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

Developer? Click here to go to the Developer Forums.

High end oculus vr.. don't hold your breath

189111314

Comments

  • bigmike20vtbigmike20vt Posts: 4,085 Valuable Player
    RedRizla said:
    @Mradr - Lets take televisions as an example. New televisions are about to be brought out and some will be 8k this time around. But whose going to buy them while they are ridiculously expensive? Even Oled and QLed television are expensive, so most people settle on purchasing a television that has just 4k. 

    Once these 8k television arrive oled & Qled 4k televisions will start to drop in price and the majority of people will then start to buy these televisions and not 8k televisions. So do you now see what Oculus is doing? They are catering for the majority and not the minority.
    I guess it depends where you draw your line.

    if varjo VR1 is the equvalent to the 146inch samsung "Wall"
    and the cheapest windows MR HMD you can buy is the 32 inch HDReady set

    then i would argue oculus are going much closer to the bottom end than the top..... I would be happy somewhere in the middle ;)

    Fiat Coupe, gone. 350Z gone. Dirty nappies, no sleep & practical transport incoming. Thank goodness for VR :)
  • DaftnDirectDaftnDirect Posts: 5,279 Volunteer Moderator
    edited April 16
    possibly paradox's post is a bit cringeworthy, especially if Netheri is French
    hmmmm, ok potential foot in mouth comment incoming but.... it is a shame, it was / is / will be again a beautiful building with a history... but AFAIK no human life was lost, it is bricks and mortar at the end of the day...... Had it of been an image of grenfell tower or similar I would have agreed with you but...........................…

    Yeah I'm not an overly sentimental person and you're absolutely right, human life is the only thing that really matters. There's something about history and heritage though that means something even to someone like me who isn't French and isn't religious.

    Well, people get quite heated over a change of direction that a VR company takes after just a few years.
    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 v1903 (18363.476)
  • edmgedmg Posts: 1,153
    Wintermute
    bigmike20vt said:
    then the vive came out with its full 360degree tracking and oculus adapted.... it took some time with some buggy issues in the early days but now, with a 3 sensor set up i believe in an average - above average sized room the rift tracks every bit as well as the vive in full 360 degrees.
    but with out the vive i think we would still be like at touch lauch, with a much more psvr like tracking.

    so for that i thank valve.

    This is just repeating the same old nonsense. The Rift was always capable of 360 tracking with a single sensor; something the Vive requires two lighthouses for.

    What it didn't originally have were motion controllers. Because they didn't want to ship with something as sucky as the Vive wands.

    The reality is that Oculus were going to do what they were going to do, and HTC just rushed out a second-rate headset because they wanted to beat Oculus to market.
  • MradrMradr Posts: 3,549 Valuable Player
    edited April 16
    RedRizla said:
    Mradr said:
    RedRizla said:
    @Mradr - Lets take televisions as an example. New televisions are about to be brought out and some will be 8k this time around. But whose going to buy them while they are ridiculously expensive? Even Oled and QLed television are expensive, so most people settle on purchasing a television that has just 4k. 

    Once these 8k televisions arrive then Oled & Qled 4k televisions will start to drop in price and the majority of people will then start to buy these televisions and not 8k televisions. So do you now see what Oculus is doing? They are catering for the majority and not the minority.


    I see, so you feel like screen technology will be able to keep up even if we hit 6k that 8k will be around the bin next?

    Sorry, I don't understand what you mean?
    Mradr said:
    @RedRizla @Zenbane @DaftnDirect
    Yes I know its theory crafting - but I like to get your thoughts - anyone can jump in - but going off the scale of hardware and the current reasoning that Oculus wants to keep it low price as possible for VR - 

