New to the forums? Click here to read the "How To" Guide.

Developer? Click here to go to the Developer Forums.

Oculus Explains Why It Doesn’t Think the Time is Right for ‘Rift 2’ or ‘Rift Pro’

1246

Comments

  • inovatorinovator Posts: 2,374 Valuable Player
    Zenbane said:
    KoBak07 said:
    I am not sure I buy into the idea that simply a less hassle free setup without the sensors will dramatically increase PCVR sales of a rift, which happens to be more expensive (just marginally though) than the one it replaces. I would challenge that the masses they are trying to bring in even knows about sensors and tracking.

    You just effectively countered your main argument. The masses may not know about sensors, and they don't want to know about them. They just want to put on a headset and have everything start working, like magic. The fact that the masses don't want to mess with or know about external sensors proves that a PCVR headset with inside-out tracking is more alluring, to the masses, than a VR Kit that requires external sensors.

    For those who have been on the forum for the past 3 years or longer, we've seen all the criticisms from "the masses" with every article plaguing the Internet proclaiming that VR was a fad that is dead and dying. You are saying that you don't "buy in to the idea" ... but the idea is literally a part of history that many witnessed first-hand.

    But lets say you are right, then what do you believe has stopped PCVR sales from go to the 10's of millions, or 100's of millions? You are playing devil's advocate to other peoples posts, but you aren't exactly offering any insight in to what you believe the problem is, nor any potential resolution.
    Omg  it's so hard to get through to people. It's almost like a relegion to keep thinking cv2 was the way to go without trying to see Facebook logic.  I also have the Playstation vr which is fun for many games bur the tracking sucks big time on others. Why did Playstation sell 4.5 million. True it's less money especially if u already own a Playstation 4. But a much bigger reason: it's so dam simple to get into. That's why even though I love my rift  the set up for me is a huge pain and during the week I use the psvr and weekends the rift. The masses don't want sensor setup. Visualize a hammer: BANG BANG BANG THE MASSES WANT SIMPLE!!!!!

  • KoBak07KoBak07 Posts: 42
    Brain Burst
    Zenbane said:
    KoBak07 said:
    You are correct that the general public does ability or interest into tinkering with technology is close to zero. What they want is a VR appliance, just like the fridge or their car. My disappointment is that supposedly FB Oculus IS the largest player in pushing VR, and all they seem to be doing is coming up with excuses why they are not wanting to push PCVR forward.
    All I see is people complaining as if they understand what it even means to "push PCVR forward."

    A business can't push anything forward without a proper ROI. Those unhappy with the lack of Rift 2 seem to think that Facebook is literally obligated to sacrificing ROI in favor of continuing to appease the few who demand more hardware. It is the epitome of "misplaced entitlement."

    HTC pushed for more hardware, and the result was over 27 months of financial loss and selling IP to Google. Yet not matter how many times this fact is pointed out, someone still thinks it's a good idea that Facebook follow the same path to financial ruin.

    Hardware is only one part of the the VR Ecosystem. Pushing PCVR forward involves developing innovative Software, which Oculus continues to do to this day, and creating a self-sustaining business model, which Oculus is doing with Rift-S and Quest.

    I'm curious, do work for a living and support yourself? Do you expect your employer to pay you for the work you do? More importantly, do you try to have money left over after you've paid all your necessary bills? Because you just said that it is "coming up with excuses" for someone to focus on yielding a positive return on investment. lol

    I don't believe for one second that Facebook and Oculus are failing to push PCVR forward. Quite the opposite, they continue to drive PCVR forward in all key areas. They are simply not giving in to the pressure of the few online voices that have no idea what building a self-sustaining business model entails. Especially considering that most of those voices don't even know what the phrase "push PCVR forward" even means.
    The challenge is that whenever there is change or a pivot in the life of a product or product family the meaning of "forward" will be different depending on what needs the product is trying to serve or fulfill. I would not say that it was the VR strategy that caused all of HTC's troubles, as they have been doing quite badly with huge losses prior to their VR launch. VR sales did not bring financial prosperity for them though. FB is not and HTC though, and I am quite certain they got into this business knowing that it will not take them more than years before they actually start making money off this business. If anybody, they could take more risks among the current players (maybe except Samsung). But it's completely their choice.

    I personally would not label customers asking for a product or service "entitled" because they are asking for more of something. Especially not when the prior history of the company was more on the leading front of an industry. Most product strategies would qualify early adopters as an important segment to keep engaged as it allows experimentation and releasing a product that is not ready for the more mainstream audience. On top of that, usually this group is prepared to spend more, to offset some of the higher costs.

    I completely get that FB wants to broaden the market for VR, and am happy give them credit that they are / have been investing resources into game development. However the Rift S does not give me too much confidence that PCVR is high on their list of priorities.

