Slashdot Mirror


Quake II In Full Motion Stereogram 3D Engine

crhylove writes "A guy called Lewey Geselowitz has hacked the GPL Quake II code to display a real time full motion stereogram SIRD 3D environment. Warning, though, it's very hard to play if you aren't excellent at focusing on SIRDS already. He has a download page on his personal site with more information." The page notes: "You finally saw the yacht in the seemingly random bunch of dots! Now use your skills to free yourself from your evil extra-dimensional zombie oppressors! Welcome to Quake II as it was never meant to be."

85 comments

  1. The Trouble with Stereoglyphs by Crash+Culligan · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I tried the first screenshot, and it actually worked! I could see some detail in the background, I could see jagged pieces and textures in between textures... and then I look to the side and Ker-FUBAR!

    "Okay, who took my focus? I knew I had it here a minute ago..."

    Either people playing Magic-Eye QUAKE 2 use mouselook like their heads have been spot-welded to their shoulders, or whenever they look to the sides of the screen their focus will break like the wind.

    --
    You cannot truly appreciate Dilbert until you read it in the original Klingon.
    1. Re:The Trouble with Stereoglyphs by NanoGator · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "I tried the first screenshot, and it actually worked! I could see some detail in the background, I could see jagged pieces and textures in between textures... and then I look to the side and Ker-FUBAR!"

      I lost my focus when I looked down to see how many bullets I had left. Wish they'd addressed that too.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    2. Re:The Trouble with Stereoglyphs by nocomment · · Score: 2, Funny

      You finally saw the yacht in the seemingly random bunch of dots!

      actually it's a schooner

      --
      /* oops I accidentally made a comment, sorry */
      /* http://allyourbasearebelongto.us */
    3. Re:The Trouble with Stereoglyphs by nogoodmonkey · · Score: 2, Funny

      I brought a lunch and a soda. I'm not leaving until I see this sailboat everyone keeps talking about.

    4. Re:The Trouble with Stereoglyphs by FrenZon · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Either people playing Magic-Eye QUAKE 2 use mouselook like their heads have been spot-welded to their shoulders
      I think you will find that most advanced FPS players do have their head spot-welded to their shoulders - focusing directly on their crosshair and just using mouselook to 'look around'. Otherwise you waste time using your neck to look at an enemy, then bringing your crosshair to bear.
    5. Re:The Trouble with Stereoglyphs by crhylove · · Score: 1

      This is a very early alpha people. Check back when we have a custom game with custom content. Or submit some md2s for us, that you think would render health/ammo, in an easily identifiable way.

      The game is playable this way. I've gotten to the hidden level already, but it's just a tech demo, atm, the finished game will be better for this environment. :D
      rhY
      Project Manager

      --
      I hold very few opinions. I hold information based on observation and fact. If you wish to disagree, please use facts.
    6. Re:The Trouble with Stereoglyphs by someguy42 · · Score: 1

      When do I get to see the GODDAMN SAILBOAT!!!!

      --
      The probability that someone is watching you is directly proportional to the stupidity of your actions.
    7. Re:The Trouble with Stereoglyphs by |/|/||| · · Score: 1
      Yeah, plus the crosshair is just slapped on top of the stereogram, so you end up with two of 'em. I guess you just have to put your target at the midpoint...

      --
      [javac] 100 errors
  2. Best disclaimer ever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    This software could cause brain damage, kill an epileptic, create pandomonium globally, or cause irreversable damage to your colon.

    1. Re:Best disclaimer ever by Will2k_is_here · · Score: 1

      :
      *Phew* Mine still works.

    2. Re:Best disclaimer ever by crhylove · · Score: 1

      Thank You. :D That was my technical way of saying "badly kick your ass."

      --
      I hold very few opinions. I hold information based on observation and fact. If you wish to disagree, please use facts.
  3. Mild frustration, then... by Portikon · · Score: 5, Funny

    cool... a sailboat.

    1. Re:Mild frustration, then... by drivers · · Score: 1

      "It's not a sailboat, it's a schooner."

    2. Re:Mild frustration, then... by y0bhgu0d · · Score: 4, Funny

      a schooner is a sailboat, stupid-head.

    3. Re:Mild frustration, then... by wickedj · · Score: 3, Informative

      I believe the quote is in reverse.

