinosaur island look amazing on Oculus but without VR - it's just an average demo.
I've actually been replaying playing Half Life 2 since I got VR. Graphically the game looks vintage now. No tessellation, but it comes to life on DK2. You can say that VR users don't need to rely on graphics... It sounds kind of lame but it's true. Games with old and crappy graphics look amazing when you're in that world.
-Tj-
I saw ripple when he was walking near water.. but ye no reflection from him.
Also no settings to change, I was stuck at 1360x768 reso with 120fps pinned and no stuff to control at all..
