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

Developer? Click here to go to the Developer Forums.

Samsung Cuts Final Ties with GearVR

kevinw729kevinw729 Posts: 5,163 Valuable Player

Now that Gear VR is no longer available, Samsung XR service is being killed

Samsung discontinued the Gear VR headset last year. Now, the company has announced that it is killing Samsung XR, a service that offered VR content such as 360-degree images and videos. The company will also remove the Samsung VR Video app from Microsoft’s and Oculus‘ stores.


https://www.sammobile.com/news/gear-vr-no-longer-available-samsung-xr-service-killed/

urdgfqqehbbb.png
** Second New Book **
"The Out-of-Home Immersive Entertainment Frontier: Expanding Interactive Boundaries in Leisure Facilities"
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Out-Home-Immersive-Entertainment-Frontier/dp/1472426959
«1

Comments

  • RuneSR2RuneSR2 Posts: 5,332 Valuable Player
    Kinda sad, with evolving phone gpus I was hoping that the masses could get easy and constantly better VR experiences through phone VR... Also the number of ratings indicated quite strong sales for some GearVR games and apps, I never got the impression that the GearVR users base was small, maybe even much bigger than Rift... So GearVR is a lost great opportunity? 
    Intel i7 7700K (4.5 GHz); MSI GeForce GTX 1080 8GB Gaming X (oc 2100 MHz gpu boost, 11 GHz mem speed); 16GB Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 MHz; MSI Z270I Gaming Pro Carbon AC (VR-Ready) mainboard; Samsung 960 Evo M.2 SSD + Toshiba P300 HD; Windows 10 OS; Valve Index and Oculus Rift CV1 - the latter nearly always using super sampling 2.0. 

    "Ask not what VR can do for you – ask what you can do for VR"
  • kevinw729kevinw729 Posts: 5,163 Valuable Player
    RuneSR2 said:
    Kinda sad, with evolving phone gpus I was hoping that the masses could get easy and constantly better VR experiences through phone VR... Also the number of ratings indicated quite strong sales for some GearVR games and apps, I never got the impression that the GearVR users base was small, maybe even much bigger than Rift... So GearVR is a lost great opportunity? 

    I have to agree this seems a major missed opportunity - I also feel for all those that had supported the platform and put so much effort and work into creating content for the Samsung GearVR, partnered with Oculus - I am not sure the amount of effort needed to port this onto the Oculus Go - but it has been suggested on other forums that its best to start from scratch rather than carry anything over. Seems this news may be a bit old, as the dropping of GearVR by Samsung was last year, but there seems to have been something going on in the background - hopefully we will find out more soon?

    Oh, and the size of the community was VERY large, but not that active. The GearVR is always held up as the number two most successful VR platform with a estimated 5m unit penetration (though a large portion were given with contracts rather than sold). I agree, to throw away an audience of that size, with no updates, no new releases or support sounds like a serious rift between partners. I wonder how much Oculus Texas [Carmack departure, etc.,] closure was the final straw in all this?
    urdgfqqehbbb.png
    ** Second New Book **
    "The Out-of-Home Immersive Entertainment Frontier: Expanding Interactive Boundaries in Leisure Facilities"
    https://www.amazon.co.uk/Out-Home-Immersive-Entertainment-Frontier/dp/1472426959
  • MradrMradr Posts: 3,760 Valuable Player
    In a way I don't see this as a miss opportunity. A few factors we have to keep in mind:
    1) Oculus is/did release GO and Quest - making it a better value for VR that should only get cheaper
    2) Phone VR is still limited in terms of having to have a good phone in the first place
    3) Phone VR I am sure is harder on the phone it self as well - these devices are not really design for long duration for running at high performance without heat build up or killing the battery faster thus more warranty claims I am sure.
    4) Etc etc

    While phone VR could still move forward in some ways, it just over all would require a lot of time and money and I dont think thje major phone providers are going to want to spend that long term - yet - as sales continue to drop across the board as newer and newer phones last longer and longer because they are "good enough" already.
  • ZenbaneZenbane Posts: 15,161 Valuable Player
    Mradr said:
    In a way I don't see this as a miss opportunity. A few factors we have to keep in mind:
    1) Oculus is/did release GO and Quest - making it a better value for VR that should only get cheaper
    2) Phone VR is still limited in terms of having to have a good phone in the first place
    3) Phone VR I am sure is harder on the phone it self as well - these devices are not really design for long duration for running at high performance without heat build up or killing the battery faster thus more warranty claims I am sure.
    4) Etc etc

    While phone VR could still move forward in some ways, it just over all would require a lot of time and money and I dont think thje major phone providers are going to want to spend that long term - yet - as sales continue to drop across the board as newer and newer phones last longer and longer because they are "good enough" already.

