But the downside of that is that your viewport render is going to need to have a heck of a lot of pixels (tilt will get very blurry if you don't supersample the viewport) which means a high render time, which is another potential source of lag.

The secret to success may actually be to step back several generations in terms of graphical quality so that the 3D render time is negligible. Get a lagless Wolfenstein or Doom going, then build forward from there.

Given the ratio of applicants to vacancies, space programmes can afford to be selective. I seriously doubt anyone with serious motion sickness would ever be accepted for astronaut training.

We've had hundreds of years of sailing the seas, and the observation is that people's capacity to get over seasickness is minimal. Sailors adjust by compensation strategies (breathing techniques, moving about more/less etc), not by becoming more accustomed.

No, seriously, it's about the tech. First up, you can't get 200fps on a 60Hz display -- it maxes out at 60fps, aka 60Hz.

Secondly, when you're looking at a screen, you're looking at a screen. When your head moves, the screen doesn't. The image might not react optimally to your fingers, but it certainly reacts to your head.

But once the screen is strapped to your head, you are pretty much immersed. You have no physical real-world point of reference, and your brain does get confused. I once piloted a ship at night, and sadly the AC generator on board has a tendency to run slow (about 45Hz, I think). There was visible flicker in your peripheral vision below decks. But the worst bit was the compass-card on the helm. You couldn't see the flicker, but persistence of vision coupled with the motion of the boat left it floating around in front of my vision like a circular ghost with numbers around its edge. I got so sick that I couldn't leave the deck for the next 8 hours, and had to be excused from my next watch.

I'm against artificial rules, but at the same time, I recognise that all writing is artificial. We need to have sensible conventions, and I wish we spent more time teaching punctuation conventions at school, because nonsensical commas split sentences badly. The basic rule is simple: never use a comma where you wouldn't naturally pause in speech -- this shouldn't really be contentious. The contentious cases are where there is a pause but the word after implies a pause/The contentious cases are where there is a pause, but the word after implies a pause.

How can it be "expanded" if it has always been that way? Besides, the verb "nauseate" is so rare as to be negligible, and without the verb form to support it, the past-participle-derived adjectival form is non-intuitive.

We should be selective about what we care about, or we risk wiping out good changes, such as when teachers reversed the death of person conjugations -- see restoration comedies for invariant "was" in the past tense, for example.

Looking at their project page, it really seemed like they had a prototype. They had lots of pictures taken with their "really fast" prototype. Which was presumably actually an updated V1 unit, and not actually a prototype of the new one at all. This puts them in a nasty position legally. They claimed to have a functional prototype. They appeared to be displaying an actual cased prototype. They gave every indication of being further on than they really were.

I'm pretty certain that their budget is well-costed, because they know up-front the cost of flights, accommodation, venue hire etc etc etc. No design, no R&D, no prototyping, no retooling. The costs are easily identified and easily audited. You, perhaps, are the one who is missing the point.

Given the poor rate of success of Kickstarter projects, you'd be surprised how much of a loss you'd make at a slightly lower price...