    And yes, I do work for a living. I am happy that I found my market fit for the skills I have, and it seems to be working out quite well for the time being. There were plenty of times though, that I invested quite a bit of work for which I was not compensated directly, like chipping in on other projects, helping other teams, even friends at other companies. I think those "investments" are paying off now, in many cases just by learning things by being involved and experimenting.
  • Digikid1Digikid1 Posts: 2,303 Valuable Player
    snowdog said:
    That Ronnie O'Sullivan video is genuine I think.

    I would laugh at it but I've come VERY close to leaning on surfaces and placing my Touch controllers on surfaces myself in VR so I can't judge lol :o:D:D:D

    Haven't gone arse over tit though...YET :D
    I have. Job Simulator....cashier job....crotched down to pick something up ingame....and proceeded to use the virtual counter to pull myself up. 

    Didn’t work so well. LOL
  • ZenbaneZenbane Posts: 15,417 Valuable Player
    edited April 2019
    What you need to understand is Valve are drawing a line in the sand here.

    That's not even remotely true. In fact, people said the same thing about HTC with the Vive Pro. But both the line and the sand washed away. Rinse and repeat for the Pimax Kickstarter. So many lines in the sand that end up as dust in the wind.

    Index attempts to tick all the boxes where first gen HMDs failed.

    Index hasn't done anything yet, it doesn't even start shipping until June. We're still in April. Index is just another hype train for the Oculus naysayers to hop aboard. We've all seen this bandwagoning before with Vive Pro and Pimax. The end result will likely turn out just as flaccid.


    While HMD sales languish in the 1% of Steam users, price counts for nothing.

    Price counts for much more than nothing, but one would need to understand Industry and Market for that. The only reason someone would come to an Oculus Forum to say that "price counts for nothings" is because they know that Oculus has used competitive pricing to harm their competitors. But merely stating that "price counts for nothing" means nothing. Just look at HTC and their Google Buyout, they know what price counts for!


    This is not a fight between Valve and Oculus. This is a fight between VR HMDs and Monitors.

    Pure fiction. There is no fight, except for the fictitious battle that exists only in the minds of those who thrive off of console war rhetoric. VR embraces Monitors just fine. We can cast to Monitors and literally launch monitors inside of VR. There is no battle here.


    Mass VR adoption may never come to pass and Valve won’t care either way as long as PCVR is dominated by SteamVR as it is today supporting all headsets taking the lions share of software sales.

    Oculus GO and Gear VR have outsold PCVR HMD's, and they use the Oculus Store. So no, Steam does not take the lions share of software sales when it comes to VR. That's a purely false and hyperbolic statement.


    Oculus basically threw in the towel with the Lenovo Rift S. Even Cosmos might sell more HMDs than Rift S given its resolution and upgradability to 5G 855 snap dragon processor.

    The phrase "threw in the towel" would only apply to the small niche group of PCVR enthusiasts, who are so small in number that they couldn't save pure HTC from suffering 27 months of consecutive financial loss. If PCVR sales were worth anything, then HTC wouldn't have sold their IP to Google just to survive.

    What Oculus did is focus on the winning strategy of entering the home of hundreds of millions of users, while HTC, Pimax, and Valve continue to focus on the "dozens."


    RIP Rift, Constellation and Oculuses position in the PCVR space. 

    Nah. RIP the barriers that prevented Oculus and HTC from reaching one hundred million in PCVR Sales. Oculus' position in the market is still as the Leader in VR. Valve Index and everything else you mentioned are all "future predictions" that mean nothing. Your post was 50% anti-Oculus hyperbole and 50% wishful thinking.

    Are you a fan of the Myst games? Check out my Mod at http://www.mystrock.com/
    Catch me on Twitter: twitter.com/zenbane
  • ZenbaneZenbane Posts: 15,417 Valuable Player
    edited April 2019
    KoBak07 said:
    The challenge is that whenever there is change or a pivot in the life of a product or product family the meaning of "forward" will be different depending on what needs the product is trying to serve or fulfill.

    You are intentionally ignoring the true history what people were saying when VR first hit mainstream markets in 2016. I already pointed this out and you have no retort. You just continue to ignore it which serves no purpose whatsoever. Pushing VR Forward means something very specific, and we've been talking about it since 2016. You want it to mean something else because it serves your bias against Rift-S.

    I would not say that it was the VR strategy that caused all of HTC's troubles, as they have been doing quite badly with huge losses prior to their VR launch.

    You're speculating and guessing. It was their VR strategy and we can see that 100% in how HTC started to copy the Oculus business model after they got their money from Google. Once that happened, HTC launched their own Store Front, just like Oculus. And they launched their own competitor to Oculus GO. For those paying attention, it is painfully obvious that HTC's failing strategy was the reason for their financial ruin.