    Precisely. Not to mention the lack of 6DoF in the original GearVR. It was great value for the release of VR, but it wasn't enough to convince people to drain their battery all day 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
  • kojackkojack Posts: 6,424 Volunteer Moderator
    They are pulling the video app from oculus stores on june 30, then it will cease to run on september 30. The MS store is losing the app on september 30.
    Any purchased premium content will be lost too on september 30, with no refunds according to the eula.

  • ZenbaneZenbane Posts: 15,161 Valuable Player
    kojack said:
    Any purchased premium content will be lost too on september 30, with no refunds according to the eula.


    Ouch!



    Are you a fan of the Myst games? Check out my Mod at http://www.mystrock.com/
    Catch me on Twitter: twitter.com/zenbane
  • kevinw729kevinw729 Posts: 5,163 Valuable Player
    edited May 15
    Please under the agreement with the moderator can you remove your posts from this discussion - thank you. 
    urdgfqqehbbb.png
    ** Second New Book **
    "The Out-of-Home Immersive Entertainment Frontier: Expanding Interactive Boundaries in Leisure Facilities"
    https://www.amazon.co.uk/Out-Home-Immersive-Entertainment-Frontier/dp/1472426959
  • kevinw729kevinw729 Posts: 5,163 Valuable Player
    edited May 15
    Mradr said:
    In a way I don't see this as a miss opportunity. A few factors we have to keep in mind:
    ......

    Some great points, let me have a go at my perspective on them:

    1) Oculus is/did release GO and Quest - making it a better value for VR that should only get cheaper
    Yes they did launch Go, but all of the opportunities of GearVR (Go fundamentally being a phone-less GVR) was lost - a factor why Go sales have "...not performed as we had initially expected"[paraphrased]. Add to that the number of apps that were not able to be used from GVR on the Go and you kinda see the point.

    2) Phone VR is still limited in terms of having to have a good phone in the first place
    Agreed. The limiting of the GVR to only one phone, and even then limit even more to a particular year of phone was a level of built in obsolescence. Even though in Asia Samsung did make a number of "variants" [image] of the GVR that accommodated their other makes,  For the Western audience it was not a path too glory.


    3) Phone VR I am sure is harder on the phone it self as well - these devices are not really design for long duration for running at high performance without heat build up or killing the battery faster thus more warranty claims I am sure.
    Again, phone VR was a dead end, and I was always amazed by the level of ingenuity that was achieved to make it viable. The phoneless 6DoF platform was the obvious route and Quest, rather than Go should be been the true focus post Samsung partnership. I still wonder what market share Oculus was after with the Go, either-way it seemed to be elusive. 

    .....
    While phone VR could still move forward in some ways, it just over all would require a lot of time and money and I dont think thje major phone providers are going to want to spend that long term - yet - as sales continue to drop across the board as newer and newer phones last longer and longer because they are "good enough" already.

    The work that Oculus Texas and Carmack did to keep the GVR and then Go relevant is nothing short of superhuman and have my respect for what was achieved. I recently saw a emulator on a converted phone VR system that benefited from some of this optimization and was truly impressed. . But agree, best drop all support of GVR (as well as Go) and focus on Quest2. 

    urdgfqqehbbb.png
    ** Second New Book **
    "The Out-of-Home Immersive Entertainment Frontier: Expanding Interactive Boundaries in Leisure Facilities"
    https://www.amazon.co.uk/Out-Home-Immersive-Entertainment-Frontier/dp/1472426959
  • MradrMradr Posts: 3,760 Valuable Player
    edited May 15
    The idea of GO - a cheap entry into VR - will live on - GO in terms of simple media will die though. Granted, a lot of people that got GO knew it was a media a very limited experience device with being a cheaper option into VR - it was just too limited for the broad public looking to really >USE< VR. This is why GO will live on into Quest-2-GO with the extra features Quest 1 offers - but still on the cheaper side with many limits to come yet still with enhancements into hand tracking and possible single controller access (or the ability to upgrade to controllers when needed/wanted). 

    The > USE < of VR is one of the major limiting factors a lot of the vr phone companies face and why you don't see 100 and 1 of them today. Why its neat on the surface and could be useful in some areas (like media) it just doesn't tickle the wiggle for enough people in the long run that makes it with worth its value.

    Its the problem VR in general is going to be force to face sooner or later as well if it wants to jump into the next level. VR NEEDS to grow out of its teenage - gaming phase - at some point and into business class software. Even if its only to run Microsoft Office. Make it RUN Microsoft Office and then offer more on the side. The point being - VR can't stay as a simple HMD - it will need to also go into AR as well. It also needs to start offering more for the public too to want to use it more. Like as an everyday monitor or even make VR Phone calls to talk and walk with people you know. Going to Quest is a great start - small jump - but the ability to use VR anywhere is already a giant leap in the making.