    What if the 30s is more than powerful enough to run 6k at 80hz even go as far as to say they did get eye tracking working for the 20s and 10s cards to be supported, but the problem is that the 6k cost WAY too much even though the hardware could support it. Would your argument that keeping price low still be valid or should they try and push something a bit stronger out? I bring this up because scale of screen technology is going to hit a wall sooner than our GPUs or future improvements to VR will hit. Our biggest cost in a HMD is the screen(s). Eye tracking sort of resets FOV cost and a percent of resolution demand. With a time scale of 3 years - that be almost 2 generation of video cards depending on release dates. Personally - I dont think this question too wild of what might happen by then. 4k already a thing at around 80-144fps  - with 5k already hitting 30-45Hz - 2 more gen + software improvements along with eye tracking doesn't sound too far off to already be supporting 6k by then.
    What I am getting at is that (if you want me to use majority or minority) is that the majority of users will be able to hit 6k screens by 2022 - but the problem is that 6k screens at that size will be too costly (lets say they cost 200$) putting the Rift S2 above the 450$ mark. Base on improvement rate for GPUs, Software improvements, and Eye tracking - the majority could support the higher end screens. Would your argument that keeping prices low then change? Same with S3 for 8k screen (all the way up to 16k that we need to hit for perfect 60PPD over FOV near eye). I mean that is a real future that could happen as screens that size continue to get harder to fix more pixels in them. TVs for example have a bit of size they can work with - but 5 inches doesn't have near the same work space.
  • foldalefoldale Posts: 8
    NerveGear
    So can anyone recommend a PC VR unit that will work well with an IPD of 58? I have a RIFT CV1 and have been waiting over 2 years for an upgrade but so far I haven't seen anything that will work for me. I would have loved to stay with OCULUS but although they  have 3 new products sadly none of them look like they will work for me :(
  • RedRizlaRedRizla Posts: 6,771 Valuable Player
    RedRizla said:
    @Mradr - Lets take televisions as an example. New televisions are about to be brought out and some will be 8k this time around. But whose going to buy them while they are ridiculously expensive? Even Oled and QLed television are expensive, so most people settle on purchasing a television that has just 4k. 

    Once these 8k television arrive oled & Qled 4k televisions will start to drop in price and the majority of people will then start to buy these televisions and not 8k televisions. So do you now see what Oculus is doing? They are catering for the majority and not the minority.
    I guess it depends where you draw your line.

    if varjo VR1 is the equvalent to the 146inch samsung "Wall"
    and the cheapest windows MR HMD you can buy is the 32 inch HDReady set

    then i would argue oculus are going much closer to the bottom end than the top..... I would be happy somewhere in the middle ;)


    Oculus are not going to the bottom end they are catering for people who have a Geforce 1060 to 1080. Steam stats show that is what the majority of gamers are using, so why would they bring out a headset that requires a Geforce 2080Ti?

    The only sticking point is the Ipd, but nobody knows for sure if that is going to be a big problem for people outside of the range. On saying that the majority of people are within range though.
  • bigmike20vtbigmike20vt Posts: 4,085 Valuable Player
    edited April 16
    edmg said:

    This is just repeating the same old nonsense. The Rift was always capable of 360 tracking with a single sensor; something the Vive requires two lighthouses for.

    What it didn't originally have were motion controllers. Because they didn't want to ship with something as sucky as the Vive wands.

    The reality is that Oculus were going to do what they were going to do, and HTC just rushed out a second-rate headset because they wanted to beat Oculus to market.
    Do you have proof to back this up?
    as for the evidence to support what i am saying...
    even when touch launched, it only supported 2 senors for a number of months, and only supported front facing set ups. I believe had oculus had always have been planning on it tracking controllers a full 360 degrees then more would have been done to get 360 degree set up, and oculus would not have been so reticent to insist "unsupported", and then later "experimental" for the 360 degree.

    the vive may not be perfect, but neither is the rift, both have their plusses and minuses over each other and you coming out with stuff like the vive being second rate is i would say more nonsensical than anything I have ever said on here.

    As of today i believe the rift with 3 sensors can happily trade tracking blows with the vive.... but it does sadden me when people seem desperate to completely downplay any other headset.  it is the opposite side of the coin to those who are suggesting the rift s is rubbish.
    Fiat Coupe, gone. 350Z gone. Dirty nappies, no sleep & practical transport incoming. Thank goodness for VR :)
  • foldalefoldale Posts: 8
    NerveGear
    CrashFu said:
    Fortunately, I think the specs of Rift-S will be more than good enough for the large majority of people.

