PDA

View Full Version : Cockpit View - Neuro Science Challenge to All Developers



McTheory90
25-06-2015, 09:56
This is not a criticism, just an observation. Cockpit view in racing games is generally provided by placing a "camera" in the car. The position and its behaviour can be refined, but developers always know that what the player "sees" is on a screen.

The human being in real life "sees" with the brain. What we see is actually 90% constructed by brain (depending upon what its priorities are at a particular moment in time, measured in ms). In focussed situations, brain priorities change less often. Most of the data received by the eyes is not used by the brain, although all the data is available to it, to construct a picture (the data changes each ms).

When driving a real car, the brain constructs a picture of the world based upon its focussed priorities. For much of the time the brain picture is closer to the "hood view" than cockpit view in games, though in games the player's brain will naturally focus on the observable "road ahead" view on the monitor screen (effectively shrinking your monitor size). In real life, brain priorities change very rapidly and briefly to mirror, instruments etc.

I have no idea exactly how much synthesis there is between computer science and neuro science and I have simplified the brain side a great deal - not mentioned filters, archetypes in construction etc.

It is a challenge and from a monitor screen perspective I don't know if there is an answer, but I would be interested in knowing how much synthesis is going on between the sciences to address it from a Project Cars Dev Team (part of the graphics revolution) perspective. The only thing that comes to my mind is an "ahead"/"inside" focus toggle.

wraithsrike
25-06-2015, 10:18
What's the question?

danowat
25-06-2015, 10:21
What's the question?

How much research has gone into making a cockpit view that is in line with what you actually see IRL.

Bascially, when driving a real car you don't actually see the dash, it's all in peripheral vision

stux
25-06-2015, 10:34
Depends how close you sit to the screen ;)

nomen nescio
25-06-2015, 10:55
Wait a few years and we all be racing in a holodeck similar to the Star Trek holodeck and all ingame camera problems are solved.

What the brain sees in real life or on a screen is probably working in a similar way. The only "problem" I see is that game developers have to find a way to show the information shown on your monitor in a 1:1 "proportion" to real life, hence the FOV adjustments you can make to get as close to the 1:1. <<<< This is how I see it.

bjosim
25-06-2015, 11:03
You know, the brain has an ability to filter out any "unwanted" information or background noise. We all do it all the time, but people with hearing aids usually get problems with this, and it has something to do with all the audio coming from one source, hence the brains reduced capacity to filter out unwanted information. Stay with me.

When i drive IRL my brain does exactly the same with my vision. It filters out unwanted information so I can do a better job with the relevant visual information. That's why, when I drive fast, I don't notice the inside of my car. I am "out there" visually. Cockpit view is therefore less realistic in my view. It does the same to the brain as hearing aids. It makes it harder for the brain to filter out the unwanted information. The handicap is bigger than the advantage of bumper cam. Hood cam is the cam that most closely matches the feeling I get from driving IRL.

I just posted this in another thread. Almost the same as you are saying..

Cockpit view is funny, but not realistic because of this...

Rambo_Commando
25-06-2015, 11:09
I've actually sat in a replica F1 car, the ones that you can get you picture taken, during the Canadian GP weekend. I can say that the default cockpit view in Pcars is good. You can tweak the camera a bit closer which is more realistic. But you are right, the dash is in your peripheral vision because you are looking at what's in front of you. Realistically, that dash in cockpit view should appear out of focus but I think it would look strange in a video game.

danowat
25-06-2015, 11:17
I've actually sat in a replica F1 car, the ones that you can get you picture taken, during the Canadian GP weekend. I can say that the default cockpit view in Pcars is good. You can tweak the camera a bit closer which is more realistic. But you are right, the dash is in your peripheral vision because you are looking at what's in front of you. Realistically, that dash in cockpit view should appear out of focus but I think it would look strange in a video game.

The point is, when you are looking at the road / track, you aren't actually seeing the dash, the brain is filling those parts in, it's not until you move your eyes from the road / track to purposely view the dash that you actually see it.

You could argue that some of this is already happening in a dash view, however, the FOV is all wrong.

wraithsrike
25-06-2015, 11:44
How much research has gone into making a cockpit view that is in line with what you actually see IRL.

