THAT's Dinosaur Encounter?

[mattspace]

Marathon ran 640x480 fullscreen on any 68020+ Mac. It of course ran on the CPU only as 3D GPUs weren't even a thing yet. You are absolutely misremembering these "facts" or just talking out your blowhole.

You see how only a portion of the screen is the actual game environment? Which is exactly what I was describing. You're right, 3D-Specific GPUs weren't a thing, my Radius card was a 7x Quickdraw accelerator primarily, but it is helpful to use the terminology of the current day to connect the metaphor to the current day and example.

 

[ErikGrim]

OK, sure. the HUD did take up an exorbitant amount of space I guess, but in return you got freelook - a first in FPS

 

[Larsvonhier]

Waitaminute - Dinosaur Encounter is a floating window, it's not an immersive thing you exist within? You can't walk around the terrain objects, look around you and see a fully realised world?

Seriously? THAT's what people have been hyping?

You did not get the joke, you just saw the beginning. Also, you do not get the difference between VR and AR.

 

[flofixer]

For most people it's the first time they try a VR headset so that's why they're so hyped.

I think it's certainly possible that most people who have tried the AVP have tried on of the Meta headsets at some point in their life.

 

[Eric5h5]

It's analogous to the original Marathon on Mac - it was the Apple world's answer to Doom on PC, but whereas Doom ran full screen, with a little UI strip at the bottom, Marathon used 2/3 of the screen real estate for UI, so the actual 3D game window was this tiny little space, which meant the less capable 3D hardware on the Mac could run the game.

That's completely wrong. "3D hardware" did not exist at the time; everything was computed by the CPU. More to the point, with the UI strip the 3D view of Doom ran at 320x168 (or less...the option to reduce the 3D view size existed for a reason). Marathon ran on a 640x480 screen. CPUs at the time would have a hard time running that smoothly, so the compromise was to have a giant UI with a 3D view of 446x270. Which if you do the math was still over 2X as many pixels as Doom was pushing.

Related, Dark Forces on PCs ran at 320x200, the Mac version ran at 640x400 (plus 80 pixels for the UI strip). DOS X-Wing was 320x200, Mac version was 640x480, same for Warcraft 1 and probably others. So the reality was the opposite of what you're claiming.

 

[mattspace]

*edit* I am not commenting on this thread any more for reasons that cannot be mentioned.

Suffice to say, I've used VR based systems to design & build large engineered structures, that had people walking under them in national arts institutions, and probably put more people through VR systems than MR has members who've used any form of headset, but sure I don't understand the difference between AR and VR, right, whatever.

 

[heretiq]

That's completely wrong. "3D hardware" did not exist at the time; everything was computed by the CPU. More to the point, with the UI strip the 3D view of Doom ran at 320x168 (or less...the option to reduce the 3D view size existed for a reason). Marathon ran on a 640x480 screen. CPUs at the time would have a hard time running that smoothly, so the compromise was to have a giant UI with a 3D view of 446x270. Which if you do the math was still over 2X as many pixels as Doom was pushing.

Related, Dark Forces on PCs ran at 320x200, the Mac version ran at 640x400 (plus 80 pixels for the UI strip). DOS X-Wing was 320x200, Mac version was 640x480, same for Warcraft 1 and probably others. So the reality was the opposite of what you're claiming.

Thanks for calling that out. It seems that Vision Pro has least two unadvertised features: (1) provoking AVP detractors to magnify (or completely invent) trivial statements to support derisive arguments (2) identifying people who believe they know more about a product they’ve never used than people who are using it.

 

[BellSystem]

Probably be better off with a QuickTime VR image from 1999 lol