    But for the ones who think they absolutely NEED something "better"... I hope Oculus will either consider adding third-party headset support to Home in the near future, or continue being supportive of programs like Revive.

    'cause even high-spec tech snobs shouldn't have to miss out on the best content and community that VR has to offer. :kissing_heart:
    Nailed it (but without the shot a cross the bow of the high end users). Imo it's not a problem if Oculus can get official support for high end VR hmds but if they don't it really sucks for those happy to invest a little more into VR but realise that oculus still have the best software infrastructure

  • MradrMradr Posts: 3,549 Valuable Player
    edited April 16
    RedRizla said:
    @Mradr - Lets take televisions as an example. New televisions are about to be brought out and some will be 8k this time around. But whose going to buy them while they are ridiculously expensive? Even Oled and QLed television are expensive, so most people settle on purchasing a television that has just 4k. 

    Once these 8k television arrive oled & Qled 4k televisions will start to drop in price and the majority of people will then start to buy these televisions and not 8k televisions. So do you now see what Oculus is doing? They are catering for the majority and not the minority.
    I guess it depends where you draw your line.

    if varjo VR1 is the equvalent to the 146inch samsung "Wall"
    and the cheapest windows MR HMD you can buy is the 32 inch HDReady set

    then i would argue oculus are going much closer to the bottom end than the top..... I would be happy somewhere in the middle ;)

    Cool - yea this isnt a trick question - I just want to know where people would stand if the majority could run it - but in real world we are sort of hitting the limit of phone screen technology right now. I think Apple is maybe thinking about releasing a 6k screen - but sort of them - I haven't heard of anyone else doing that or having a need to as the pixels at that point are already too small to see and that increasing it past 4k is just a power waste. Thus if we don't have the backing of the phone market for these screens - that means cost for VR screens is going to increase over time if we wish to continue increasing our resolution.
  • foldalefoldale Posts: 8
    NerveGear
    Sadly for me (I would have gone with the S) is the lack of IPD support for my 58 IPD. I fly with about 8 VR pilots and 3 of us have an IPD lower than 60 :( 
  • bigmike20vtbigmike20vt Posts: 4,085 Valuable Player
    Mradr said:
    RedRizla said:
    @Mradr - Lets take televisions as an example. New televisions are about to be brought out and some will be 8k this time around. But whose going to buy them while they are ridiculously expensive? Even Oled and QLed television are expensive, so most people settle on purchasing a television that has just 4k. 

    Once these 8k television arrive oled & Qled 4k televisions will start to drop in price and the majority of people will then start to buy these televisions and not 8k televisions. So do you now see what Oculus is doing? They are catering for the majority and not the minority.
    I guess it depends where you draw your line.

    if varjo VR1 is the equvalent to the 146inch samsung "Wall"
    and the cheapest windows MR HMD you can buy is the 32 inch HDReady set

    then i would argue oculus are going much closer to the bottom end than the top..... I would be happy somewhere in the middle ;)

    Cool - yea this isnt a trick question - I just want to know where people would stand if the majority could run it - but in real world we are sort of hitting the limit of phone screen technology right now. I think Apple is maybe thinking about releasing a 6k screen - but sort of them - I haven't heard of anyone else doing that or having a need to as the pixels at that point are already too small to see and that increasing it past 4k is just a power waste. 
    well 1stly my comment was tongue firmly in cheek, but other than that, there is a law of diminishing returns anyway.

    I have a 75inch 1080p TV and a 65 inch 4k TV.  sure, the 65 inch is sharper and for TVs >60 inch there is definitely a use case for 4k

    but for those who sit 3m+ away from their 43inch telly, i would say an upgrade from 1080p to 4k is barely worth it and certainly not going beyond.  For VR it is a bit different tho....... and i will happily take what ever the engineers can give me :)

    remember just because a panel is what ever, lets say 4k, it does not mean you HAVE to output at that.