Bascially, when driving a real car you don't actually see the dash, it's all in peripheral vision

I was joking buddy ;-)

It's a cool question though ( if slightly above my head :-)

Morgan Henstridge
25-06-2015, 11:49
If you work out the correct FOV (http://www.projectimmersion.com/fov/) for your racing position, it looks very real and has a more correct sense of speed and elevation.

You will most likely see less of the dashboard and more through the windscreen. Once the correct FOV is set, use the seat adjustments ingame to perfect the view to your liking.

It takes a while to get used to this from defaults, but once you get used to it, you will find it much more accurate to place the car where you want it on track.

Innerspace_HQ
25-06-2015, 12:03
work out the correct FOV (http://www.projectimmersion.com/fov/)

That is excellent! Thank you.

McTheory90
25-06-2015, 15:15
What's the question?

Sorry it was tucked away here in a post I hurried, so rather an overcomplex syntax.

"...but I would be interested in knowing how much synthesis is going on between the sciences to address it from a Project Cars Dev Team (part of the graphics revolution) perspective?"

The operative sciences here are, computer graphics and neuro science. Synthesis is basically where two scientific disciplines get their heads together.

b_akerlite
25-06-2015, 15:25
I think helmet cam does a great job of prioritising focus on horizon and dash comes in and out of focus . Can't see it being much better on a physically 2d screen. Esp with correct fov.
I wish I could enforce helmet cam in lobby.....

McTheory90
25-06-2015, 15:29
If you work out the correct FOV (http://www.projectimmersion.com/fov/) for your racing position, it looks very real and has a more correct sense of speed and elevation.

You will most likely see less of the dashboard and more through the windscreen. Once the correct FOV is set, use the seat adjustments ingame to perfect the view to your liking.

It takes a while to get used to this from defaults, but once you get used to it, you will find it much more accurate to place the car where you want it on track.

The Open Wheel cars cockpit view in Project Cars is superior to most others. However, the hood view remains the closest to real life precisely because of how the brain actually works.

When games set a challenge to complete whatever task in cockpit view, the real challenge is a shrinking of the useful area of the screen. This does not happen in real life with the brain because it has some really neat tricks to "create" a spacial image of the world, filling in blanks and uses less than 10% of the available data to do it.

Computer Science has started to latch onto this spooky phenomenon with ray tracing accurate 3d images from only a fraction of the available data. Project Cars is good, but what I am suggesting is that a real revolution in graphics and perception might be possible if you go for that synthesis with neuro science.

If Project Cars doesn't, somone else will and they will get the kudos and the s for doing so.

wraithsrike
25-06-2015, 16:02
Now this is a cool thread.

Phishfinger
25-06-2015, 16:10
That FOV caluclator is great, I've set mine to 45 for cockpit cam and although it's really zoomed in it's much more of a realistic view. It doesn't look as easy on the eye though, I like to see the inside of the car so I might end up switching back to default.

tarbat
25-06-2015, 16:11
If you work out the correct FOV (http://www.projectimmersion.com/fov/) for your racing position, it looks very real and has a more correct sense of speed and elevation.

Similarly, I use this Excel formula - =2*DEGREES(TAN(0.4358*Screen_Diagonal/Viewing_Distance))

It's surprising how small a FOV you should really use for a realistic cockpit view. For example, sitting 55" from a 46" TV gives a FOV of only 44.

tntcbag
25-06-2015, 16:14
Isn't this the exact same thing? If in real life you sit in the driver's seat and focus on the road your brain only views the road and in the game you use cockpit view and only focus on the road your brain will only see the road? Unless you're just staring at the dashboard in cockpit view which may explain the problem. Your screen won't be as big as real life, so you can compensate by changing your field of view or moving the camera up to the hood, but there's no different neuroscience going on, if you focus on the road in the game it's the same as focusing on the road in real life.

JessicaWalter
25-06-2015, 16:20
Unless you're just staring at the dashboard in cockpit view which may explain the problem...

i crash like that a lot. pretty dashes and motecs

.

Chin
25-06-2015, 20:46
The Open Wheel cars cockpit view in Project Cars is superior to most others. However, the hood view remains the closest to real life precisely because of how the brain actually works.

When games set a challenge to complete whatever task in cockpit view, the real challenge is a shrinking of the useful area of the screen. This does not happen in real life with the brain because it has some really neat tricks to "create" a spacial image of the world, filling in blanks and uses less than 10% of the available data to do it.