    I personally would not label customers asking for a product or service "entitled" because they are asking for more of something.
    When a consumer asks a company to provide the consumer what the consumer wants at the cost of the company sacrificing any sense of meaningful ROI, then yes, that is pure entitlement. In your arguments, you literally call Facebook's desire to work on a "self-sustaining business model" as an "excuse." If you have a job and support yourself, then you should understand that trying to have money to live and having some left over to "move forward" is a noteworthy goal, not an excuse. But for you to think that this is how a company should operation is most certainly entitlement. And a double-standard.

    Especially not when the prior history of the company was more on the leading front of an industry.

    By sacrificing ROI and giving so much away for free (drastic Rift price cuts, free software, etc.) You expect them to continue sacrificing for your needs, which is absurd.


    Most product strategies would qualify early adopters as an important segment to keep engaged as it allows experimentation and releasing a product that is not ready for the more mainstream audience. On top of that, usually this group is prepared to spend more, to offset some of the higher costs.

    Early Adopters can be considered important without catering to their needs in a self-sacrificing way.


    I completely get that FB wants to broaden the market for VR

    It's about more than just broadening the VR market. It's about creating a self-sustaining business model which can only be achieved by having their products purchased by 10's of millions and 100's of millions. I explained this to you already but again, you prefer to ignore it and instead try to rephrase things to suit your narrative.


    However the Rift S does not give me too much confidence that PCVR is high on their list of priorities.

    That's only because you have intentionally limited your understanding of what PCVR entails.


    And yes, I do work for a living. I am happy that I found my market fit for the skills I have, and it seems to be working out quite well for the time being. There were plenty of times though, that I invested quite a bit of work for which I was not compensated directly, like chipping in on other projects, helping other teams, even friends at other companies. I think those "investments" are paying off now, in many cases just by learning things by being involved and experimenting.

    Just because you volunteer some of your time doesn't mean you are working at a loss. Do you work at a loss? Do you expect to be compensated in a way that lets you sustain yourself?

    Oculus continues to make the types of "investments" that you describe. It comes in the form of free software and competitive pricing. I have a nice amount of Software that I've received for free from Oculus. That's the same thing as Facebook "investing quite a bit of work for which they were not compensated directly." They continue to do these types of investments, but that's different from what you expect: which is for Facebook to continue directing their main strategy to the portion of the market that will keep them at a struggling ROI.

    Are you a fan of the Myst games? Check out my Mod at http://www.mystrock.com/
    Catch me on Twitter: twitter.com/zenbane
  • inovatorinovator Posts: 2,374 Valuable Player
    Price does count as something but it has to be combined with exceptional and a steady stream of that content.
  • ZenbaneZenbane Posts: 15,417 Valuable Player
    inovator said:
    Price does count as something but it has to be combined with exceptional and a steady stream of that content.

    Agreed. And the content we've received from Oculus has been exceptional (RoboRecall, The Unspoken, Lone Echo, etc). Not to mention the content we have coming in the future: Stormland, the Darth Vader trilogy.
    :)
    Are you a fan of the Myst games? Check out my Mod at http://www.mystrock.com/
    Catch me on Twitter: twitter.com/zenbane
  • inovatorinovator Posts: 2,374 Valuable Player
    Zenbane said:
    inovator said:
    Price does count as something but it has to be combined with exceptional and a steady stream of that content.

    Agreed. And the content we've received from Oculus has been exceptional (RoboRecall, The Unspoken, Lone Echo, etc). Not to mention the content we have coming in the future: Stormland, the Darth Vader trilogy.
    :)
    Yup I'm hoping that enough people will join after the launch that eventually oculus along with 3rd party developers will feel there is a big enough base to at least triple quality content so that the the saying what comes 1st the chicken or the egg no longer applies, to decide if it's worth creating triple a games. Then vr will head to the masses.
  • ZenbaneZenbane Posts: 15,417 Valuable Player
    I jumped in Dead & Buried a few days ago to see how the game is doing. It has been well over a year since I last played (and it showed, I am rusty as hell). I didn't have to wait longer than 30 seconds or so for a multiplayer match. Glad to see yet another Oculus title still going strong.
    Are you a fan of the Myst games? Check out my Mod at http://www.mystrock.com/
    Catch me on Twitter: twitter.com/zenbane
  • inovatorinovator Posts: 2,374 Valuable Player
    Dead and buried should be awesome on the quest.
  • KoBak07KoBak07 Posts: 42
    Brain Burst
    Zenbane said:
    KoBak07 said:
    The challenge is that whenever there is change or a pivot in the life of a product or product family the meaning of "forward" will be different depending on what needs the product is trying to serve or fulfill.

    You are intentionally ignoring the true history what people were saying when VR first hit mainstream markets in 2016. I already pointed this out and you have no retort. You just continue to ignore it which serves no purpose whatsoever. Pushing VR Forward means something very specific, and we've been talking about it since 2016. You want it to mean something else because it serves your bias against Rift-S.

