03-29-2019 04:26 PM
03-30-2019 03:37 AM
bigmike20vt said:
So long as windows MR are sticking g with 2 camera inside out then I am not going near one of those.
Also whilst oculus is my preferred vr store front steam is head and shoulders above the windows vr infrastructure and I wod want the majority of titles I play to be natively supported and not reliant almost solely on wrappers.like most windows MR users are.
I really want to stick with oculus bit depending on what this new valve hmd is I will probably jump ship .... Hopefully if openXR takes off I can get back to buying from oculus store sooner rather than .later however
I'm pretty much in agreement with this and like @dburne said, it'll just be great to have choices.
Just need a LOT more facts and some incling of when an Oculus enthusiast headset is likely. But if the facts are positive (including price) I see no reason for anyone to complain, new:comers to PC VR know they already have a great option and maybe enthusiasts will have a choice to upgrade sooner than they thought.
That wrapper business would be bit of a nagging annoyance though for sure.
Edit: I'm also forgetting the cost of a GPU upgrade which I'll need for something more demanding than a Rift-S, Having to buy that sooner rather than later wiould nag a bit too.
Edit 2: I'm also forgetting about Touch controllers. Lots to consider.
03-30-2019 03:44 AM
Mradr said:
RuneSR2 said:
Seems like most believe in 135 fov - but 150 would be amazing. Then I'd be forced to start modding Skyrim! 😄
150 would be too much and just another Pimax honestly unless they have eye tracking. 135 is kind of the cap or edge of what current GPUs will be able to handle in terms of 10s, 20s, and 30s cards. Anything higher than you really do run the risk no one ever buying it other than the top 1%.
03-30-2019 03:52 AM
DaftnDirect said:Edit: I'm also forgetting the cost of a GPU upgrade which I'll need for something more demanding than a Rift-S, Having to buy that sooner rather than later wiould nag a bit too.
03-30-2019 03:56 AM
With
the Valve Index Tease confirming that the Leaked photo's from a few
months ago were real, its a reasonable assumption to make from those
photo's that the FOV will be wider than the Rift and Vive CV1's due to
the sizes of the lenses. Increase the FOV and its reasonable to assume a
decent jump in resolution compared to the CV1's otherwise you have the
same or even lower PPD than the CV1's.
Its
apparent to most of us that the Valve Index is likely to be all the
things we wanted in a Rift S but didn't get. Its reasonable to assume
that this will come at a higher cost than Rift S and thus the Valve
Index will be aimed at VR enthusiasts.
Its
been my opinion for several years now (I'll try and dig up some 2 year
old posts of mine) that while price of HMD's and ease of setup are
important considerations for the PC gaming masses still on the VR fence,
I feel that perhaps the biggest thing holding the 'PC Master Race' back
from buying a HMD is the resolution and FOV. Those folks simply will
not be convinced by us raving about how amazing VR gaming can be and how
you forget about the FOV or resolution or SDE once you start playing.
They simply will not spend ANY
money on a device that they see as akin to in effect taking a 2 decade
step back in time to their old 640x480 VGA monitors from their 144hz
1440p or 4K monitors in terms of image clarity. When I've talked about
this in the past I've talked about how I believe that once you have a
HMD with high enough res that they can play their monitor games on high
refresh rate high res virtual monitors, enjoy high clarity VR porn and
VR Cinema too, that a VR HMD becomes a no brainer purchase even if they
never intended to play an actual VR game. Now the Valve Index is still
not going to be high res nor cheap enough to make it a no brainer
purchase for the PC Gaming masses but it will be very interesting to see
if it does a better job at convincing those with VR capable GPU's to
part with their cash compared to how cheap but low res Rift and Vive
fared in that regard. Even Palmer Luckey changed his tune away from
believing that Price was the most important consideration for buyers.His
famous "Free isn't cheap enough" Blog post.
So
while the vast majority of the PC gaming community will still have to
wait till we have Eyetracking with Foveated Rendering capable HMD's
(2022 according to Oculus' Michael Abrash) where even bottom tier GPU
owners will be able to run 6000x6000 pixel per eye HMD's, if my numbers
are correct, upto 5 million people already own a GPU that could run
(some GPU's would need to undersample granted) a 2160x2160 per eye Valve
Index. HP Reverb with those panels has GTX 1080 as the recommended
spec. I took that as a baseline and toted up the number of Steam users
with GTX 1080's, GTX 1080TI's, RTX2070's, RTX2080's & RTX2080TI's.
It came to 5.6% of the Steam userbase. Those are monthly percentages so I
used Steams average Monthly active users which is 90 million which
means about 5 million Steam users own one of those cards. Correct me if
I'm wrong anyone.
