Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!dali.cs.montana.edu!milton!xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG From: xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) Newsgroups: sci.virtual-worlds Subject: Re: Cyberspace, VR, a summary of what I've seen so far... Message-ID: <7988@milton.u.washington.edu> Date: 21 Sep 90 12:32:09 GMT References: <7624@milton.u.washington.edu> <7660@ <7678@milton.u.washington.edu> Sender: hlab@milton.u.washington.edu Organization: SF-Bay Public-Access Unix Lines: 49 Approved: hitl@hardy.u.washington.edu cyberoid@milton.u.washington.edu (Robert Jacobson) writes: > > > >As Fred Brooks suggested in his paper at SIGGRAPH, "Project GROPE-- >Haptic Displays for Scientific Visualization," there is no substitute >for multisensory apprehension of data. Putting a complex image on a >CRT merely displaces the process of making sense of an abstraction >from textual translation to visual translation. Without a sense of >spatiality or encompassing three-dimensionality, certain symbioses >of the senses -- sound complementing sight, and body motion comple- >menting both of those -- simply can't kick in. > >The oscillating glasses/CRT image concept is very creative and it >produces a fine illusion, but you're still peeking through the >porthole. You can't hear the waves lapping at the hull or walk >the decks of experience. > >Bob Jacobson >HIT Lab >Seattle Perhaps not, but the illusion of motion in a common arcade game is quite strong, even though the body is essentially still. Just like the hand eye coordination between a mouse and a screen cursor, I'd guess your body could quickly learn to compensate for missing cues from the motion sensors if the visual cues are made strong enough (3D, etc.). Thus, the virtual reality platform need not give you Mary Martin's flight support system to give the illusion of flight. Compare the truely limited real motion of the Disney starbus ride with the tremendous roller coaster sensation the intense visuals and minor motion cues provide. To generalize, don't overdesign the early systems to provide every possible sensory input. Start by trusting the body/memory/imagination/wishful thinking to provide the parts that are hard to simulate if you only do the easy ones well. Similarly, moving a joystick rather than ones head to look left or right may seem klutzy at first, and seem to demand the CRT be replaced by 3D head motion sensors and projection goggles in the initial design, but try the cheap, easy photo-optic goggles and interlaced left and right 3D views CRT screen solution, push it to the max, and see how the user adapts before deciding you have to invent the direct neural interface just because it's "the techy thing to do". ;-) Kent, the man from xanth.