    I would not say that it was the VR strategy that caused all of HTC's troubles, as they have been doing quite badly with huge losses prior to their VR launch.

    You're speculating and guessing. It was their VR strategy and we can see that 100% in how HTC started to copy the Oculus business model after they got their money from Google. Once that happened, HTC launched their own Store Front, just like Oculus. And they launched their own competitor to Oculus GO. For those paying attention, it is painfully obvious that HTC's failing strategy was the reason for their financial ruin.


    I personally would not label customers asking for a product or service "entitled" because they are asking for more of something.
    When a consumer asks a company to provide the consumer what the consumer wants at the cost of the company sacrificing any sense of meaningful ROI, then yes, that is pure entitlement. In your arguments, you literally call Facebook's desire to work on a "self-sustaining business model" as an "excuse." If you have a job and support yourself, then you should understand that trying to have money to live and having some left over to "move forward" is a noteworthy goal, not an excuse. But for you to think that this is how a company should operation is most certainly entitlement. And a double-standard.

    Especially not when the prior history of the company was more on the leading front of an industry.

    By sacrificing ROI and giving so much away for free (drastic Rift price cuts, free software, etc.) You expect them to continue sacrificing for your needs, which is absurd.


    Most product strategies would qualify early adopters as an important segment to keep engaged as it allows experimentation and releasing a product that is not ready for the more mainstream audience. On top of that, usually this group is prepared to spend more, to offset some of the higher costs.

    Early Adopters can be considered important without catering to their needs in a self-sacrificing way.


    I completely get that FB wants to broaden the market for VR

    It's about more than just broadening the VR market. It's about creating a self-sustaining business model which can only be achieved by having their products purchased by 10's of millions and 100's of millions. I explained this to you already but again, you prefer to ignore it and instead try to rephrase things to suit your narrative.


    However the Rift S does not give me too much confidence that PCVR is high on their list of priorities.

    That's only because you have intentionally limited your understanding of what PCVR entails.


    And yes, I do work for a living. I am happy that I found my market fit for the skills I have, and it seems to be working out quite well for the time being. There were plenty of times though, that I invested quite a bit of work for which I was not compensated directly, like chipping in on other projects, helping other teams, even friends at other companies. I think those "investments" are paying off now, in many cases just by learning things by being involved and experimenting.

    Just because you volunteer some of your time doesn't mean you are working at a loss. Do you work at a loss? Do you expect to be compensated in a way that lets you sustain yourself?

    Oculus continues to make the types of "investments" that you describe. It comes in the form of free software and competitive pricing. I have a nice amount of Software that I've received for free from Oculus. That's the same thing as Facebook "investing quite a bit of work for which they were not compensated directly." They continue to do these types of investments, but that's different from what you expect: which is for Facebook to continue directing their main strategy to the portion of the market that will keep them at a struggling ROI.

    Sorry, but I find it funny that you are calling people "entitled" because they ask a company to make a product. Normally that is how the market works, that sooner or later someone figures out how to fill that void.

    Companies do work at a loss when they are investing into new products, especially those which require hardware development. There is nothing controversial there. Heck, Tesla is still losing money after having launched four car lines, but they have yet to outsource the design and development of their model s and x to Kia.

    Just as I was not driving myself into financial ruins due to spending my time on things for which I made no money on, I had the "sustained myself on" covered from my job, I would argue FB is not looking at going out of business any time soon due to their Oculus subsidiary.
  • ZenbaneZenbane Posts: 15,417 Valuable Player
    edited April 2019
    KoBak07 said:
    Sorry, but I find it funny that you are calling people "entitled" because they ask a company to make a product.
    I find it funny that you have to rephrase what I'm saying in order for you to find something funny.
    This is what I actually said:
    When a consumer asks a company to provide the consumer what the consumer wants at the cost of the company sacrificing any sense of meaningful ROI, then yes, that is pure entitlement.

    Big difference.

    Normally that is how the market works, that sooner or later someone figures out how to fill that void.

    After 3 years of PCVR, the market has told the world that it needs something other than high-end hardware if someone wants to acquire 10's of millions of consumers. And now Oculus is filling that Void with Quest and Rift-S. So you are correct in your statement, but you are applying it completely wrong.


    Companies do work at a loss when they are investing into new products, especially those which require hardware development.

    After 3 years, Facebook has decided that working at a loss is enough. A year ago, HTC decided the same thing when they sold IP to Google. But what you seem to think is that you are entitled to have a company continue working at a loss at your leisure.


    Tesla is still losing money after having launched four car lines, but they have yet to outsource the design and development of their model s and x to Kia.
    You obviously don't know how Tesla is being funded; it's based purely on Loans:
    Last year, reports emerged from local Chinese media hinting that Tesla was receiving assistance in receiving low-interest loans from local Shanghai banks to fund part of Gigafactory 3’s construction.