    i game now on my 4K TV at QHD and let my pc upscale and it looks fab.
    Fiat Coupe, gone. 350Z gone. Dirty nappies, no sleep & practical transport incoming. Thank goodness for VR :)
  • RedRizlaRedRizla Posts: 6,771 Valuable Player
    foldale said:
    Sadly for me (I would have gone with the S) is the lack of IPD support for my 58 IPD. I fly with about 8 VR pilots and 3 of us have an IPD lower than 60 :( 

    The Rift -S has a much better sweet spot then CV1, so I think you will be alright.
  • dburnedburne Posts: 2,850 Valuable Player
    Just the length of this thread and the debates is a good signal Oculus changing directions on PC-VR is having a pretty negative effect.
    Don

    EVGA Z390 Dark MB | I9 9900k| EVGA 2080Ti FTW3 Ultra |32 GB G Skill 3200 cl14 ram | Warthog Throttle | VKB Gunfighter Pro/MCG Pro grip | Crosswind Pedals | EVGA DG 87 Case| Rift S | Quest |
  • bigmike20vtbigmike20vt Posts: 4,085 Valuable Player
    to be fair we are hardly a representative bunch of the market oculus are trying to capture...... and even on this forum which must surely be biased towards people more likely to pay a bit more for VR we are split.
    Fiat Coupe, gone. 350Z gone. Dirty nappies, no sleep & practical transport incoming. Thank goodness for VR :)
  • RedRizlaRedRizla Posts: 6,771 Valuable Player
    to be fair we are hardly a representative bunch of the market oculus are trying to capture...... and even on this forum which must surely be biased towards people more likely to pay a bit more for VR we are split.

    How many people on this forum own a Geforce 2080Ti that can run higher resolution screens? I bet a majority of people with a Geforce 1080 or less would moan a bucket full, if Oculus released a headset that only Geforce 2080Ti users could use with games like SkyRim etc.
  • DaftnDirectDaftnDirect Posts: 5,279 Volunteer Moderator
    edited April 16
    Mradr said:
    @RedRizla @Zenbane @DaftnDirect
    Yes I know its theory crafting - but I like to get your thoughts - anyone can jump in - but going off the scale of hardware and the current reasoning that Oculus wants to keep it low price as possible for VR - 

    What if the 30s is more than powerful enough to run 6k at 80hz even go as far as to say they did get eye tracking working for the 20s and 10s cards to be supported, but the problem is that the 6k cost WAY too much even though the hardware could support it. Would your argument that keeping price low still be valid or should they try and push something a bit stronger out? I bring this up because scale of screen technology is going to hit a wall sooner than our GPUs or future improvements to VR will hit. Our biggest cost in a HMD is the screen(s). Eye tracking sort of resets FOV cost and a percent of resolution demand. With a time scale of 3 years - that be almost 2 generation of video cards depending on release dates. Personally - I dont think this question too wild of what might happen by then. 4k already a thing at around 80-144fps  - with 5k already hitting 30-45Hz - 2 more gen + software improvements along with eye tracking doesn't sound too far off to already be supporting 6k by then.
    Sorry, I missed this post.

    I think the premise if the question is slightly off in that I don't think Oculus are trying to keep it as low price as possible. I really think it's more nuanced than that and they are trying to strike a balance in making it a bit cheaper, a bit better and a bit more convenient in an attempt to attract as many as possible.

    Everything feeds into that... if GPUs become available that focus more on non-RT performance, that helps, if foveated rendering makes it more drivable that helps. If there was more software that helps a lot.

    In 3 years time, I think we'll have our choice of all these things... except software, unless more people between now and then get into VR.
    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 v1903 (18363.476)
  • bigmike20vtbigmike20vt Posts: 4,085 Valuable Player
    RedRizla said:
    How many people on this forum own a Geforce 2080Ti that can run higher resolution screens? I bet a majority of people with a Geforce 1080 or less would moan a bucket full, if Oculus released a headset that only Geforce 2080Ti users could use with games like SkyRim etc.
    extremes rarely hold the answer imo... there is a big difference between maintaining the minimum spec of the current 3 year old headset and making it so ONLY a £1000+ gpu is supported.