So its looking like
we are going to get a real world test of those theories. Is it Price or
Specs keeping the VR capable GPU owning PC Gamers on the fence. Will the
Rift S entice those 5 million higher end GPU owners to finally jump
into VR or will it be the higher spec but more expensive Valve Index?
As
for me, as some of you may have noticed, ever since the Rift S
announcement I have ceased to be an Oculus/Facebook Cheerleader/Fanboy
and am really worried about the direction Oculus seem to be going. I am
no longer sure that OpenXR will mean a 100% open Store like I once
thought. While I absolutely see a place for the likes of the Rift S I
thought it should be cheaper and I think Oculus need to keep their foot
in the Enthusiast door as well but Rubins recent RtoVR interview seemed
to poopoo on the Rift Pro rumours. So ever since the Rift S announcement
I've been saying in several threads that I am now looking outside of
Oculus for my next HMD. Now even considering the Pimax or Vive Cosmos,
though most likely the HP Reverb....unless Valve Rumours turned out to
have some meat on the bones......
Today
I got my answer. I would have settled for the HP Reverb for my Space,
Flight & Driving Sim and VR Cinema usage where the controller
tracking or shitty controllers don't matter and continued to use my CV1
for other VR games. However, a 2160x2160 pixel per eye 130-140º FOV
Valve Index with Lighthouse and knuckles for even $800 would be an
absolute DAY 1 purchase for me.
Exciting Times !!!
03-30-2019 04:01 AM
Mradr said:
DaftnDirect said:Edit: I'm also forgetting the cost of a GPU upgrade which I'll need for something more demanding than a Rift-S, Having to buy that sooner rather than later wiould nag a bit too.
This is why the entry cost isn't the HMD - its the computer. If you go for PCVR you are in a penny for a pound setup either way. Quest is honestly the answer to anyone that wants to get into VR at a entry level price. Rift S isn't the answer for the mass market - its Quest.
*shuts mouth* Sorry rants ><; I will need to try and pressure my self not to comment of these type of statements xD
I should qualify... I think Rift-S is the great option for people wanting to get into PC VR if their budget allows for a new PC with the same specs as we considered to be top-end 3 years ago (I don't think that's top-end now). Or if they already have that PC but are swayed by little things like a more plug and play solution or slightly higher res.
Also, there are very good reasons to go for PC VR over stand-alone if you qualify for the above.... mainly choice and scope of games and experiences.
Edit: I did say newcomers to PC VR rather than newcomers to VR. If someone's not at all interested in the PC side of things then absolutely Quest is the one to go for.
03-30-2019 04:07 AM
03-30-2019 04:14 AM
pyroth309 said:
RuneSR2 said:
The more important question - who will buy the Rift S without knowing anything about the Valve Index? Kinda feels like Valve did this on purpose. Also examine that words "Upgrade your experience". There's been a lot of discussions about Rift-S being "not an upgrade" for Rift owners. I believe Valve chose their words especially to signify that a true upgrade is coming - if they truly can deliver...
Valve Index - didn't they choose the wrong finger? Should it not have been Valve Middle Finger? (Which perfectly would convey their message to HTC and Oculus - and the WMR Group 😉
Due to the timing of the release, (I mean Pax and GDC just happened) I feel like they weren't ready to release yet and rushed this because of the opportunity. It was like..hey before you hit that order button... take a look at this physical IPD adjustment we got right here!
03-30-2019 04:15 AM
DaftnDirect said:
Mradr said:
DaftnDirect said:Edit: I'm also forgetting the cost of a GPU upgrade which I'll need for something more demanding than a Rift-S, Having to buy that sooner rather than later wiould nag a bit too.
This is why the entry cost isn't the HMD - its the computer. If you go for PCVR you are in a penny for a pound setup either way. Quest is honestly the answer to anyone that wants to get into VR at a entry level price. Rift S isn't the answer for the mass market - its Quest.
*shuts mouth* Sorry rants ><; I will need to try and pressure my self not to comment of these type of statements xD
I should qualify... I think Rift-S is the great option for people wanting to get into PC VR if their budge allows for a new PC with the same specs as we considered to be top-end 3 years ago (I don't think that's top-end now). Or if they already have that PC but are swayed by little things like a more plug and play solution or slightly higher res.Also, there are very good reasons to go for PC VR over stand-alone if you qualify for the above.... mainly choice and scope of games and experiences.
03-30-2019 04:15 AM
KlodsBrik said:
Finally knuckles and HL3 as well ? .. No seriously ??
03-30-2019 04:25 AM