      "Ha ha ha, you dumb bastard. It's not a schooner, it's a sailboat."
      "A schooner is a sailboat stupidhead!"
      "YOU KNOW WHAT, THERE IS NO EASTER BUNNY, OVER THERE, THAT'S JUST A GUY IN A SUIT!!!!!"

      I love that movie.

    4. Re:Mild frustration, then... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      K3v1n Sm1th R0000les

    5. Re:Mild frustration, then... by richy+freeway · · Score: 1

      Or a large beer glass. Which sounds much better than a damn sailboat. Although you could get more beer in a sailboat... Hmmm...

    6. Re:Mild frustration, then... by still_sick · · Score: 1

      YOU KNOW WHAT, THERE IS NO EASTER BUNNY! OVER THERE - THAT'S JUST A GUY IN A SUIT!!!

      (Before modding me down as off-topic, consider for a second that you just don't "get it".)

      --
      ...Also, I didn't know Buggalo could fly.
  4. My own cross-eyed stereodottygram... by The+Ultimate+Fartkno · · Score: 1, Funny

    000111010100111010101010100101101010 010110101001001000011101010110101010 101010110101011001010101011010101011 000111110101110101101101110100011101 101010010101101011110101010111010101 111010100001111101010110101011010101 101011010110101010110101010101011010 (If you cross your eyes and stare at that, it says "Fr15T p05T!" I'm currently rendering the "YUO ARE TEH FAILURE!"

  5. is it even possible? by gl4ss · · Score: 1

    iirc you would lost the (un)focus if the scene moved(watched a magic eye book just few months ago whilst on skiing vacation).

    so is it just yet another april fools gag day too late?

    --
    world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    1. Re:is it even possible? by DeltaSigma · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You should be fine as long as you continue to focus on the middle of the screen.

      You see, as each new frame is drawn your eyes are already adjusted to being crossed, the next frame will have roughly the same depth so your eyes won't uncross.

      I imagine the difficult part would be establishing a focus on a moving scene.

      But really, I hated looking left or right and losing it immediately... I'd have to have a large monitor and enormous fov setting to play that way.

  6. Magic Carpet by TwistedGreen · · Score: 4, Informative

    This isn't exactly new in a game... I remember that Bullfrog's Magic Carpet had this feature way back in 1994. It was virtually impossible to actually play while in this mode, of course, but it was kind of neat for a few seconds. But it was nothing more than a gimmick: certainly not a major feature.

    While Quake II would be even neater, I don't think anything's changed now... Hell, text-mode Quake II would be more playable.

    1. Re:Magic Carpet by szyzyg · · Score: 1

      Ahh beat me to it... Yep Magic Carpet was a fantastice title, I remember it was one of the first games I played that had water with reflections - if you had a fast enough machine.

    2. Re:Magic Carpet by The+Ultimate+Fartkno · · Score: 1

      And I would *kill* to get it running under DosBox or something. I miss that game. It even had that sound effect that got recycled on Buffy so many years later...

    3. Re:Magic Carpet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I remember Descent had a bunch of modes designed to work with various 3-d goggle systems...one of which resulted in two full-color off-center views being drawn to the screen if you didn't have the headset. If you could manage to focus your eyes through the screen far enough, you could get a single 3-d view in the middle, with full color and everything. Of course, there were only two images, so the required focal distance was quite headache-inducing...

    4. Re:Magic Carpet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yes, that game was awesome. remember the AI magic carpet riders? i loved to see them battle, it was one of the first games where i was impressed by the autonomous nature of the AI.

    5. Re:Magic Carpet by PhilHibbs · · Score: 2, Informative
      It was virtually impossible to actually play while in this mode, of course,
      It was playable if you were stoned. I was a student at the time.
    6. Re:Magic Carpet by spydir31 · · Score: 1

      how about a text mode SIRD? aa3d!

  7. Secret image on level 3 by redog · · Score: 1

    Go 3 paces north turn right , 15 paces, turn left 4 paces and stare at the wall. My eyes hurt enough but I swear I see a spray of goatse.cx!!

  8. Additional Information by TwistedGreen · · Score: 4, Informative

    This article gives a nice overview of how Single Image Random Dot Stereograms (SIRDS) work and their history.