Computer Science has started to latch onto this spooky phenomenon with ray tracing accurate 3d images from only a fraction of the available data. Project Cars is good, but what I am suggesting is that a real revolution in graphics and perception might be possible if you go for that synthesis with neuro science.

If Project Cars doesn't, someone else will and they will get the kudos and the s for doing so.

I don't get where you are going with this... When I sit in the cockpit view, I am focusing on the road/cars in front and don't see the dash. This is much like you are describing. Are you using the correct FOV? Helmet cam with the blur enabled? These will affect your perception.

Are you suggesting that the mind cannot see 'past' the cockpit because of the 2D environment? I will suggest it may be due to the factors above combined with the lower level of immersion while playing the sim (sounds are not the same, no seat of the pants feel, etc). If anything, I will I had better periphery to see my data display that is sitting right below my screen.

Mad Al
25-06-2015, 20:47
42..?

danpinho
26-06-2015, 03:25
When I drive a real car I can see part of my arms, dashboard gaugues and left mirror.
I try to replicate that in when I set the POV in PCars. It's not the same values to all cars so I end up chaging this option once in while. The values goes from 87~100 in most cases. I've tried FOV calculator (nice tool) but it take away the Motec and Gauges. Since I'm aways checking Motec… it's just not an option for me.

Panopticism
26-06-2015, 03:44
Hey, OP,

I don't mean to step on any toes and I obviously don't know how in depth your knowledge of and training in neuroscience is, but has anyone ever warned you about making realist claims?

Your posts in this thread suggest that you are a staunch scientific realist. There is a great deal of risk associated with such a world view.

McTheory90
26-06-2015, 07:47
42..?

By far the best response, bringing new meaning to WMD, the game, its direction of travel, everything... :)

McTheory90
26-06-2015, 08:01
Hey, OP,

I don't mean to step on any toes and I obviously don't know how in depth your knowledge of and training in neuroscience is, but has anyone ever warned you about making realist claims?

Your posts in this thread suggest that you are a staunch scientific realist. There is a great deal of risk associated with such a world view.

Huge risks indeed, including a risk of the folly of taking seriously the proposition Ayn Rand was actually a philosopher. But I tried to keep my proposition as simple and un-frightening as possible. I did not go into quantum physics or the implications of Heisenberg's uncertainty principle in relation to what the brain actually "sees" in the "real world" or the spacial shift in projection/perception when focussed. Although I did use the word spooky once.

A ray-tracing camera is as "realist" as you can get. For a human being only a certain type of individual at a high end of the autistic spectrum would "see" like that.

danowat
26-06-2015, 08:07
When I drive a real car I can see part of my arms, dashboard gaugues and left mirror.

The point is you actually don't, when looking at the road you see the road, and your brain fills in the rest that is in peripheral vision (arms, gauges, mirror) etc, unless you actually divert your gaze and consciously look the other things.

McTheory90
26-06-2015, 08:22
Isn't this the exact same thing? If in real life you sit in the driver's seat and focus on the road your brain only views the road and in the game you use cockpit view and only focus on the road your brain will only see the road? Unless you're just staring at the dashboard in cockpit view which may explain the problem. Your screen won't be as big as real life, so you can compensate by changing your field of view or moving the camera up to the hood, but there's no different neuroscience going on, if you focus on the road in the game it's the same as focusing on the road in real life.

A Priori, in the real world the perception shift does not zoom and foreshorten distance. I am not saying the ability to tailor in the game is poor, it is actually excellent. Hood view with mirrors is a closer approximation of what the brain perceives in reality - but only an approximation.

LukeC
26-06-2015, 09:21
The point is you actually don't, when looking at the road you see the road, and your brain fills in the rest that is in peripheral vision (arms, gauges, mirror) etc, unless you actually divert your gaze and consciously look the other things.

That's exactly right. When you're playing PC in cockpit view you also see the road ahead, unless you gaze at the gauges, the mirror, or what have you. That's the reason why we have a cockpit view in sims, to give the sensation of actually sitting inside the car, rather than floating above the bonnet slightly in front of the windscreen, which is what I experience when playing in bonnet view. In my personal opinion bonnet, bumper and chase views have no place in sim racing; although I understand that a lot of people would comlpain if they weren't included so I don't mind if they are there as an option for those who absolutely must have them.