    * I might be a bit bias against GO and phone VR. I never saw the point in the release of these devices other than it being a cheaper option into what VR is like. Same with Google Cardboard.
  • zproxyzproxy Posts: 262
    Art3mis
    well. a 4K phone device is still expected. standalone VR headsets are less interesting than modular mobile headsets.
  • RuneSR2RuneSR2 Posts: 5,332 Valuable Player
    4K phones are old news, Sony made the first in 2015 with the Z5 Premium, and have made more.



    Such a display may not be interesting on a phone, where you can hardly see a difference compared to 2K apart from lower performance, but 4K would indeed be awesome for phone VR. - If you got enough gpu power to run 4K, lol.
    Intel i7 7700K (4.5 GHz); MSI GeForce GTX 1080 8GB Gaming X (oc 2100 MHz gpu boost, 11 GHz mem speed); 16GB Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 MHz; MSI Z270I Gaming Pro Carbon AC (VR-Ready) mainboard; Samsung 960 Evo M.2 SSD + Toshiba P300 HD; Windows 10 OS; Valve Index and Oculus Rift CV1 - the latter nearly always using super sampling 2.0. 

    "Ask not what VR can do for you – ask what you can do for VR"
  • kevinw729kevinw729 Posts: 5,163 Valuable Player
    edited May 16
    Mradr said:
    The idea of GO - a cheap entry into VR - will live on - GO in terms of simple media will die though. Granted, a lot of people that got GO knew it was a media a very limited experience device with being a cheaper option into VR - it was just too limited for the broad public looking to really >USE< VR. 
    .......
    * I might be a bit bias against GO and phone VR. I never saw the point in the release of these devices other than it being a cheaper option into what VR is like. Same with Google Cardboard.

    I too have to admit to being a bit biased against the VR phone phase. I was okay with Google Cardboard, as we had seen the VR-phone-holster fad germinate in Asia before hand, but was not happy with calling it VR. This was always a difficult subject, as I defended the need for "positional tracking" to make this more than immersive viewing.

    With GearVR at least a higher bar was set, and for all the limitations, many have had enjoyment out of their VR phone based platform (some still do now in the phone-less variant like Oculus Go, Pico Neo, HTC Focus, 3Glases ET1, etc.,)

    The main concern for me was the lack of progression - for this to be just a dead end with no real investment was the key to the wasted opportunity comment. As you can see from the image shared in the previous comment - Samsung had a phone-free GearVR back in 2016 [image] - but with the collapse of the Samsung / Oculus partnership this whole platform was left to flounder.

    I think it was a mistake to make the Go, but there are still a strong vocal group of supporters. Just a shame it never achieved more than just being a slightly faster GVR. I doubt we will ever see a Go2. I just wonder if the resources of the Go and the failed Chinese deal had been placed in the Quest alone, what we could have achieved?
    urdgfqqehbbb.png
    ** Second New Book **
    "The Out-of-Home Immersive Entertainment Frontier: Expanding Interactive Boundaries in Leisure Facilities"
    https://www.amazon.co.uk/Out-Home-Immersive-Entertainment-Frontier/dp/1472426959
  • MradrMradr Posts: 3,760 Valuable Player
    edited May 16
    You will always have supporters in any product other wise the product was a total flop and that isn't good lol. GVR had many as well and was one of the most selling unit for VR at the time so of coarse its a shame to see something that came so far just fall to the way side. But, I say, even though it wasn't going to make it far vs standalone that can update it self to match what VR needs - it was a stepping stone for VR to even start in the first place. Without GVR - I am not sure if VR would be where it is now with Software, GO, Quest, and even the Rift S. 

    But there is lots to learn from it and I think going forward - the stander will continue to raise. We already know to a point what is base line VR for most people, and that doesn't cost an arm and leg either to make anymore. Going forward, we know VR requires some type of tracking method that allows freedom of movement in the VR world, we know we can get by with one screen, and we know we can still have a fun experience in VR that doesn't require a PC to make that happen anymore.  Sure, everyone wants "more" numbers and that will come over time, but at least now we know what the line that needs to be cross before someone will take the plunge into VR.

    This is why a strip down Quest 1 - with same basic features - would explode VR in the $150-199 range and that is already possible if they push for that. Also the guy that said 4k phones would be more interesting - I assume its only because of the 4k display and nothing more than that really. The thing is - for that same price - you could get a 4k stand alone headset - well you could get a 5k standalone right now. Plus, have all the features of tracking your hands or controllers without the attach bill for phone service lol.
  • RuneSR2RuneSR2 Posts: 5,332 Valuable Player
    edited May 16
    The fun thing about Quest is that it's basically phoneVR with Touch. Or GearVR with Touch. Oculus simply integrated the old Samsung S8 gpu in a HMD and added Touch (and of course nice tracking and sound). 

    GearVR is dead, long live Quest!  :D  
    Intel i7 7700K (4.5 GHz); MSI GeForce GTX 1080 8GB Gaming X (oc 2100 MHz gpu boost, 11 GHz mem speed); 16GB Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 MHz; MSI Z270I Gaming Pro Carbon AC (VR-Ready) mainboard; Samsung 960 Evo M.2 SSD + Toshiba P300 HD; Windows 10 OS; Valve Index and Oculus Rift CV1 - the latter nearly always using super sampling 2.0. 