    Also, check out this Java applet here which can generate stereograms, with source code.

    1. Re:Additional Information by PhilHibbs · · Score: 1

      You can do it in Perl as well. Not only is it a stereogram generator, but it's also a quine!

  9. Nifty. by pragma_x · · Score: 2, Interesting

    More screenshots on the developer's homepage.

    One problem remains: how the hell are you supposed to read your status (ammo, hp, etc) while you're all crosseyed?!?

    1. Re:Nifty. by illuvata · · Score: 1

      One problem remains: how the hell are you supposed to read your status (ammo, hp, etc) while you're all crosseyed?!?
      the HUD is displayed normally. didn't you at least look at the screenshots you linked to?

    2. Re:Nifty. by tarth · · Score: 1

      That's his point... your eyes have to go in focus to read the HUD and out of focus to see where you're going. Talk about headache inducing.

    3. Re:Nifty. by |/|/||| · · Score: 1
      Not to mention a good way to get shot or walk off a cliff.

      --
      [javac] 100 errors
  10. My Impressions by Anti_Climax · · Score: 5, Interesting

    As I have yet to find a stereogram I could not view easily, I decided to take this for a spin. After playing for a few minutes I've noticed some interesting things.

    1) Playability is greatly reduced by the fact that the HUD and crosshair is not put in stereo as well.

    2) If someone is not familiar with the levels already, the lack of textures makes it almost impossible to navigate properly.

    3) After quitting the game, I realize how much I enjoy viewing things in real world color/lighting

    4) This is still pretty wicked awesome, and I have to give props to the creator.

    --
    Even people that believe in pre-destiny look both ways before crossing the street.
    1. Re:My Impressions by Anti_Climax · · Score: 1

      After devoting a little more time to this I have also found that the stereogram is limited to discrete levels of depth. As these are random dot stereo images, it may be possible to increase the number of planes until this is no longer distinguishable. Though this would probably make playing next to impossible for all but the best stereogram viewers and increase the complexity of the code exponentially.

      Stiil, as I said before, they've done a great job and I hope they continue development.

      --
      Even people that believe in pre-destiny look both ways before crossing the street.
    2. Re:My Impressions by jensen404 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How about making the 2 crosshairs (needed to make the 3d crosshair) the right distance apart so that the 3d crosshair rests on the 3d surface under it? The two crosshairs would also help you gain or maintain the correct eye divergence for viewing.

  11. Works well with the Quake 2 demo too by apocamok · · Score: 4, Informative

    Grab the Quake 2 demo from GamersHell, install it and replace ref_soft.dll with the AbSIRD one.

  12. Stereograms on computer screens: by Nomihn0 · · Score: 1

    I am experiencing a strange phenomenon when I view stereograms on my computer. When my eyes cross, I see an intense stroboscopic effect on any white sections of the screen. Obviously, this is the monitor refreshing itself. At my relatively low 60Hz refresh rate, it becomes exceedingly irritating and could, I presume, induce a siezure in a photosensitive person. Be careful with this people . . .it's neat, but it can really be dangerous. Not to mention, it expedites the speed at which your vision is degraded. But it's so much fun... hmm, Quake Stereo for a year or vision for life . . .hmmm :)

    1. Re:Stereograms on computer screens: by Kaali · · Score: 1

      Low refresh rates can easily be seen with the "side of your eye" look away from the monitor but still "look" at the monitor and you'll see the effect. I noticed this years ago when i had 60Hz refresh rate on my monitor, and my TV was directly to the left of my monitor.

  13. Oh look, a sailboat! by Nasarius · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Arrgh. I can never do these things :)

    --
    LOAD "SIG",8,1
  14. Hmm.. by NanoGator · · Score: 1

    You know, if you ever wanted to 'encrypt' your screen so that you're the only one who can really see it, stereogram's the way to do it. It looks like a bunch of noise, but to the guy with his eyes crossed (and right in front of it), the info will appear.

    Can't say it's the biggest whoop-de-doo ever since lots of information melts away, but it would be kinda neat on an airplane. "Oh I'm looking at something super secret here.."

    --
    "Derp de derp."
    1. Re:Hmm.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sorry, but that's just a stupid idea and you're a stupid person for thinking of it. No offense meant.