SpeedLimitUnknown
26-06-2015, 09:49
I've actually sat in a replica F1 car, the ones that you can get you picture taken, during the Canadian GP weekend. I can say that the default cockpit view in Pcars is good. You can tweak the camera a bit closer which is more realistic. But you are right, the dash is in your peripheral vision because you are looking at what's in front of you. Realistically, that dash in cockpit view should appear out of focus but I think it would look strange in a video game.

This why I like to race from the hood cam, better sense of speed and view of your surroundings. In a video game with a single monitor (and no peripheral vision to see what's around us) we need all the help we can get!

TSells31
26-06-2015, 09:50
I see what you're saying about vision focus. In real life, you move your eyes to see other things, but they are always focused in a very fine manner. They can peripherally see >180 degrees, but you're only realistically focused anywhere between 15-30 or 40 degrees (I'm guessing). The focus changes depending on what you're doing, what you're trying to see, and how fine of detail you need to see for any given task. When reading, for example, the amount you can see in detail is very small, to focus on the fine details required to read. When driving a racecar, you need to be able to see in detail a greater amount. So while you might not be able to see every pebble on the track in detail, you can see the track in front of you broadly enough to follow your line, but in less detail. I'm kind of rambling and probably not getting my thoughts across very effectively. The easiest way to picture this is if you think about it this way. You can look at a persons whole face, and get a good image of it, or you can focus on the zit on their cheek, but the rest of their face becomes peripheral, because you're focusing on a small detail.

So while you can "see" your surroundings when driving a car, like your mirrors, the interior, etc, you're not really seeing any of that unless you actually shift your focus. Unfortunately, on a display between 40-60 inches, if you have the field of view set to 180+ degrees like in real life, everything becomes too small to effectively see the track in front of you. If you set the field of view down around 40-50 degrees, your trackview becomes more realistic, but you can't just look down quick to check your gauges, and you lose your peripheral vision to see cars next to you, the rest of the interior, etc.

The only ways I can see solving this realistically without dumping thousands and thousands on some sort of optical tracking sensor and a monsterous display, would be to either get a monsterous display (1:1 ratio relative to your distance from the display), and set the field of view high, allowing your eyes to work like they do in real life. The other, cheaper, and easier solution, would be to add a feature in game that allows you to move your focus (turn your head), with the right analog stick or whatever, and then set your field of view to the 30-50 degrees that you're eyes would normally be focused on at any given point. You wouldn't have peripheral vision, but you could easily look down at the dash, over at the car next to you, up at your rearview mirror, etc at will. I would absolutely love this, but it'd be hard to map on a wheel without analog sticks, which my t300 and most wheels don't have. Another option would be to add button mapping options such as glance at dash, glance at mirror, similar to the look left/right options. This would take a lot of buttons, but it would be a huge improvement imo. Then you could run the focused optical angle that allows you to see the track properly, and still be able to see everything in and around the car that you need to, when you need to.

McTheory90
26-06-2015, 10:03
I see what you're saying about vision focus. In real life, you move your eyes to see other things, but they are always focused in a very fine manner. They can peripherally see >180 degrees, but you're only realistically focused anywhere between 15-30 or 40 degrees (I'm guessing). The focus changes depending on what you're doing, what you're trying to see, and how fine of detail you need to see for any given task. When reading, for example, the amount you can see in detail is very small, to focus on the fine details required to read. When driving a racecar, you need to be able to see in detail a greater amount. So while you might not be able to see every pebble on the track in detail, you can see the track in front of you broadly enough to follow your line, but in less detail. I'm kind of rambling and probably not getting my thoughts across very effectively. The easiest way to picture this is if you think about it this way. You can look at a persons whole face, and get a good image of it, or you can focus on the zit on their cheek, but the rest of their face becomes peripheral, because you're focusing on a small detail.

So while you can "see" your surroundings when driving a car, like your mirrors, the interior, etc, you're not really seeing any of that unless you actually shift your focus. Unfortunately, on a display between 40-60 inches, if you have the field of view set to 180+ degrees like in real life, everything becomes too small to effectively see the track in front of you. If you set the field of view down around 40-50 degrees, your trackview becomes more realistic, but you can't just look down quick to check your gauges, and you lose your peripheral vision to see cars next to you, the rest of the interior, etc.