    So when you're not expecting a company to continue working at a loss at your leisure, you expect them to get in debt for your leisure? Funny.


    Just as I was not driving myself into financial ruins due to spending my time on things for which I made no money on, I had the "sustained myself on" covered from my job,

    But you still haven't done what you are asking Facebook and Oculus to do: Work at a loss. Work for your employer without getting any ROI whatsoever. Then you can talk.

    Are you a fan of the Myst games? Check out my Mod at http://www.mystrock.com/
    Catch me on Twitter: twitter.com/zenbane
  • KoBak07KoBak07 Posts: 42
    Brain Burst
    Zenbane said:
    Normally that is how the market works, that sooner or later someone figures out how to fill that void.

    After 3 years of PCVR, the market has told the world that it needs something other than high-end hardware if someone wants to acquire 10's of millions of consumers. And now Oculus is filling that Void with Quest and Rift-S. So you are correct in your statement, but you are applying it completely wrong.

    Companies do work at a loss when they are investing into new products, especially those which require hardware development.

    After 3 years, Facebook has decided that working at a loss is enough. A year ago, HTC decided the same thing when they sold IP to Google. But what you seem to think is that you are entitled to have a company continue working at a loss at your leisure. 

    I totally see the Quest filling a void that is not serviced. It provides mobility, with almost zero barriers to entry with lots of innovation. The performance is a big question mark as the raw power gap between even a 1060 with a proper CPU to the snapdragon is pretty wide.

    The Rift-S however is full of compromises, which I feel questions their commitment to that product segment. At least we are still blessed with a free market economy, and it seems that others are trying a different route for this iteration cycle. In a week or so we most likely find out the Index details. Then ppl can make decisions on where to spend their money. I was just hoping FB/Oculus will have a compelling option, as I tend to stuck on brands I liked and gave me a good past experience.
  • RedRizlaRedRizla Posts: 7,115 Valuable Player
    edited April 2019
    @KoBak07 - The Rift -S will be a lot more mobile too, because people with a laptop will just be able to hook it up in any room or take it with them to another location. Can you list all the compromises you think Oculus have made? I ask because some posters have already tried to explain it all to you in great detail what Oculus is trying to achieve.

    There's only one thing I don't like about Rift -S and that's the foam they use for the face. I'll get a VR Cover for that though, so it's no big deal.
  • KoBak07KoBak07 Posts: 42
    Brain Burst
    RedRizla said:
    @KoBak07 - The Rift -S will be a lot more mobile too, because people with a laptop will just be able to hook it up in any room or take it with them to another location. Can you list all the compromises you think Oculus have made? I ask because some posters have already tried to explain it all to you in great detail what Oculus is trying to achieve.

    There's only one thing I don't like about Rift -S and that's the foam they use for the face. I'll get a VR Cover for that though, so it's no big deal.
    @RedRizla - I agree with you, that it will be more mobile, one for not needing the sensors, second for needing less USB ports. These are the main positives, offset by the compromises:
    - lower res panels than all other recently launched or upcoming headset, Quest, Odyssey+, Vive Pro, Reverb, Index (most likely), Pimax, even the Lenovo Explorer
    - downgraded audio
    - no hardware IPD adjustment
    - loss of tracking in some scenarios vs existing roomscale setups
    - loss of deeper blacks while playing space sims or flying / driving at night in sims
    - no playing sims in the dark anymore (light bleed)

    The last thing is the hard plastic halo headband vs straps. When I tried on the Playstation VR, it felt much more uncomfortable for me than strap setup, but this is more of a personal preference rather than a compromise.

    Since I have 3 sensors setup already, and I can't recall ever thinking about putting my rift along with the controllers in a cabin bags then hook them up at a hotel room for my laptop is a feature going unused. I get it though that there are people who do not want to or have a desktop next to a laptop, as you can get some pretty decent laptops that get you great overall performance.
  • MorgrumMorgrum Posts: 1,717 Valuable Player

    RedRizla said:
    @KoBak07 - The Rift -S will be a lot more mobile too, because people with a laptop will just be able to hook it up in any room or take it with them to another location. Can you list all the compromises you think Oculus have made? I ask because some posters have already tried to explain it all to you in great detail what Oculus is trying to achieve.

    There's only one thing I don't like about Rift -S and that's the foam they use for the face. I'll get a VR Cover for that though, so it's no big deal.
    I have a real nice hard case that fits in my go bag to bring my rift, touch controllers, battery charging station plus rechargeable batteries, and 3 sensors wherever I go when deployed.

    I run a MSI titan so my laptop runs the Rift with no issues.

    So far my rifts been in two different countries and soonish a couple more with a satellite rotation somewhere not in the U.S.

    * shrugs * It is very doable I know I do it very easily and the space taken up isn't much bigger then what would be required for the S.