    "Ask not what VR can do for you – ask what you can do for VR"
  • kevinw729kevinw729 Posts: 5,163 Valuable Player
    Mradr said:
    .......
    This is why a strip down Quest 1 - with same basic features - would explode VR in the $150-199 range and that is already possible if they push for that. Also the guy that said 4k phones would be more interesting - I assume its only because of the 4k display and nothing more than that really. The thing is - for that same price - you could get a 4k stand alone headset - well you could get a 5k standalone right now. Plus, have all the features of tracking your hands or controllers without the attach bill for phone service lol.


    RuneSR2 said:
    The fun thing about Quest is that it's basically phoneVR with Touch. Or GearVR with Touch. Oculus simply integrated the old Samsung S8 gpu in a HMD and added Touch (and of course nice tracking and sound). 

    GearVR is dead, long live Quest!  :D  

    Yes guys, you are both saying roughly the same thing.

    I see Quest the same way, that Samsung GearVR prototype, benefiting from the Touch controllers and WindowMR Inside-Out Trackers, done right. As all tech, a culmination of new thinking mixed in with lessons learned. And a dash of professionalism. To see the same path repeated with Go rather than new innovation was for me a waste, but a business decision that was based on now flawed thinking - that has been rectified by the removal of those thinkers, and the deployment of a new team focused on Quest (directed from Facebook). 

    Yes, a stepping stone in 2017, but a missed path as its taken till 2019 to move on. Maybe I am just too impatient for the right paths to be taken, and avoid the iteration. 
    urdgfqqehbbb.png
    ** Second New Book **
    "The Out-of-Home Immersive Entertainment Frontier: Expanding Interactive Boundaries in Leisure Facilities"
    https://www.amazon.co.uk/Out-Home-Immersive-Entertainment-Frontier/dp/1472426959
  • DaftnDirectDaftnDirect Posts: 5,720 Volunteer Moderator
    I don't think the Quest is a correction of an incorrect path, it's just the headset that's possible as the technology becomes available at a price that's affordable. Pretty much same was true for GearVR and Go imho. Interpreting it as a change in staff or thinkers doesn't seem to fit for me.

    The difference now as far as I can see is that the tech has developed to the point that we have just about all the elements necessary for full VR in the Quest package, so it's much more likely now that the format will continue in an iterative and backwards compatible model rather than a replacement type model, at least for the next 3-5 years (I think).
    Intel 5820K [email protected], Titan X (Maxwell), 16GB Corsair Vengeance DDR4, ASRock X99 Taichi, Samsung 500Gb 960 Evo M.2, Corsair H100i v2 Cooler, Inateck KTU3FR-4P USB 3 card, Windows 10 Pro v1909 (18363.836)
  • kevinw729kevinw729 Posts: 5,163 Valuable Player
    I don't think the Quest is a correction of an incorrect path, it's just the headset that's possible as the technology becomes available at a price that's affordable. Pretty much same was true for GearVR and Go imho. Interpreting it as a change in staff or thinkers doesn't seem to fit for me.

    The difference now as far as I can see is that the tech has developed to the point that we have just about all the elements necessary for full VR in the Quest package, so it's much more likely now that the format will continue in an iterative and backwards compatible model rather than a replacement type model, at least for the next 3-5 years (I think).

    I see your point - but again, mine is more about progressional pathing rather than iterative jumps from Lilly-pad to Lilly-pad. The GVR was a path to Quest was a path to Standalone MR (in my estimations), but what we got was GVR, then abortive prototype and collapse of progress - four year abandonment, then belated similar direction with Go. It took the removal of certain gatekeepers to allow what had been proposed back in 2016 to be reiterated, and no one noticed the caravan had moved on!

    The feeling seems to be innovation, but with the need to achieve stimulated mass adoption - when it was found that Go was not the right entry level, then all focus swapped to Quest (and we now see what happened to Go). I wonder when Facebook AR is launched, and it proves a success (possibly) then this sweeping pendulum will swap to that at the hindrance of the Quest - as seen with what happened with Rift-S. 

    The next three years could have been so easily laid out with the continuation of Half Dome dev - then with that gone, we had Half-Dome 2 and now Half-Dome 3. (and 3.2) Iterations of technology demonstrators, but not really a replacement type model. While internally there is a battle for a super cheap Quest-Go hybrid or a Quest-2. Maybe we can have both if they were backward comparable?
    urdgfqqehbbb.png
    ** Second New Book **
    "The Out-of-Home Immersive Entertainment Frontier: Expanding Interactive Boundaries in Leisure Facilities"
    https://www.amazon.co.uk/Out-Home-Immersive-Entertainment-Frontier/dp/1472426959
  • MradrMradr Posts: 3,760 Valuable Player
    edited May 16
    To some point yea they could've, but at the same time - I guess its normal progression in the global scope of what every company has done over their life time. Progression tells us though - Quest will take over both Low and Mid range with a possible hybrid for High end. AR will be its 2nd child - I assume to focus more on business and enterprise class applications while using that to learn how to improve hybrid devices for the VR space as well. That would be an easy 3-5 year road map right there alone. Yes, add increase numbers here and there for other specs and add a feature or two for the higher end.