    2. Re:Hmm.. by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      "I'm sorry, but that's just a stupid idea and you're a stupid person for thinking of it. No offense meant."

      It's hard to take offense at name calling by somebody who doesn't have the balls to post that with their registerred nickname. "I'm only comfortable calling you stupid if you can't find out how I am."

      --
      "Derp de derp."
  15. Discrimination! by Pred · · Score: 5, Funny

    I can't play it because I only have one eye!

    Actually tried to use this excuse (along with proving it by tapping my proshtetic eye really hard with a fingernail) to get into a 3d ride (the kind with the glasses) for half price. Never worked though.

    --
    "You all laugh because I'm different, I laugh because you're all the same."
    1. Re:Discrimination! by Sentry21 · · Score: 1

      I have a similar issue with such things - I have two eyes, but my brain doesn't 'see' in stereo. Instead, it uses what it sees through my left eye, and then fills in the blanks with the right, resulting in less than stereoscopic vision, and no depth perception.

      That is to say, no hardware-accelerated depth perception. I can still do software depth perception by considering points of reference (trees, shadows, etc.) and estimating accordingly.

      Still, I've never seen a stereoscopic imagine, or the sailboat, or 3D comics. Sigh. Maybe some day.

      --Dan

  16. OMG by pontifier · · Score: 1

    OW! my eyes!

    --
    -John Fenley
  17. I still by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I still don't believe magic eye pictures actually work. I've never seen one and believe that everyone who does is either lying or experiencing a mass haluicination.

  18. Um Slashdot? by inkless1 · · Score: 1

    April Fool's was yesterday.

    1. Re:Um Slashdot? by crhylove · · Score: 1

      It's not a joke. You may not have good lateral vision, which is required. See the above posts from lazy eyed people.

      Sorry! This is not for anyone who can't use both of their eyes fully!

      rhY

      --
      I hold very few opinions. I hold information based on observation and fact. If you wish to disagree, please use facts.
  19. What prevents smooth stereograms? by John+Harrison · · Score: 1

    Do stereograms have to have discrete depths? Is there something preventing the depth from varying by the pixel? The chunkiness of this is distracting. It looks like you are walking on a cattle guard.

    1. Re:What prevents smooth stereograms? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      According to wikipedia it is possible:

      "Subtle changes in spacing can create the illusion of smooth gradients in distance rather than the simpler-to-achieve jumps in depth."

      (from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autostereogram ) GFDL.

      Some of these 3d model->stereogram programs first convert the 3d to a 256-grayscale depth image. They then use that to generate the random dots. so it limits them to 256 'steps'.

      i dunno what this program does.

    2. Re:What prevents smooth stereograms? by John+Harrison · · Score: 1

      Yeah, if you explore the guy's site you can find a screenshot of a smooth one. I would guess that it is computationally easier to do the 8 bit depth, but the smooth ones look much nicer.

    3. Re:What prevents smooth stereograms? by ildon · · Score: 1

      Try the r_sirdlayers 1 variable to see how it splits up the scene before making it a stereogram.

    4. Re:What prevents smooth stereograms? by crhylove · · Score: 1

      This is planned in the future, this is a very early beta. Maybe even an alpha. ;D Lewey is a busy guy, and he's not getting paid for this.... yet.

      rhY

      --
      I hold very few opinions. I hold information based on observation and fact. If you wish to disagree, please use facts.
    5. Re:What prevents smooth stereograms? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, these images work by replicating pixels a certain horizontal distance from the original. The depth is percieved by the distance of the replication (larger distance signifies a further pixel, shorter distance signifies a closer pixel). However the distance is discretized as pixels on your monitor are discretely spaced. There is also more precision at closer depths.

      If you run it at a higher res that should reduce the discretization, but it would get harder to maintain focus (smaller pixel area requires more accurate matching between the eyes).

    6. Re:What prevents smooth stereograms? by John+Harrison · · Score: 1

      No, I am talking about a different effect. I understand that a pixel level effect is as good as you can do. The quake demo has only 256 levels of depth to it, so surfaces appear choppy. If you are looking at the floor a horizontal row 5 pixels tall all appear to be the same depth, then there is another row. He has another demo on his site which is not choppy and does pixel level depth.

  20. game at work by Grand · · Score: 1

    A guy in my cube is playing it in windowed mode. He has some other things open, and it kinda blends in. Someone walking by wouldnt know he was playing video games.

