cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Rift S Disappointment Thread so Oculus knows our feedback!

Cyion
Protege
Hello Oculus,

I just would like to express my severe disappointment at the now confirmed features of the Oculus Rift S.

Here are the deal breakers for me (ranked from biggest deal breaker to smallest):

#1 - Lack of outside-in tracking (was hoping for something of the level of tracking that the vive has without having to plug 3 usb sensors in and all the hell that comes with that because of crappy motherboards/cords etc.)

     The reason this bothers me so much is I play games like Echo Arena and you need AMAZING tracking, I am constantly pushing off walls that are completely behind my back without looking and inside out tracking is insufficient.  I also will take a swing behind my back without looking and again inside out tracking won't cut it.

#2 - Lack of a physical IPD adjustment

   My IPD has to be bang on or I end up getting headaches after playing longer then 2 hours.  If it is even 1 mm off, the headaches happen, if it is set just right, I can play for 8 hour plus with no side effects.  I cannot play test a rift S to find out if it will give me headaches for more then 2 hours.

#3 - No option to set your refresh rate to 90 Hz

    If you want the default refresh rate to be 80 Hz fine, but give me the option to allow it to be 90 Hz.  When the fps gets lower than 90 fps I notice it and it does not feel good for me.

#4 - Lack of quality headphone included with the headset

   I love the sound on my rift CV1 and I will not accept anything less and I don't want to have another wire that my hand can bump into when I am playing highly competitive games since I would have to plug in my own headphones.

The small jump in resolution doesn't outweigh all the negatives I have mentioned above and a slight increase in the FOV would have been nice!

I think Oculus has failed in that they should have been developing the Rift S and another new Rift headset that is geared towards those enthusiasts who are willing to pay a bit more for a QUALITY headset.  You have made an AFFORDABLE headset that will get a lot of new people into VR but you have neglected the wants of a LARGE CORE (enthusiasts) of your fans!

Your future headsets has to have a outside in tracking option and an physical adjustable IPD or I will never buy another oculus headset.  At this point I don't want to wait another 2 years for a new proper headset that meets these requirements and my money will likely go to another company that pulls this off in the mean time.  I wish I bought all of my games on the steam store now.  Wouldn't have imagined Oculus's next headset would be so contrary to what I want.

Sincerely,

Cyion
231 REPLIES 231

RedRizla
Honored Visionary


Do all the people on these forums that know their IPD wear glasses? I was just wondering because I don't know my IPD but I don't wear glasses so maybe that's why. 

I currently own Oculus GO though and I don't feel any discomfort compared to my Rift which is also perfect but obviously has the IPD slider. So I'm guessing my IPD must be in the majority range of 65. Although I do have a big head! lol



I'm not sure it has anything to do with having a large head, it's more to do with how far apart your eyes are. I think having a large head would just give you an Oculus face. 

CrashFu
Consultant
Some people just can't comprehend why Oculus would want to sell a $400 device (that requires a $500-$1000 PC) to a very large number of people when they could be trying to sell a $1000+ device (that requires a multi-thousand-dollar PC) to like... 1/100th as many people.

But then again, he actually thinks that high-end PC users ARE the masses, and that people stuck with "potato PCs" are a small minority who should be ignored?  It's incredible; I guess that's what happens when you isolate yourself within "PCMR" communities and lose touch with the rest of the world.

Hey rich kids, ask yourself this:  If the majority of people, or even the majority of the gaming market were wealthy enough to own high-spec gaming PCs,  then why do most of them settle for inexpensive gaming consoles instead of running out and buying the newest Alienware or w/e?  Why didn't VR achieve Mass Adoption years ago?   Why didn't very many people in the Vive camp upgrade to Vive Pro when it came out?

Just because wealthy tech enthusiasts were the first people able to afford VR doesn't make you the only audience worth catering to.  Not unless you'd be willing to pay 10x as much for every piece of software you buy, to compensate for all of the people who wouldn't be able to afford a Rift at all, if Oculus had prioritized the high-end.
It's hard being the voice of reason when you're surrounded by unreasonable people.

Anonymous
Not applicable
Yup. The most important thing that Oculus has done with the Rift S is keep the same minimum spec requirement. Three years ago you needed a powerful gaming PC to run a Rift, but three years later you'll find laptops being able to run one.

The minimum and recommend specs will probably change with the CV2 in 2022 but even then you'll probably find laptops able to run it thanks to eye tracking and dynamic foveated rendering.