    End goal - > one device type -> hybrids that can do both VR/AR

    Future headsets will aim for: Being smaller, more compact, easier to put on and off, stronger SOC, and over all stream line for production and software sells.

    As for lilly-pad jumping - I think we will see it two more times - then that will be it. This up coming one for standalone hardware inside our HMDs for always on the go use. Last, will be for the AR jump that will happen when AR can take over VR in terms of creating the black out around the user (the shell if you will). After that - I don't know what else VR could even do past that point.

    As for any more big leaps forward - unless they take that dam 400$ money cap off - we're NOT going to see anymore large jumps and instead just going to see small progressions going forward and that means leap years in our buying purchases I assume. Every other product will be the one you will want to buy for any number of reasons.

    What I hope, as far as progression goes, is that the AR will finally get them to start working with MS and start working on OS features/programs that will take it to the next level. Even though it sounds dum - if you can get VR/AR to run Microsoft Office, and do it well, it going to be a BIG game changer for VR/AR and use outside of our room/homes and into a whole new realm of "what can VR/AR do for you" instead of "what can VR/AR even do?". With that said - I think as far as software goes - there will always be games, but the next bit leap will be in the form of some type of AR hybrid application that allows you to do something kind of fun/silly like tracking your pizza or jimmy johns - live - on Google Earth in our VR HMDs. Hell - even a good Pokemon game would be a smash hit pretty much from the get-go - just don't have them move... ever... (looking at you PKG).
  • kevinw729kevinw729 Posts: 5,163 Valuable Player
    edited May 16
    Thanks for this @Mradr - some well thought out points. I will not repeat them and say on the whole agree.

    The only omission is "the road-map".
    I agree during 2014-2016 there was a road-map, that had been well laid out (see the leaked Intel/AMD presentation from 2015), were we got the infamous first use of the "iterations like mobile phones" comment - suggesting a new version every year, (a reason some posters were surprised we never saw a CV2 till now...kinda.

    But after the real mass shedding of staff and execs the baby got thrown out with the bathwater. Failed aspirations were sidelined and focus changed. Till we find ourselves today with the situation of people only finding out that duties were not being done because the person had left, only after the situation overran (a variation of the infamous bricking of headsets when the MS license was not renewed because that person had left). 

    I think the management that is now in place report to FB only, and are working on the "spaghetti against the wall" principle of direction. That would explain the Oculus Link situation, the compromises on the Rift-S, and more importantly the departures of the Half Dome execs. All that said the company is doing fine from the perspective of achieving sales - Quest has knocked it out the park, and the key execs will now use that to drive their position - but that is not a road-map, that is lilly-pad to lilly-pad. And its hard for marketing and advertising to keep up with that - "There's a Oculus headset for Everyone!!"

    urdgfqqehbbb.png
    ** Second New Book **
    "The Out-of-Home Immersive Entertainment Frontier: Expanding Interactive Boundaries in Leisure Facilities"
    https://www.amazon.co.uk/Out-Home-Immersive-Entertainment-Frontier/dp/1472426959
  • kevinw729kevinw729 Posts: 5,163 Valuable Player
    Some one just pointed out:

    ...seems funny the CV1 page says "not available", but the GearVR page is still showing availability while sending you to a broken link - on the Oculus.com site?


    urdgfqqehbbb.png
    ** Second New Book **
    "The Out-of-Home Immersive Entertainment Frontier: Expanding Interactive Boundaries in Leisure Facilities"
    https://www.amazon.co.uk/Out-Home-Immersive-Entertainment-Frontier/dp/1472426959
  • ZenbaneZenbane Posts: 15,161 Valuable Player
    edited May 16
    Mradr said:
    Progression tells us though - Quest will take over both Low and Mid range with a possible hybrid for High end.

    Yep, there's people playing HL:A on Quest. Albeit with some performance issues, but still! Quest 2 should be even stronger in this arena.