    again tho, the fix would be in software... i own a 4k tv but my heavily overclocked 1080ti cant play games at a level i am happy with at 4k so i output at QHD...... but the screen is there ready for when i upgrade.
    Fiat Coupe, gone. 350Z gone. Dirty nappies, no sleep & practical transport incoming. Thank goodness for VR :)
  • RedRizlaRedRizla Posts: 6,771 Valuable Player
    edited April 16
    @bigmike20vt - Adding 4K screens to the Rift -S would increase the price. Why not just wait until PC hardware and 4K screens are cheap enough and then make another Rift? That way the headset itself remains cheap enough for everyone.
  • bigmike20vtbigmike20vt Posts: 4,085 Valuable Player
    edited April 16
    <bangs head on table repeatedly> ;)

    I dont think anyone is asking for oculus not to release the rift S..... but it has certain design limitations which the CV1 does not have, 1 of which may well mean the rift S is not usable for some.

    All I (and others) are expressing disappointment in that oculus are not catering at all for those who have a bit more cash and are happy to pay a bit more, and for those who have IPDs for instance that the CV1 supports that RiftS doesnt (according to oculus) AS WELL AS the rift S. 3 years in technology is a long time to not progress much.

    btw your logic works for ever btw but at some point you too will have a more capable PC and want to stretch its legs. (otherwise we could all still be playing on xbox 360s and telling everyone that 540p 30fps is just fine.)
    be careful what you wish for is all i am saying.

    Fiat Coupe, gone. 350Z gone. Dirty nappies, no sleep & practical transport incoming. Thank goodness for VR :)
  • pyroth309pyroth309 Posts: 1,576 Valuable Player
    edited April 16
    CrashFu said:


    Most people cannot afford to drop $1400 on a PC and VR system one year and then replace it with a system twice as expensive only a couple years later!   If you're in a position to even consider doing that, then You. Are. Financially. Privileged. It has nothing to do with being "a real enthusiast" or not.



    The bs that is privilege which has risen in the last 10 years is nothing more than a means to attack and silence successful people out of jealousy. I came up from a poor family and grew up in a bad neighborhood. I didn't sit around and hate or be jealous of rich people. Instead, I refused to stay in that situation and outworked my peers and moved up and worked my way into a great paying job. I didn't have any benefits of nepotism or inheritance as my family were nobodies. All of my siblings remain poor because of bad choices including drug abuse. I used nothing but hard work and determination and my refusal to settle. Changing jobs like underwear when there was an opportunity for more money. I paid for my first car myself, paid for my college, and paid for my first house. So if that's privilege then sorry if you don't have the ability to be privileged but that's really not my fault, it's yours.

    Secondly, most middle class families blow a lot more than $1400 a year for entertainment. From buying nice cars/trucks, to eating out all the time, to ATV's, to boats to vacations to whatever. My point was, if something that is only a few thousand is important enough to you, you will find a way to acquire it even if you don't make a lot of money. Sacrificing elsewhere to buy a high end PC doesn't automatically mean you're rich. Even when making $8.00 an hour washing windows I still had a high end "Enthusiast" PC because it was important to me. I've eaten a LOT of ramen noodles and macaroni in my younger days.

    Obviously if you're in poverty things are different, or if you're a lower middle income family with more than 4 kids. In which case, you probably shouldn't be wasting time on gaming anyway as you likely have more important matters to deal with.

    Also, noone is suggesting that you have to upgrade your PC or VR headset every couple of years. Hell 3 years in on my PC and I have refused to buy a 2080TI thus far because performance per dollar is so bad. With that pricing it's not an enthusiast item, it's a luxury item. I have nothing against the Rift-S and understand the direction. Nvidia has poisoned the well a bit of VR. RTX came at the worst time so it makes sense get why Oculus punted. That said, it's not a product for me. Already own an Odyssey+ so the only thing it would offer me is better tracking and native access to Rift titles along with several negatives. Hopefully the Rift-S is a mainstream success because we do need better software and I will continue to buy all of the Oculus titles as support for their efforts.