Chivas
Expert Protege
As a long time Oculus supporter I'm Very disappointed...especially in regards to the non existent physical IPD adjustment.   I think Facebook has really dropped the ball in VR development, with this weak Rift S product.  I thought Oculus/Facebook had amassed one of the most talented VR teams in the industry, but beginning to think Facebook has hobbled Oculus efforts to provide the best cutting edge products.  IMHO Oculus has moved from an industry leader to just another ho-hum VR product.

Anonymous
Not applicable

Chivas said:

As a long time Oculus supporter I'm Very disappointed...especially in regards to the non existent physical IPD adjustment.   I think Facebook has really dropped the ball in VR development, with this weak Rift S product.  I thought Oculus/Facebook had amassed one of the most talented VR teams in the industry, but beginning to think Facebook has hobbled Oculus efforts to provide the best cutting edge products.  IMHO Oculus has moved from an industry leader to just another ho-hum VR product.



Just wait until the tock comes with the CV2. And they're still an industry leader, all you have to do is look at the Touch controllers to see that. The vast majority of headsets have Touch clones, including the Vive Cosmos.

Richooal
Consultant

snowdog said:

The CV2 is going to be another tick. It's going to end up having 4K displays, eye tracking and dynamic foveated rendering and 140 degrees FOV with the same form factor as the Rift.

The Rift CV2 S will be another tock .......


snowdog said:

Just wait until the tock comes with the CV2.

I just can't keep up with you techy guys. Things change so quick, one minute CV2 is a "tick" and the next it's a "tock".
i5 6600k - GTX1060 - 8GB RAM - Rift CV1 + 3 Sensors - 1 minor problem
Dear Oculus, If it ain't broke, don't fix it, please.

Zenbane
MVP
MVP

Richooal said:

I just can't keep up with you techy guys. Things change so quick, one minute CV2 is a "tick" and the next it's a "tock".




Anonymous
Not applicable

CrashFu said:

Just because wealthy tech enthusiasts were the first people able to afford VR doesn't make you the only audience worth catering to.  Not unless you'd be willing to pay 10x as much for every piece of software you buy, to compensate for all of the people who wouldn't be able to afford a Rift at all, if Oculus had prioritized the high-end.


I think there is another view you are not looking at either. I will try to explain the best I can, but just because you  can lower the price it doesn't mean its going to fix the problem either. The value you pay something at has to match the value you are wanting in return. If that is broken - you end up with some problems later down the road from either side. Trust me, I see it in service all the time.

1) The thing is most gaming computers still start at around 1k$. The argument that keeping the price low on the head set for more sells - still might not hold as much water when the issue isnt so much price of the HMD - but the level quality of the hardware and the software that goes with it.

Even if we make the HMD cost only 200$ - the entry to get into PCVR is still going to be high either way unless we can figure out how to support the video card onto the HMD (Quest) or keep the level of hardware support low and this has other problems if we do.

2) A lot of people want to push going forward because that is how everything has always work in the computer world. There are two camps out there. One that wants a super amazing value and another that wants bleeding edge. The sad truth - one cant live without the other in terms of value to scale. Without the high end show off and testing the new features - the low end will never demand these features at a value that matches what they want to pay. Along with that, it never opens the door to the future for people meaning instead of getting a choice for low or high end - they are either stuck in one option that they might not like.
 
Right now we have GO, Quest, CV1, and now a Rift S - but they all meet what would be consider low end to a lot of people (CV1 included because of the age). Thats a large amount of options now for lower end. There isnt a option for higher end hardware or people that dont mind spending more to get something bleeding edge. Granted, I am not saying go balls to the wall here either. What I mean is that there needs to be a higher end option that makes sense for the price and value of what you are getting in return. That doesnt mean to say make a headset that is going to be price out of what most people are willing to pay, but it does mean you dont have to aim low to get more sells either. There is a balance in there that will fit a pretty good market value. 500-800 seems like there is market there willing to pay for good quality of hardware either it be video cards, HMD (I mean look at CV1), and phones.

Example, I remember seeing some games set to max setting and remembering how omg pretty the game look. Granted, I couldn't afford the high end video cards at the time to get max settings, but yet I was looking at the cards and demanding/waiting for the next set to features to come out on their next line of hardware so I could. This created both a want and a need for me (as the customer) to want to go to the next step up or upgrade as soon as I could on their next line of cards at my price point. Along with already having cards out that could do that - game makers could flex their stuff just a bit with their software also creating that need and want to run their software.