    WAAAGH!
  • RedRizlaRedRizla Posts: 7,115 Valuable Player
    @KoBak07

    1) the Lcd panel will look good because it reduces the screen door more then the Oled panels do, and uses 3 pixels instead of 2 pixels. As far as blacks go there is a draw back to having blacks in some games. Sometimes really dark blacks don't allow you to see background things in a game that you are meant to see. I'm not talking about space games here though.

    2) Don't know anything about Valve index yet, but for Vive Pro, HP Reverb you will need a Geforce 2080Ti to get the best out of those headsets you mention.

    3) Oculus may include headphones for Rift -S, but nobody knows for sure yet. Oculus have spoken about this though.

    4) The hands on reviews by people who are out of the Ipd range have said this wasn't a problem for them. This might have something to do with the larger sweet spot on the lenses. 

    5) The hands of review have all said the tracking on the Rift -S is good. On my CV1, I lose tracking when I go into the corners on my room, so you can't say CV1 tracking is flawless.
  • WildtWildt Posts: 2,280 Valuable Player
    RedRizla said:

    5) The hands of review have all said the tracking on the Rift -S is good. On my CV1, I lose tracking when I go into the corners on my room, so you can't say CV1 tracking is flawless.
    It CAN be pretty darn close to. I have 4 sensors at ceiling height angled downwards and I can't remember when I last experienced an occlusion issue.
    PCVR: CV1 || 4 sensors || TPcast wireless adapter || MamutVR Gun stock V3
    PSVR: PS4 Pro || Move Controllers || Aim controller
    WMR: HP Reverb
  • RedRizlaRedRizla Posts: 7,115 Valuable Player
    edited April 2019
    Morgrum said:

    RedRizla said:
    @KoBak07 - The Rift -S will be a lot more mobile too, because people with a laptop will just be able to hook it up in any room or take it with them to another location. Can you list all the compromises you think Oculus have made? I ask because some posters have already tried to explain it all to you in great detail what Oculus is trying to achieve.

    There's only one thing I don't like about Rift -S and that's the foam they use for the face. I'll get a VR Cover for that though, so it's no big deal.
    I have a real nice hard case that fits in my go bag to bring my rift, touch controllers, battery charging station plus rechargeable batteries, and 3 sensors wherever I go when deployed.

    I run a MSI titan so my laptop runs the Rift with no issues.

    So far my rifts been in two different countries and soonish a couple more with a satellite rotation somewhere not in the U.S.

    * shrugs * It is very doable I know I do it very easily and the space taken up isn't much bigger then what would be required for the S.


    Must be great setting all that up each time you choose to take it somewhere else. Like just taking it over to a friends for a night of fun etc. I know the Rift -S will take no time at all setting it up. I'd hate to think I'd have to start messing around with 3 sensors once I got my CV1 to a friends house.
  • RedRizlaRedRizla Posts: 7,115 Valuable Player
    edited April 2019
    Wildt said:
    RedRizla said:

    5) The hands of review have all said the tracking on the Rift -S is good. On my CV1, I lose tracking when I go into the corners on my room, so you can't say CV1 tracking is flawless.
    It CAN be pretty darn close to. I have 4 sensors at ceiling height angled downwards and I can't remember when I last experienced an occlusion issue.

    I have 3 sensors at ceiling height and cannot go into the corners of my room because I am below the sensors. That's probably a bit like the Rift -S losing tracking right behind your back. But on Rift -S I think there's something in the software that helps combat that loss of tracking behind you back. 
  • bigmike20vtbigmike20vt Posts: 4,190 Valuable Player
    edited April 2019
    I'll be glad when its the 1st of May, conversations are getting a little pedantic. I found myself getting involved in a billiards argument lol.   
    lol.... out of curiosity is billiards in the context here what we in England would cool Pool? (because to me billiards is a very obscure game which, as far as i know few people play these days.
    I bought it up however as an example that i would like to see the RiftS in action, just because I think it is a good case where if RiftS can pull it off it would be a very big "win" for RiftS inside out tracking but that i am worried it may fail at it, like windows MR does.... not because i was trying to derail.
    actually i googled... i am guessing billiards it is being used here as the generic term for the entire sport where as I was thinking of it as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_billiards

    Fiat Coupe, gone. 350Z gone. Dirty nappies, no sleep & practical transport incoming. Thank goodness for VR :)
  • WildtWildt Posts: 2,280 Valuable Player
    edited April 2019
    RedRizla said:
    Wildt said:
    RedRizla said:

    5) The hands of review have all said the tracking on the Rift -S is good. On my CV1, I lose tracking when I go into the corners on my room, so you can't say CV1 tracking is flawless.
    It CAN be pretty darn close to. I have 4 sensors at ceiling height angled downwards and I can't remember when I last experienced an occlusion issue.