The only ways I can see solving this realistically without dumping thousands and thousands on some sort of optical tracking sensor and a monsterous display, would be to either get a monsterous display (1:1 ratio relative to your distance from the display), and set the field of view high, allowing your eyes to work like they do in real life. The other, cheaper, and easier solution, would be to add a feature in game that allows you to move your focus (turn your head), with the right analog stick or whatever, and then set your field of view to the 30-50 degrees that you're eyes would normally be focused on at any given point. You wouldn't have peripheral vision, but you could easily look down at the dash, over at the car next to you, up at your rearview mirror, etc at will. I would absolutely love this, but it'd be hard to map on a wheel without analog sticks, which my t300 and most wheels don't have. Another option would be to add button mapping options such as glance at dash, glance at mirror, similar to the look left/right options. This would take a lot of buttons, but it would be a huge improvement imo. Then you could run the focused optical angle that allows you to see the track properly, and still be able to see everything in and around the car that you need to, when you need to.

You are absolutely spot on, mostly, in your analysis. The problem with FOV is that it behaves like a camera (it zooms and foreshortens). The brain does not employ the eyes as a camera, per ms it uses some of the data from the eyes to create a spacial image of the world and because it is constantly updating can shift the viewpoint of perception.

Artists have been exploring this phenomenon for centuries. Some of the masters created images from supposedly impossible viewpoints but were able to portray a world the viewer found reasonable and "realistic" on the limited space of the canvas. Art historians with knowledge of viewpoint could make a positive contribution to the whole "cockpit view is more realistic" paradigm in computer games. That paradigm is flawed and IMO it would be nice if Creative Britain could play a part in revolutionising that.

PerFixAlot
26-06-2015, 10:05
I don't think neuroscience is really relevant to game development at the current technological level, simple trial and error is more effective.
To me it seems like calculating transistor properties for the Motec display, sure it would be more realistic but at what computational cost?
A shorthand statistical value (probably 0) for failure is much more practical, and in 99.99999% of the cases it won't make any difference in terms of realism, though it would result in huge processing overhead and decreased performance.

That said, my guess is that understanding the physiology and functional mechanisms behind visual processes could boost performance as well visual realism, but I think new hardware would be required.
As in this project: http://www.getfove.com/

danowat
26-06-2015, 11:02
The long and the short of it for me personally.

Cockpit view, although not strictly realistic, provides the most sense of immersion.

Hood view is probably more realistic, and probably faster, but it feels more "gamey"

Flaw3dGenius
26-06-2015, 11:06
This is not a criticism, just an observation. Cockpit view in racing games is generally provided by placing a "camera" in the car. The position and its behaviour can be refined, but developers always know that what the player "sees" is on a screen.

The human being in real life "sees" with the brain. What we see is actually 90% constructed by brain (depending upon what its priorities are at a particular moment in time, measured in ms). In focussed situations, brain priorities change less often. Most of the data received by the eyes is not used by the brain, although all the data is available to it, to construct a picture (the data changes each ms).

When driving a real car, the brain constructs a picture of the world based upon its focussed priorities. For much of the time the brain picture is closer to the "hood view" than cockpit view in games, though in games the player's brain will naturally focus on the observable "road ahead" view on the monitor screen (effectively shrinking your monitor size). In real life, brain priorities change very rapidly and briefly to mirror, instruments etc.

I have no idea exactly how much synthesis there is between computer science and neuro science and I have simplified the brain side a great deal - not mentioned filters, archetypes in construction etc.

It is a challenge and from a monitor screen perspective I don't know if there is an answer, but I would be interested in knowing how much synthesis is going on between the sciences to address it from a Project Cars Dev Team (part of the graphics revolution) perspective. The only thing that comes to my mind is an "ahead"/"inside" focus toggle.

Great post

Yeah i race solely in cockpit view and for me we see far too much of the roofs of cars, I know i can put the FOV down to 45-50 (currently at 55-60) to combat this but i dont feel as if i should need to do this. I think game devs decide to make cockpit view more gamey rather than doing it realistically.

Lukas Macedo
26-06-2015, 12:21
I would like to have an option to set low FOV and a few buttons mapped to simulate the change of focus: look to left mirror, look to right mirror, look to main mirror, look to dashboard, look to side console. When driving in real life, it seems to me, we switch focus in a fraction of time. So, instead of a imprecise look around (which we have), a focused look on key elements/views would be great. Never done before, afaik.

kurtie
26-06-2015, 13:45
If you work out the correct FOV (http://www.projectimmersion.com/fov/) for your racing position, it looks very real and has a more correct sense of speed and elevation.