    Quest in its current form goes far beyond what mobile phone VR (GearVR) would ever be able to do considering Quest has:
    • Controller-less hand tracking (advanced inside-out tracking)
    • 6DoF
    It doesn't seem feasible to think that smart phone manufacturers would have updated their SDK's to function at that level of native VR support. That's why dedicated stand-alone headsets are so alluring. Quest is far more than just another version of GearVR. Like DnD said, this is more about advancement in technology, not correcting a bad path. Inside-Out tracking wasn't available in 2016 when this all started; and controller-less hand-tracking is barely in an alpha stage now in 2020.
    Are you a fan of the Myst games? Check out my Mod at http://www.mystrock.com/
    Catch me on Twitter: twitter.com/zenbane
  • MradrMradr Posts: 3,760 Valuable Player
    edited May 16
    kevinw729 said:
    but that is not a road-map, that is lilly-pad to lilly-pad. And its hard for marketing and advertising to keep up with that - "There's a Oculus headset for Everyone!!"

    lol - don't work for Google then. They don't just lillly-pad - then make you fight to the death for the same software path and see who wins in the product stack and then leaves the winner to defend it self.

    ~~

    Correct, I mean there will always be hind-sight to something. Lets do take a look at Link. Granted, I heard rumors about Link before its release, but the idea of Link only did come after one of the team members was playing around with the idea of streaming to the headset over compress video methods. Even in eternally, they was debating of even releasing Link for the Quest and just waiting for the next release. It wasn't for some higher ups playing around with the idea more (and I am sure you can guess who) did they say it might be "good enough" for this release they went full steam with the idea. That only came true because Oculus created their own standalone.

    Phone style headsets would've never had the ability to do this because they would've had to hope Samsung would've thought about that and added a pass-though mode witch - why would a cell phone ever have a need that for?

    This means - Oculus actually did something both good and bad for us customers in terms of releasing something that wasn't 100% on the road map and yet - wasn't on the road map for getting it right from top to bottom of how it should work. This also pushes Quest more in the spot light as that amazing hybrid device faster than it normally would've. In long term - Hybrid devices was the move forward either way - but the success of what Link is even able to do - is going to push that forward faster now. Future headsets will take what we learn from Quest - and improve it for Quest 2 in many areas. Not just in numbers, but what it will take to continue to improve on it. Looking at the rumors of the new controller - we can also see what changes that Inside-out tracking might require for the full product stack as well. 

    So while I think Oculus could make a type of road map for us to follow in terms of release of projects/products  Go (2020) -> (Quest (2021) -> Rift S (2022) I think it be a bit (looking for word here) for them to say yet they will following this progression path just yet. There are still many things that could change from now till then and never know when the next "Link" just pops up. Granted, I am not sure what will come next my self that would support a no road map plan - I am sure something will though or is - as they are working way a head of the game that might be just on the edge of being ready to ship tomorrow.



    Just a side note and not towards anyone as no one brought this up yet: I think AIB partners will not become a thing for a while going forward. So far between Windows Mix Reality and Lenovo from Oculus - I think other companies will be a bit more (looking for another word here) about doing anymore work with VR. I am more interested in knowing what will happen because of this and if anyone would still be interested in working as an AIB partner going forward. Samsung already had some success with their MR headset and then started making their own while others like Acer just crash and burn. HP is also doing well - but with their own design even though they still use the tracking from MR, but are looking at switching to a different tracking method. 
  • kevinw729kevinw729 Posts: 5,163 Valuable Player
    Thanks as always for some great observations @Mradr.

    I see your points - though on the "...they are working way a head of the game that might be just on the edge of being ready to ship tomorrow." I would have agreed that they had been ahead, but with the change in structure a lot of that "future road-map" has been compromised.

    I also get what you are saying about Quest Link - that the managements decision to run with it showed a level of free thinking. I agree I too would welcome a new road-map, but as the company post-first-reshuffle went for a zero communication of process, it would be a waste to even wish for this.

    Finally, yes the situation of the competitors is fascinating. While many have foretold the demise of HTC they seem to have doggedly held on till now. The word on the street however is that the condition currently is dire, (the mess that is Cosmo will go down in the history books).  HP have played a stellar game, and their business model (focused on a business others in the trade dismissed) has set them on a strong path. The partnership with MS and Valve will surprise many, and could see the final exodus. 

    Acers current position is one that the access media in VR seem loathed to talk about, from the OSVR, StarVR and OJO investments - and the aborted WinMR projects. The company would be a perfect example of the "spaghetti against the wall" principle.

    We look at Lenovo, and its emulation of the Samsung situation. And this reflects my first point touched on, that jumping around on business plans impacts partnerships and can cause confusion. I think that we can point to the impact of the last minute support of Quest Link to put the kibosh on Lenovo future partnership. As you will know the company has moved on from supporting future Rift-S development and are focused on a HP style direction with Varjo.

    Finally there is the dark horse. Following the revitalizing of the PSVR initiative, and the development of a brand new Standalone PSVR2 concept in a record time - I think we will all be greatly surprised by what will be shown in a couple of months time. While the surprise of the reveal has been impacted by the recent leaks - the possibility that the Quests biggest competitor could be a repeat of what happened to CV1 and the first PSVR will be interesting to watch. Underlining the point of wasting time on Go against shoring up Quest to be in a position to defend against this scenario, shows a failing in the road-map.