  21. oh my eyes! (OSQ) by Frederic54 · · Score: 1

    The goggle!!!!!! they do nothing!!!

    --
    "Science will win because it works." - Stephen Hawking
  22. I hate SIRDs by codexus · · Score: 1

    I never managed to see them (oh the hours of frustration while staring at static). But Red/Blue anaglyphs are really cool and would make a much more playable game.

    --
    True warriors use the Klingon Google
    1. Re:I hate SIRDs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      But Red/Blue anaglyphs are really cool and would make a much more playable game.
      You mean something like this?
  23. The emperor's new SIRD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    SIRDs are a hoax.

    1. Re:The emperor's new SIRD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm starting to believe they are a hoax. Imagine that thousands of people received a memo when these things first came about saying "Ok, these are all just a bunch of random dots. You really can't see anything. But we are all about to play the biggest practical joke in the history of humankind... tell everyone that you can see things in these pictures in 3d. Watch everyone else strain their eyes trying to see them. Laugh at them quietly. Most importantly, *do not tell anyone*."

      I'm on to you. Admit it, they're all just a bunch of random dots! ADMIT IT! *shakes fist*

  24. Why use 'random dots'? by mivok · · Score: 1

    I'm curious as to why they didn't simply use two images (differing slightly of course) side by side, you then go crosseyed (or let your eyes defocus, whichever method is set up), and you would be able to see the 3d image complete with textures etc.

    1. Re:Why use 'random dots'? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think it would be possible to use 2 views, so that the left view and the right view would have the real textures used in the game, but then you're playing area would be greatly reduced to fit both images left and right. And the other problem is that you'd have to cross your eyes alot more so that both images would overlap.
      This
      *** ***
      *x* *x*
      *** ***

      as opposed to something like used by Quird
      (Not to scale, imagine this is a full sized screen twice as wide as each of the smaller screens above, lameness filter won't let me make it the proper size.
      ***********
      * *
      *___x_x___*
      * *
      ***********

      With the "random dots" technique both views are on the screen simultaneously, with a smaller offset. That's why the images on the pages you linked to were either small, or very thin. If you look at a screenshot of Quird, you can kind of see a repeating pattern from left to right. That shows you the offset.

    2. Re:Why use 'random dots'? by Arngautr · · Score: 1

      This works great if the images are close enough but falls apart if elements in them are further away like the size of a monitor. It would be doable if you sized each half way down.
      I would give you an example but the slashdot "lameness filter was encountered: post aborted: Reason: Please use fewer 'junk' characters."

  25. SIRDS by Arngautr · · Score: 1

    I wrote some code to make SIRDS a while back and you can put these in motion with no more difficulty than puting normal images in motion, but the textured stereograms -the smoother magic-eye like stuff- don't do well in motion, this has to do with the way our brains track motion. Effectively adding meaningfull colors is also something I couldn't get to work.

    I really think someday the graphical component of a computer's output will appear true 3D, without the need for special goggles. I seem to recall seeing something about making computer screens use technology where each pixel had elements oriented towards each eye thus allowing for very effective, and non-headache inducing, 3D depth. Goggles like you've seen at arcades work well enough but they arent very popular. Holograms like Starwars would be cool but the engineering problems are huge in the biggest sense of the word. Polorized glasses might work well but you still need to wear something. Though unlike goggles these glasses merely sort out the images instead of displaying them. Disneyland has or had some movie that they used two cameras to film, one camera offset slightly from the other, then when the movie is played back one projector polarizes light one way and the other does the opposite, thus when you view the screen with your polarized glasses on, each eye picks up the image from each camera's point of view. This was highly effective as I recall. The trick would be to get a computer to processes information quickly enough and then polarize light for display, to address a person moving their head umm, I know a few solutions but I notice I'm already going too far off topic so I'll stop now.
    I haven't downloaded the code or the program yet but it looks good, I just hope you don't move your head too much when you play games like these, My parents wouldn't be able to play this as they would lose the depth too quickly if they turned. Addressing the health of SIRDS I've stared at a lot an the worst it ever does to me (that I notice) is give me a slight headache. Sig to come in new reply when I finish it

    1. Re:SIRDS by Arngautr · · Score: 1

      Well I was going to post an Ascii stereogram but it " violated the "postercomment" compression filter. Try less whitespace and/or less repetition. Comment aborted."

