Is it even remotely possible that this could become mainstream?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f9v_XN7Wxh8
https://github.com/shaunlebron/blinky
Obviously, a reduction of visual quality in peripheral vision would be necessary, to avoid making games literally several times as heavy on the graphics card. Are there any other hurdles that would have to be overcome?
Most shooters post-Quake barely even support 120°, and forcing beyond that tends to cause really fucked distortion. This fix seems legit, but outside of a few people who REALLY want FOVs above 120° it's not going to catch on unless there's some indie first-person game that focuses on using the FOV for puzzles or something.
>>59912266
>some indie first-person game that focuses on using the FOV for puzzles
Boba Fett canonically had 360° cameras in his helmet, and I wouldn't be surprised if Batman and Iron Man have used similar technology. It would be totally worthwhile for a major company to use this idea in adapting one of those IPs in a big-budget game.
>>59913392
"Hey boss these fictional characters might do this thing. Let's spend all the money figuring out how and why. We might be able to use it in a video game."
Fired.
>>59913392
having 360 view helmet would be great
>>59913485
>Hey, Boss, there are all these hardcore nerds angry at how the old Star Wars canon erased their childhoods. We can use a cheap gimmick to bring back something from the old canon's depiction of Boba Fett and assuage their anger.
10% raise.
>>59913539
>old Star Wars canon
*new Star Wars canon
are you retarded OP
>>59914624
Are you saying that you wouldn't like to have eyes in the back of your head?
>>59913485
>implying these sorts of things don't drive the industry
90 - 120 is god tier
>>59914767
>90
Are you fucking stupid?
This is literally the point of VR
360 degree fov without having to distort it to shit on a flat screen
Too bad it won't ever take off