  • snowdogsnowdog Posts: 7,150 Valuable Player
    Mradr said:
    RedRizla said:
    I'm sure in 3 years time when Nvidia drop their crazy prices for Graphics cards, then we will see Oculus create a headset for something like a Geforce 2080Ti, if there's a large amount of people using these cards.
    The thing is - the 20s cards are a short live card - by that - they release late meaning the 30s should be coming late this year or early next years dropping the prices and improving performance all while getting a shrink too on the node side. 

    The 21s should be next. The number went from 10s to 20s instead of 11s because of the new tech changing the cards from being GTX cards to being RTX cards.
    "This you have to understand. There's only one way to hurt a man who's lost everything. Give him back something broken."

    Thomas Covenant, Unbeliever
  • RedRizlaRedRizla Posts: 6,771 Valuable Player
    edited April 16
    <bangs head on table repeatedly> ;)

    I dont think anyone is asking for oculus not to release the rift S..... but it has certain design limitations which the CV1 does not have, 1 of which may well mean the rift S is not usable for some.

    All I (any others) are expressing dissapointment in that oculus are not catering at all for those who have a bit more cash and are happy to pay a bit more, and for those who have IPDs for instance that the CV1 supports that RiftS doesnt (according to oculus)

    Yeah, like the right audio on the CV1 going out wasn't a problem due to design of the CV1 ;)  

    I already agreed the ipd is a disappointment, but some of those with hands on with Rift S have said it wasn't much of a problem for some out of range ipd's. Maybe that's to do with the larger sweet spot in Rift -S, I don't know. I'm only going by what some of those with hands on have said. Until we get more feed back we will not know for sure what ipd range it affects the most.


  • snowdogsnowdog Posts: 7,150 Valuable Player
    Mradr said:
    @RedRizla @Zenbane @DaftnDirect
    Yes I know its theory crafting - but I like to get your thoughts - anyone can jump in - but going off the scale of hardware and the current reasoning that Oculus wants to keep it low price as possible for VR - 

    What if the 30s is more than powerful enough to run 6k at 80hz even go as far as to say they did get eye tracking working for the 20s and 10s cards to be supported, but the problem is that the 6k cost WAY too much even though the hardware could support it. Would your argument that keeping price low still be valid or should they try and push something a bit stronger out? I bring this up because scale of screen technology is going to hit a wall sooner than our GPUs or future improvements to VR will hit. Our biggest cost in a HMD is the screen(s). Eye tracking sort of resets FOV cost and a percent of resolution demand. With a time scale of 3 years - that be almost 2 generation of video cards depending on release dates. Personally - I dont think this question too wild of what might happen by then. 4k already a thing at around 80-144fps  - with 5k already hitting 30-45Hz - 2 more gen + software improvements along with eye tracking doesn't sound too far off to already be supporting 6k by then.

    By the time that 4K displays are used we'll see eye tracking and foveated rendering which SHOULD bring the new minimum spec PC being the current recommended spec PC.

    And we'll see other companies doing this before Oculus too, same as with motion controllers - but because Oculus won't have rushed their eye tracking to market it will be better, same as with the motion controllers.
    "This you have to understand. There's only one way to hurt a man who's lost everything. Give him back something broken."

    Thomas Covenant, Unbeliever
  • ZenbaneZenbane Posts: 14,619 Valuable Player
    Mradr said:
    @RedRizla @Zenbane @DaftnDirect
    Yes I know its theory crafting - but I like to get your thoughts - anyone can jump in - but going off the scale of hardware and the current reasoning that Oculus wants to keep it low price as possible for VR - 

    What if the 30s is more than powerful enough to run 6k at 80hz even go as far as to say they did get eye tracking working for the 20s and 10s cards to be supported, but the problem is that the 6k cost WAY too much even though the hardware could support it. Would your argument that keeping price low still be valid or should they try and push something a bit stronger out? I bring this up because scale of screen technology is going to hit a wall sooner than our GPUs or future improvements to VR will hit. Our biggest cost in a HMD is the screen(s). Eye tracking sort of resets FOV cost and a percent of resolution demand. With a time scale of 3 years - that be almost 2 generation of video cards depending on release dates. Personally - I dont think this question too wild of what might happen by then. 4k already a thing at around 80-144fps  - with 5k already hitting 30-45Hz - 2 more gen + software improvements along with eye tracking doesn't sound too far off to already be supporting 6k by then.
    Sorry, I missed this post.