  26. For people having trouble seeing it... by ildon · · Score: 1

    My friend and I found that running Quake2 at 640x480 in a window, then moving our heads close to the screen made it much easier to see. He claims to have beaten the first level. I can't even get past the first monster. :(

    1. Re:For people having trouble seeing it... by Guspaz · · Score: 1

      I found the opposite, the further I get the easier it is to see.

      I beat the first 2 levels, with godmode on. I had to turn it off occasionally to hit buttons, those barely protrude and are very hard to see.

  27. Really neat by Guspaz · · Score: 1

    However it would be nice if some sort of method were used to provide rudimentry texturing or shading. I don't even know if it's possible, but I'd figure, if you know which dots are going where, then at least shading couldn't be that insane. Besides, it'd REALLY help navigate, going by depth information alone is really tough.

  28. What's wrong with me? by British · · Score: 1

    Am I the only person who has been exposed to numerous stereograms in print and on the web and doesn't see anything?

    I've tried, and tried and tried, but nothing. All I see is dots and noise.

    Is there just a group of people out there that can't see a stereogram if their life depended on it?

    If I see a black grid with white lines I see the grays in the intersections, but...

  29. Lazy Eye :( by kisielk · · Score: 1

    Unfortunately I can never see these fancy steregograms because I have a lazy left eye. I remember when I was around 10 or so I could see them but that was before I developed lazy eye. Now I find it is pretty much impossible. Has anyone with lazy eye have had success with seeing these images? If so, what's your technique?

    1. Re:Lazy Eye :( by still_sick · · Score: 2, Informative

      No dice, guy.

      I've had a lazy eye since long before these things first became popular in the early late 80s/early90s.

      All my friends kept telling me how cool they were, and I literally spent dozens of hours trying every stupid method. Putting it behind glass, buying special "helper glasses", etc...

      There's some things in this world us lazy (eyed) people were never meant to experience.

      --
      ...Also, I didn't know Buggalo could fly.
    2. Re:Lazy Eye :( by fltsimbuff · · Score: 1

      I've managed to capture a glimpse once when not really trying... have not been able to duplicate it though... Forced-dominance of the lazy eye is annoying, and messes up all sorts of stuff. :(

  30. PAIN.... by Foo2rama · · Score: 1

    I already have headaches... although I can think of some great applications for this... esp with some tweaks... get your brainstorm out now!

    --


    ---In a time of Chimpanzees I was a Monkey.
  31. In case you don't know how to view stereograms... by francium+de+neobie · · Score: 1

    Try this link http://www.vision3d.com/3views.html

    It is not easy to acquire the skill though. It takes quite some time of practising to get it. Me, for example, had to keep trying for a few weeks until I've managed to change my eyes' focus freely to see those stereograms. But once you've "got it", you'll be looking at those two-image stereograms or SIRDs just like every other 3D object in your surroundings.

    Just keep trying and be patient.

  32. Give it at least 5 minutes by xeos · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Even if you are good at static stereograms, you need to give this one a while before your brain & eyes will work well with this. After a while it's pretty playable, but the (neccessary) lack of texture and colored objects makes navigation very difficult. A wall and a door look exactly the same. Enimies are not so bad, since they are more geometircally complex than almost anything else, and they move, even when you don't. Thus the key seems to be whenever you hear an enimy wake up, stop moving and look for the part of the screen where the depth is changing.

    It's quite amazing. It really, really makes you appricate the fact that your visual system extracts much more than just shape from the world. On the other hand, quake worlds were never that geometrically complex, and that makes it very easy to get lost. Perhaps if you could only see shape in the real world it wouldn't be so bad, since there is so much more varation.

  33. Try moving your aim around a bit by ReKleSS · · Score: 1

    That happened to me too, initially. I thought I just wasn't focussing on it. Then, when I started moving the mouse around (with +mlook, of course....) I realized that it was just difficult to see anything in it. Also, try just seeing your gun in the bottom right corner.... then try to focus on the whole scene. -ReK

    --
    md5sum -c reality.md5
    reality: FAILED
    md5sum: WARNING: 1 of 1 computed checksum did NOT match