This web is amazing. I think that cockpit view, with correct FOV, and TrackIR or similar head tracking, is the best inmersion you can get...

Regards,
Kurt.-

McTheory90
26-06-2015, 14:06
The long and the short of it for me personally.

Cockpit view, although not strictly realistic, provides the most sense of immersion.

Hood view is probably more realistic, and probably faster, but it feels more "gamey"

You are right to point out immersion. Like everything else it depends hugely on personal preferences. For me, I need 75 degree FOV, minimum, to get the sense of speed from the periphery. Sense of speed gives me, personally, the sense of immersion I am looking for. Inside a non-open wheel car, using a smaller FOV, like 45 degrees diminishes it hugely, as well as making Turn 1 at Monza downright weird (and not a success in trying to beat my measly 1:24:2 there in Formula A either and even more weird).

After experimenting a lot with FOV and seat position I have come to the conclusion I would really like to be able to change the camera position more in an enclosed car without lowering the FOV. Presently the seat position changes seem quite limited and downright awkward having to do it in car on a pad with limited buttons to map it all to.

McTheory90
26-06-2015, 14:17
I don't think neuroscience is really relevant to game development at the current technological level, simple trial and error is more effective.
To me it seems like calculating transistor properties for the Motec display, sure it would be more realistic but at what computational cost?
A shorthand statistical value (probably 0) for failure is much more practical, and in 99.99999% of the cases it won't make any difference in terms of realism, though it would result in huge processing overhead and decreased performance.

That said, my guess is that understanding the physiology and functional mechanisms behind visual processes could boost performance as well visual realism, but I think new hardware would be required.
As in this project: http://www.getfove.com/

You might be right about new hardware being needed, though visualization academia are not just writing code that will need new hardware, they are also pushing the boundaries for existing - some of which is spooky and involves, much like the brain, using fractions of the data to accurately draw the 3d image, though I don't know if the synthesis between the various fields of computer science includes the gaming field. I've read some of the papers and seen the results of the fractional data use and although I have no expertise in coding, the results were plain spooky to me for other reasons which are too way out to go into here.

McTheory90
26-06-2015, 14:41
I just posted this in another thread. Almost the same as you are saying..

Cockpit view is funny, but not realistic because of this...

Because of this thread I conducted a personal and strictly unscientific experiment today. I got into my car and sat parked in it for a good few minutes in my normal driving position and looked very carefully at what I could actually see. I was amazed to find I could barely see the hood/bonnet of my car. As expected though I was hugely aware of the wheel, the dash; but surprised by how little I could actually see through the windscreen.

But as soon as I started up the engine and began to move I could "see" the hood very clearly and the world outside just opened up. It's hard to remember whether things worked like that when I first actually drove a car (though I had done a lot of motorcycling before I drove a car). It might be something the brain acquires; it might be something some never acquire.

It is as though your ability to see has shifted the point from which it does so in space - but is actually the brain constructing the image from incomplete data.

Martini Da Gasalini
26-06-2015, 14:45
How much research has gone into making a cockpit view that is in line with what you actually see IRL.

Bascially, when driving a real car you don't actually see the dash, it's all in peripheral vision

you don't see the dash? really? it's funny I see the dash, dummy gauges, hell even the armrest when I want when driving a real car

danowat
26-06-2015, 14:47
you don't see the dash? really? it's funny I see the dash, dummy gauges, hell even the armrest when I want when driving a real car

That's the point ;)

Martini Da Gasalini
26-06-2015, 14:51
You are absolutely spot on, mostly, in your analysis. The problem with FOV is that it behaves like a camera (it zooms and foreshortens). The brain does not employ the eyes as a camera, per ms it uses some of the data from the eyes to create a spacial image of the world and because it is constantly updating can shift the viewpoint of perception.

Artists have been exploring this phenomenon for centuries. Some of the masters created images from supposedly impossible viewpoints but were able to portray a world the viewer found reasonable and "realistic" on the limited space of the canvas. Art historians with knowledge of viewpoint could make a positive contribution to the whole "cockpit view is more realistic" paradigm in computer games. That paradigm is flawed and IMO it would be nice if Creative Britain could play a part in revolutionising that.


what are you talking about? have you setup a 3 screen setup?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tr9HCwuh3E

case in point ^ what is missing? what can't you see that you wouldn't if you where in this vehicle?