    To avoid turning this into a wall of text I will leave this here. 

    urdgfqqehbbb.png
    ** Second New Book **
    "The Out-of-Home Immersive Entertainment Frontier: Expanding Interactive Boundaries in Leisure Facilities"
    https://www.amazon.co.uk/Out-Home-Immersive-Entertainment-Frontier/dp/1472426959
  • MradrMradr Posts: 3,760 Valuable Player
    edited May 17
    The thing about PSVR is that it is a console base device. IE you need a support console to make it work. Even though many will compare to PSVR - there are just things that consoles can not do that a PC enable device can do. Really, it comes down to marketing and working forward on what else can VR do and why I said - they need to focus more on outside of gaming and into other areas of the software market. Granted - Oculus does work with other companies like Wal-Mart for their training and that is great - but that is behind closes doors. Even if they can not yet - they should try to focus on more public facing value. Like what they did at the last expo showing off their Quest multi-player design (the one where they was showing off tennis and the open floor shooter game). A lot of it will come back to games for a while - but every little bit outside of that will be a bigger step forward for VR.

    *Side note, if Quest-2-GO is cheap + support hand controllers - stuff like the above would be way more family friendly (2 or more kids) while offering them something again outside of their rooms/homes.

    Plus - PSVR still has a lot of work a head of it self still while trying to keep the price down. The tracking is still not great for a lot of reasons and the controllers still are lacking in feel compare to like every other controller out there (Oculus, Valves, etc etc). Talk and rumor is all over the place really - wireless, HDR, higher res, eye tracking, etc etc would be crazy to see all these upgrades in one shot. On the other hand, if a company could do it - it be Sony. They been a head of the game for a while and I am sure they partner with many technologies over the years. Then again, for them to move to a standalone headset instead - I dont see it. The PS5 will be pretty hard to stuff into a headset or even close to it without running into some major overhead (heat, battery life, etc etc). Even if they don't aim for those specs - going for anything else will be a risk and something I dont think Sony will want to take on at this time - so I am 100% sure it will be just another console design headset.

    Oculus at that point again shouldn't worry about it and just focus on what makes their design better and more open than what a console can offer. 

  • kevinw729kevinw729 Posts: 5,163 Valuable Player
    Agree - the feature creep on what is rumored to be the PSVR2 looks like they will have a difficult time not hitting that $400 magic number. I think many will be surprised at the Sony new entry, not as much a slave to the console (one of the marketing spins being suggested is "cut the cord!")

    Those looking at the numbers on the PS5 are concerned that this expensive, limited number platform could seriously be impacted by the current situation, giving the win to MS - but those that have seen it, and seen the demo of the full XR suite are very impressed (that UE5 demo comparison adding to the interest). 

    It would be interesting if the PSVR2 addition to the retinue would push the PS5 over the winning line - and if that happened would MS capitulate and pivot to rush for a VR add-on? Say rushing to HP and asking for the new Reverb2 to be compatible with their platform?

    Just some fun speculation IMHO. 


    urdgfqqehbbb.png
    ** Second New Book **
    "The Out-of-Home Immersive Entertainment Frontier: Expanding Interactive Boundaries in Leisure Facilities"
    https://www.amazon.co.uk/Out-Home-Immersive-Entertainment-Frontier/dp/1472426959
  • MradrMradr Posts: 3,760 Valuable Player
    edited May 18
    Hmm, knowing MS - I think they... don't see the need to rush for VR yet still. They do have H-L and I think they have a good idea already on what has to happen for VR/AR going forward already from a higher thinking stand point... its not like they didn't try with WMR either by testing the waters with AIB partners. As other saw though - without some type of store in place - it makes it really hard to grow a community around it long term though without pushing money into the game to make it work well. Around that time - MS was already seeing record profits from other sources of money making services - thus I think it just fall to the waste side for them at this time and rather just focus on making the Xbox and pushing Office 365 for now.

    In the future... hard to say... I want MS to really push for it you know? I think they will in the next 3-4 years for sure either it be with their own WMR2 or something else that can communicate with their console - but mmmm. They are a company that likes to see profits and if they don't feel/see the need they take their sweet time getting it out there. This is both good and bad of course as the time scale sucks - but you know they do "learn" and "grow" going forward improving their past mistakes or adding the correct features. Possible they are just playing the waiting game - but at this time - at least for another year or two - they will not focus on VR and instead focus on their current money makers + their console.

    A far as specs go for the consoles - its looks pretty dead even in my book. One will do a bit better in raw performance, while the other will have new technology to push it forward. Also, keep in mind about that UE5 demo - it was only running around 30 FPS - amazing looking and still a giant leap forward - but its also way hardware demanding even on a 2080 and its not coming out this year. They still need to scale it to work around the 60 FPS ranges to meet base line performance. 

