| Jacob Oost 2005-03-31, 3:50 am |
| Doug Jacobs wrote:
quote:
> I've seen some pretty impressive camera-based things in the arcades
> though. There's a boxing game and a light-gun game. In the boxing game,
> you can move around on a small pad, but you can duck punch and defend like
> a real boxer. Your actions are then translated to your onscreen character.
>
In reality though a system like that is rather simplistic. The computer
isn't as "smart" as it seems to be.
quote:
> So, you'd tip your forward to move forward? I guess that could work.
> Naw, holodecks are way too dangerous and raise way too many ethical/moral
> questions.
>
Huh? No, in a holodeck you walk forward and the entire simulated world
moves, and the forcefield under your feet moves under you as well. The
whole ground wouldn't need to be simulated, just the part under you.
One thing they never explained on Star Trek was how multiple people
could be in a holodeck at the same time and be farther away from
eachother than the confines of the holodeck would allow. Those things
are the size of racketball courts and yet some holodeck simulations are
outdoors, with people miles away from eachother. I guess I should
repeat to myself "It's just a show, and I should really just relax."
quote:
> Ack! Now I have to learn to ride a horse and play the flute!? ;) I just
> want to whack bad guys, not "learn" something ;)
Nah, it would be easier than in real life. Riding a horse would be as
smooth as riding in a car in the VR world, whereas in real life, riding
a horse even at a slow pace is like sitting on a broken washing machine.
--
----- BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK -----
Version 3.1
GAT d? !s !a C++++ UL+ P L++ E- W+ N+ o-- K- w--
O- !M !V PS-- PE++ Y+ PGP- t++>++++* 5? !X-- R- tv b++ DI+ D++
G e !h !r !y
...... END GEEK CODE BLOCK ----
|