    I have 3 sensors at ceiling height and cannot go into the corners of my room because I am below the sensors. That's probably a bit like the Rift -S losing tracking right behind your back. But on Rift -S I think there's something in the software that helps combat that loss of tracking behind you back. 
    That's more of a play space configuration issue imo. You cannot reconfigure anything on an inside out tracking HMD to change its blind spots.
    PCVR: CV1 || 4 sensors || TPcast wireless adapter || MamutVR Gun stock V3
    PSVR: PS4 Pro || Move Controllers || Aim controller
    WMR: HP Reverb
  • KoBak07KoBak07 Posts: 42
    Brain Burst
    RedRizla said:
    @KoBak07

    1) the Lcd panel will look good because it reduces the screen door more then the Oled panels do, and uses 3 pixels instead of 2 pixels. As far as blacks go there is a draw back to having blacks in some games. Sometimes really dark blacks don't allow you to see background things in a game that you are meant to see. I'm not talking about space games here though.

    2) Don't know anything about Valve index yet, but for Vive Pro, HP Reverb you will need a Geforce 2080Ti to get the best out of those headsets you mention.

    3) Oculus may include headphones for Rift -S, but nobody knows for sure yet. Oculus have spoken about this though.

    4) The hands on reviews by people who are out of the Ipd range have said this wasn't a problem for them. This might have something to do with the larger sweet spot on the lenses. 

    5) The hands of review have all said the tracking on the Rift -S is good. On my CV1, I lose tracking when I go into the corners on my room, so you can't say CV1 tracking is flawless.
    Will need to see what the Index brings and at what price point. If it's a 1000+ headset than making comparisons is a pointless.

    I am just having hard time seeing how this product will drive adoption so much as much the proponents expect to be, when WMR headsets with a much lower prices than the S had failed. For sure it will have better tracking, but a worse panel. If mobility and the censors was then main problem holding back PCVR adoption, then why not simply add a tether option to the Quest instead of making compromises on the Rift.
  • LuciferousLuciferous Posts: 2,424 Valuable Player
    JD-UK said:
    This thread is turning into what I was posting about earlier. Some people just don't get it at all. "All they have to do....." yes, I'm sure you are a much better VR headset designer and sales advisor than those at Oculus!

    Not.

    They have told you why they aren't doing that - but no, they should do exactly what you want - not what they feel is best (and will give them a return on their substantial investment) and what is best the market that they want to sell to. You guys know all about what everyone else wants and why they don't want this.

    Fuck me, I don't think I've ever seen so much bollox.
    It is a discussion forum about VR. People are just posting about what they like about the current headsets, and what they hope for in future headsets and also potential dissapointments of the way VR is progressing.  I think the riftS is going to be a fantastic device but i am concerned it physically wont work for me. Others are convinced it will... that is what discussion is about.
    There is a lot of theory crafting and guesswork going on because few of us have access to the headsets yet.
    the alternative is just to not post at all, but then that is not really the point of a discussion forum is it?

    What really pisses me off is when people instead of discussing the post, attack the posters instead.

    I must admit I thought this on your first Post JD-UK. I think you may have missed the whole point of a forum, to discuss things. 






  • JD-UKJD-UK Posts: 2,377 Valuable Player
    Wildt said:
    RedRizla said:
    Wildt said:
    RedRizla said:

    5) The hands of review have all said the tracking on the Rift -S is good. On my CV1, I lose tracking when I go into the corners on my room, so you can't say CV1 tracking is flawless.
    It CAN be pretty darn close to. I have 4 sensors at ceiling height angled downwards and I can't remember when I last experienced an occlusion issue.

    I have 3 sensors at ceiling height and cannot go into the corners of my room because I am below the sensors. That's probably a bit like the Rift -S losing tracking right behind your back. But on Rift -S I think there's something in the software that helps combat that loss of tracking behind you back. 
    That's more of a play space configuration issue imo. You cannot reconfigure anything on an inside out tracking HMD to change its blind spots.
    Yeah, I agree - I can't remember the last time I suffered any occlusion and I am using just two sensors at 180° to each other in the ceiling corners.




  • JD-UKJD-UK Posts: 2,377 Valuable Player
    edited April 2019
    JD-UK said:
    This thread is turning into what I was posting about earlier. Some people just don't get it at all. "All they have to do....." yes, I'm sure you are a much better VR headset designer and sales advisor than those at Oculus!

    Not.

    They have told you why they aren't doing that - but no, they should do exactly what you want - not what they feel is best (and will give them a return on their substantial investment) and what is best the market that they want to sell to. You guys know all about what everyone else wants and why they don't want this.

    Fuck me, I don't think I've ever seen so much bollox.
    It is a discussion forum about VR. People are just posting about what they like about the current headsets, and what they hope for in future headsets and also potential dissapointments of the way VR is progressing.  I think the riftS is going to be a fantastic device but i am concerned it physically wont work for me. Others are convinced it will... that is what discussion is about.
    There is a lot of theory crafting and guesswork going on because few of us have access to the headsets yet.
    the alternative is just to not post at all, but then that is not really the point of a discussion forum is it?