3) Hardware isnt good enough right now for other options or uses. One thing I love to get started using VR for is as another monitor. The problem is the hardware (CV1) just doesn't have enough PPD or a way to focus on the text well enough to make a stander monitor yet. Keeping the price low means they cant add in higher PPD displays or full RGB display(s) to the headset. There for, technology such as this will take longer to get out to the public that means less market pressure on it self to have people start taking the leap of faith to bring it outside of gaming and into other software markets.

4) Again going back to 2 and 3 there - if game software and hardware cant flex even a little bit on their eye candy -  there wont be any draw for the customer to see it as any better than a lower end system. Im 100% sure you've see the arguments that "vr looks like 720p graphics" compare to 1080p flat screen monitors. Yet, we all agree - that really doesnt matter when you get into the games as your brain melts that away. New users dont know that though and even when I first got my VR headset - I thought the same. Granted it was rough back then (DK), but I could easily see where VR was going and could be going in the near future if it was properly support correctly.

5) Low end hardware doesnt bring in larges amount of money UNLESS there is a LARGE group of you. The main reason I say this is the fact you have to question your self - why cant people afford a higher cost model? What it keeping them from spending the money? Even if they do spend the money - do they even have enough to buy more games? Catering to a lower end market brings in a lot more questions because the other end is going to want to NOT spend a lot of money for their habits meaning you have to sell 2x more and the market will reflect that as well meaning we wont see 60$ games, but instead 30$ or 15$ games That means devs are going to limit or be more controlling on how long their game takes, the quality of the game, and support after the game is release for bugs and add ons. Games that make a lot of money tend to want to go bigger on their next games, but games that tend to make less - might not ever make another game at all.


TLDR:
1) Price of entry isnt the HMD - but the computer it self.
2) There is value supporting the higher end that creates demand/want from the lower end
3) Limiting hardware means limited support options outside usefulness
4) Limited hardware means limited software
5) Price limits software quality

Honestly - I really hope Oculus is going to release another HMD for the high end PC next year. If they dont - even if you think keeping the low end is a better option - they're going to lose a percent of their customer base or even their customer base will be more flex on what to go to next. Low end already has many options - getting Rift S is just another lower end product - people are going to wonder soon or later why VR hardware isnt growing fast enough and I think its going to get another "dead" maker from the market.

RattyUK
Trustee
But, if the Rift S is not an 'upgrade' for standard Rift owners (but sounds like it will be its replacement) why is a disappointment thread needed for Rift owners?
If it was being hyped as the 'CV2' then such might provoke disappointment among those of us who are looking for the next big thing.
So what on earth is all the fuss about?  What is there to be so upset about?
I'd consider the S to replace my Rift and lose the sensors muddle, as well as making it useful on my laptop too, but it wouldn't be 'upgrading'  - that will come later I'm sure.
PC info: AMD Ryzen 9 5900X - Sapphire 7900XTX - 32GB DDR4 4000 - 3 NVMe + 3SATA SSD - Quest 2 & 3

ShineHunter
Protege


@ShineHunter I'm listening, hence my comment. I also didn't say you weren't listening. I said you were dismissing people with a different opinion in rather a rude way. It's just rude to dismiss people who have a different opinion than yours by calling them fanboys. Same deal with calling people trolls. I don't do it. Instead I discuss the arguments.

So, going back to the arguments... no I don't have facts to say Oculus are bringing out a next gen headset. We're voicing our respective opinions based on what we think is likely. As I said, this is a forum and expressing different opinions doesn't mean we're not listening, it just means we have different opinions. When you say the replies aren't great, do youi mean they don't agree with you?

Anyway, announcing a headset that you're not happy with doesn't mean that Oculus won't bring out an enthusiast headset when they consider the time to be right.

I happen to think the time will be right in around 12 months for the reasons I've already said i.e PPD increase of around 40%, an FOV increase of maybe 30% and a GPU available that can drive it. Possibly sooner if foveated rendering has been finalised.

Sorry if you're angered at people who don't come round to agreeing with you but that's life.


If I say I don't like it why is some one trying to tell me I don't know what I'm talking about. I'm not angered at people who don't agree with me, just don't need them trying to make me agree with them. It's not like they can make this a next gen headset. I personally love my Rift and I'm a fan of it, but I'm not a yes man. I didn't come for an argument because there is nothing to argue about. We know everything about the Rift S now. Reassurance is what I need. I'm not saying everyone is fanboy or a troll. Some replies have been very defence for Oculus on here to the point of extreme. I know alot of people that are not happy, but wouldn't even try to come on here to say it due to what they have seen already from the replies. Instead Discord is getting it all, Twitter and YouTube. 

Anyway next gen isn't clearly happening this year at least. If it does happen please be the Half dome.