    The more interesting one will be that of Apple to me. They are in such a weird situation from their MAC's performance to mobile devices being their own eco system it surprises me they would even think about going down the AR/VR route without something in place to really push or have a need for it. This is one is really up in the air for me xD They just recently bought out a company for their VR software and I still see rumors of new designs for their VR headset. - but why? - how are they even going to run this thing? lol It stream standalone of course and the push for more powerful ARM designs tell me they are looking to maybe build stuff from the ground up. I feel like we're about to see another HTC running as they don't even have a software company to really back them up with current titles as well if they go the public route. If anything - this thing not going to be cheap - thus tells me its going to start out more like a professional device.
  • kevinw729kevinw729 Posts: 5,163 Valuable Player
    I would normally have agreed with the "long -game" approach from MS - they dumped the VR bandwagon after the last involvement with Oculus, and there was some serious animosity that was vented in the WinMR initiative. So seeing them go back would have been a stretch. But things have changed, and management is not entirely happy with the XBONES strategy - especially after the UE5 promotion on the PS5 showing up the deficiencies of the XBONEX. I would not be surprised for a knee jerk if they see the PSVR2 gains traction with the audience.  This is near-term, am not really a fan of the long play speculation, as this is always impacted by the restructuring that seems to be constant in all of these operations. 
    urdgfqqehbbb.png
    ** Second New Book **
    "The Out-of-Home Immersive Entertainment Frontier: Expanding Interactive Boundaries in Leisure Facilities"
    https://www.amazon.co.uk/Out-Home-Immersive-Entertainment-Frontier/dp/1472426959
  • MradrMradr Posts: 3,760 Valuable Player
    kevinw729 said:
    I would normally have agreed with the "long -game" approach from MS - they dumped the VR bandwagon after the last involvement with Oculus, and there was some serious animosity that was vented in the WinMR initiative. So seeing them go back would have been a stretch. But things have changed, and management is not entirely happy with the XBONES strategy - especially after the UE5 promotion on the PS5 showing up the deficiencies of the XBONEX. I would not be surprised for a knee jerk if they see the PSVR2 gains traction with the audience.  This is near-term, am not really a fan of the long play speculation, as this is always impacted by the restructuring that seems to be constant in all of these operations. 
    Hmmm as for a reaction - I think they will focus on the following:
    1) Make games cross platform more - they already hinted at this and I think if VR really pushes them over - it will be here to allow both platforms to finally merg.
    2) They are going to push more free game options on their streaming services. They are seeing the light here and want to really push this idea more than anything. They know once you are lock into their cloud services - you will even be more inclined to continue using them over Sony they can run on Sony device while MS has the PC and their Console.
    3) MS still the leading software company for DX - meaning - they have a lead in future low level hardware API even before Sony - thus they might have something under the hood to really push them forward if they have to release some secret code. Granted - this one is a bit more far fetch - but still possible.
    4) MS also has some great titles that will be a bit hard to leave for just the PS if they really push them this year like for Halo, Gears of War, GTA , etc etc.

    Far as I can see - they seem pretty dead even. I am not much of a console fan - so my knowledge is a bit limited with both platforms - but from a side liner - it looks like they both can compete just fine.
  • kevinw729kevinw729 Posts: 5,163 Valuable Player
    Yep, most of those I would also point to as the "long game" for MS.
    One you may have missed out, or condensed into one of the other entries, was:

    5} "focusing on Project Cloud" [Sorry if you said this and I missed it.]
    This is their big gamble on controlling the exo-system, and to be frank VR does not work as a stream target, so it may illustrate why Phil is not keen on VR!!
    urdgfqqehbbb.png
    ** Second New Book **
    "The Out-of-Home Immersive Entertainment Frontier: Expanding Interactive Boundaries in Leisure Facilities"
    https://www.amazon.co.uk/Out-Home-Immersive-Entertainment-Frontier/dp/1472426959
  • MradrMradr Posts: 3,760 Valuable Player
    After that we also have new GPUs, CPUs, Intel GPUs, and finally directions from places like Samsung saying they are dropping support for LCD all together saying the market it s flood with cheap options for LCD panels and their move to Q-Dot/OLED instead for cheaper and faster malfunctioning. Hell AMD is moving to Ray Tracing and ND just release some idea on their new core design that will allow their 3000s to perform almost 4x the performance taking full advantage of their added AI/RT cores instead of neither. Heck, even mobile is going to get some love in the mobile space from AMD releasing new "APUs" that can be attach to SOC like snapdragon on the new 7nm and RDNA (maybe 2?).

    To me, VR has a very LARGE window in front of it if Oculus really wants to push forward with something like a Half Dome without even needing the use of eye tracking. Really, I am hype for next year either it be software or hardware, VR wont have any excuses they can't upgrade their current technology anymore. So I am hoping Samsung, Steam, HP, and others will release and push pressure on Oculus for some healthy competition going forward.
Sign In or Register to comment.