    What really pisses me off is when people instead of discussing the post, attack the posters instead.

    I must admit I thought this on your first Post JD-UK. I think you may have missed the whole point of a forum, to discuss things. 






    Well I did come here this morning to make sure no-one was feeling offended or upset or whatever about my post. At the end of the day it's just a bit of banter ;)

    A lot of my "discussion" posts are made mostly tongue-in-cheek anyway - I don't take things very seriously these days - and nor should you as far as my posts are concerned  :)




  • ZenbaneZenbane Posts: 15,417 Valuable Player
    KoBak07 said:
    I totally see the Quest filling a void that is not serviced.
    You're cherry-picking. My comment was about the PCVR market, not the stand-alone market. I explained to you several times that there is no single PCVR Company that has been able to sale in 10's of millions and 100's of millions. I've typed this several times to you in two different threads, and for some reason you just don't seem to get it.

    Quest is not filling the PCVR void, Rift-S is filling that void.

    The Rift-S however is full of compromises

    Rift-S is full of trade-offs, and is geared towards filling the mass market void that all PCVR competitors face.


    KoBak07 said:
    At least we are still blessed with a free market economy, and it seems that others are trying a different route for this iteration cycle.
    Yes, HTC and their near bankruptcy situation knows very well what the free market economy is all about. While competitors continue to fight for the dozens who treat 1.x upgrades as if they are 2.x upgrades, Facebook and Oculus have taken a momentary timeout from the hardware race to get those 10's of millions and 100's of millions. Once Facebook and Oculus obtain their self-sustaining VR business model, they will be back in the hardware race... and everyone will find something new to complain about!
    :p
    Are you a fan of the Myst games? Check out my Mod at http://www.mystrock.com/
    Catch me on Twitter: twitter.com/zenbane
  • ZenbaneZenbane Posts: 15,417 Valuable Player
    JD-UK said:
    JD-UK said:
    This thread is turning into what I was posting about earlier. Some people just don't get it at all. "All they have to do....." yes, I'm sure you are a much better VR headset designer and sales advisor than those at Oculus!

    Not.

    They have told you why they aren't doing that - but no, they should do exactly what you want - not what they feel is best (and will give them a return on their substantial investment) and what is best the market that they want to sell to. You guys know all about what everyone else wants and why they don't want this.

    Fuck me, I don't think I've ever seen so much bollox.
    It is a discussion forum about VR. People are just posting about what they like about the current headsets, and what they hope for in future headsets and also potential dissapointments of the way VR is progressing.  I think the riftS is going to be a fantastic device but i am concerned it physically wont work for me. Others are convinced it will... that is what discussion is about.
    There is a lot of theory crafting and guesswork going on because few of us have access to the headsets yet.
    the alternative is just to not post at all, but then that is not really the point of a discussion forum is it?

    What really pisses me off is when people instead of discussing the post, attack the posters instead.

    I must admit I thought this on your first Post JD-UK. I think you may have missed the whole point of a forum, to discuss things. 






    Well I did come here this morning to make sure no-one was feeling offended or upset or whatever about my post. At the end of the day it's just a bit of banter

    A lot of my "discussion" posts are made mostly tongue-in-cheek anyway - I don't take things very seriously these days - and nor should you as far as my posts are concerned 

    You have a decent history of going in to threads and angrily attacking people because you don't like their opinion. It's as if you are just upset because people are thinking for themselves. The act of "thinking" has been making you angry for quite some time. People aren't taking your posts "seriously," they are just commenting on the noise factor it creates. I agree with what others have said about you in this thread: you don't seem to understand what a forum is used for.
    Are you a fan of the Myst games? Check out my Mod at http://www.mystrock.com/
    Catch me on Twitter: twitter.com/zenbane
  • ZenbaneZenbane Posts: 15,417 Valuable Player
    KoBak07 said:
    I am just having hard time seeing how this product will drive adoption so much as much the proponents expect to be, when WMR headsets with a much lower prices than the S had failed.

    WMR has a garbage selection of VR Titles. Software is king in VR. That's how Oculus was able to compete against the Vive even when the Rift had a single sensor and an X-Box controller. And that was 3 years ago. The software advantage that Oculus maintains has been obvious since April 2016. This advantage will continue with both Quest and Rift-S. So it shouldn't be hard to see how Rift-S will drive adoption compared to WMR headsets - which have terrible native platform title selections.

    Would you buy a Nintendo if all it let you do was play XBox games through a Port? lol
    Are you a fan of the Myst games? Check out my Mod at http://www.mystrock.com/
    Catch me on Twitter: twitter.com/zenbane
Sign In or Register to comment.