Martini Da Gasalini
26-06-2015, 14:53
That's the point ;)

that is your perspective.

Let me ask you a question, when racing or driving, what is the actual focal point of your eyes?

danowat
26-06-2015, 15:55
The track, of course.

stux
26-06-2015, 16:04
There's another interesting neuro-visual effect at play too, when you change your glance (ie move your eyeballs), your vision is actually blanked/filtered out for the duration of the move by your brain. If it wasn't you'd be seeing crazy motion blur as you looked around.

Interestingly, when you move your head to change your gaze that is not blanked.

What this means is when you are driving and glance at your mirrors, you're actually not seeing anything during the change in focus/gaze, but if you instead turn your head you are.

It's a funny effect, have a play with it ;)

The filtering out is the same sortof thing that happens when driving and looking into the distance, how the near distance is not really seen.

stux
26-06-2015, 16:13
Because of this thread I conducted a personal and strictly unscientific experiment today. I got into my car and sat parked in it for a good few minutes in my normal driving position and looked very carefully at what I could actually see. I was amazed to find I could barely see the hood/bonnet of my car. As expected though I was hugely aware of the wheel, the dash; but surprised by how little I could actually see through the windscreen.

But as soon as I started up the engine and began to move I could "see" the hood very clearly and the world outside just opened up. It's hard to remember whether things worked like that when I first actually drove a car (though I had done a lot of motorcycling before I drove a car). It might be something the brain acquires; it might be something some never acquire.

It is as though your ability to see has shifted the point from which it does so in space - but is actually the brain constructing the image from incomplete data.

I remember learning to drive. I got dinged for not seeing the cars way ahead rather than the near ones. I explained to the instructor, that is probably a learned skill, let me get behind a wheel and I will learn it ;)

He agreed, I did ;)

Martini Da Gasalini
26-06-2015, 16:43
The track, of course.

where?

Lukas Macedo
26-06-2015, 16:52
Adding to what I mentioned, the current look left/right effect in pCars is a bit disorienting. A more direct (maybe fast?) movement would be better. I lose a few ms searching for the mirror, every time. It would never happened IRL (at least, not in my experience).

McTheory90
30-06-2015, 07:42
There's another interesting neuro-visual effect at play too, when you change your glance (ie move your eyeballs), your vision is actually blanked/filtered out for the duration of the move by your brain. If it wasn't you'd be seeing crazy motion blur as you looked around.

Interestingly, when you move your head to change your gaze that is not blanked.

What this means is when you are driving and glance at your mirrors, you're actually not seeing anything during the change in focus/gaze, but if you instead turn your head you are.

It's a funny effect, have a play with it ;)

The filtering out is the same sortof thing that happens when driving and looking into the distance, how the near distance is not really seen.

I have raised my awareness about this whilst driving. You are right. It occurs also with the over the shoulder (life saver) glances before changing lane or turning at a junction.

Mascot
30-06-2015, 07:50
I've always thought it would be good to try a cockpit view with the interior ghosted out so that it's semi-transparent. I always feel that my vision is very restricted in cockpit view, a lot more than it would be in real life, especially in race cars with very wide A-pillars and narrow windscreens. Ghosting the interior (or just parts of it, like the A-pillar) could be a good compromise and might actually replicate how our brains and vision work together to fill in missing details.

Bouyo
30-06-2015, 18:25
I'm playing with a 110" screen and projector setup, helmet cam with all blur effects on.

I'd say that PCars does a great job and it's extremely close to what I experience with a real car, vis the view through the widescreen being the focus and my dash and wheel being blurred periphery.

Good drivers (and racing drivers for that fact) will tend towards opening up their mind's eye to allow more periphery into the mix, rather than focusing on single points of road ahead, as this helps greatly with spatial awareness and being aware of dangers around you. It's common among people who juggle to do this with ease as it's essential for the act of juggling.

There are other instances where object fixation is what you want, i.e. Playing squash (looking at the ball) and flying gliders too (you tend to fly to where you look), but with driving you want more of an open fov.

I think someone said it earlier but I'll repeat: you shouldn't try to make the game mimick effects that occur already in your mind, then you're doubling up. Let the game simply present to you the fov you'd experience (dash 'n all) then rely on the game to blur those parts appropriately to how your eye's depth of field would actually blur them. Simple.