    I think the premise if the question is slightly off in that I don't think Oculus are trying to keep it as low price as possible. I really think it's more nuanced than that and they are trying to strike a balance in making it a bit cheaper, a bit better and a bit more convenient in an attempt to attract as many as possible.

    Everything feeds into that... if GPUs become available that focus more on non-RT performance, that helps, if foveated rendering makes it more drivable that helps. If there was more software that helps a lot.

    In 3 years time, I think we'll have our choice of all these things... except software, unless more people between now and then get into VR.

    Good question, Mradr. And DnD said it best. +1 to his answer!
    :)
    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: 3,549 Valuable Player
    edited April 16
    RedRizla said:
    @bigmike20vt - Adding 4K screens to the Rift -S would increase the price. Why not just wait until PC hardware and 4K screens are cheap enough and then make another Rift? That way the headset itself remains cheap enough for everyone.
    Well going off my example - that might never become a thing. At some point we will hit a wall - to the price of screens would always stay high only going down in cost over time - far longer though than most would want to wait - for example - maybe it'll start with a 1 year, 3, 6, etc - we are already seeing that with Intel products. Remember, we wont have the backing of cell phones at some point to get these screens any cheaper. VR it self will have to create that demand.
  • inovatorinovator Posts: 2,114 Valuable Player
    One of the reasons I never got into pc pancake gaming was having to chase the upgrading to play games as they required the upgrading. I say lol when my son who always played pc gaming always complained how many developers were paid off to dumb down games not to look and play better than game consoles.(not all games but many) I think a lot of people feel the same way is why Oculus doesn't want to continue making people continue the PC Chase.
  • MradrMradr Posts: 3,549 Valuable Player
    edited April 16
    snowdog said:

    By the time that 4K displays are used we'll see eye tracking and foveated rendering which SHOULD bring the new minimum spec PC being the current recommended spec PC.

    And we'll see other companies doing this before Oculus too, same as with motion controllers - but because Oculus won't have rushed their eye tracking to market it will be better, same as with the motion controllers.
    Sorry I think you miss understand - its not about the spec - as I said the majority in that will have access to run 6k screens - the question is would keeping the price under 450 be valid when we hit the screen cost wall. Screen tech takes many years to advance forward let alone get cheap enough to a value anyone would want to pay. What do we do then? The hardware will be more than able to run it for the majority - but if it cost 400+ to even get one screen in - what happens then? Will we see delays each time as they try to advance it - but without the backing of cell phones - VR will have to do this instead. I say we are closer to the wall than we think as 6k screen was the last I hear anyone would be willing to even get to. For CV2 - if they do go 4k but follow the Rif S design they would need to source and get a 8k display in or  going back to 2 displays.
  • snowdogsnowdog Posts: 7,150 Valuable Player
    foldale said:
    Sadly for me (I would have gone with the S) is the lack of IPD support for my 58 IPD. I fly with about 8 VR pilots and 3 of us have an IPD lower than 60 :( 

    You might be okay with the Rift S. The software IPD has a range between 58mm and 72mm. People with both extremes of IPD have used the Rift S for an hour and not had any problems. Best to wait until it's out and you can try one at a shop before buying though I think.
    "This you have to understand. There's only one way to hurt a man who's lost everything. Give him back something broken."

    Thomas Covenant, Unbeliever
  • LZoltowskiLZoltowski Posts: 6,774 Volunteer Moderator
    I other news Quest pre-order was available for 1 minute on Amazon UK .. is gone now ;(
    Core i7-7700k @ 4.9 Ghz | 32 GB DDR4 Corsair Vengeance @ 3000Mhz | 2x 1TB Samsung Evo | 2x 4GB WD Black
    ASUS MAXIMUS IX HERO | MSI AERO GTX 1080 OC @ 2000Mhz | Corsair Carbide Series 400C White (RGB FTW!) 

    Be kind to one another :)
Sign In or Register to comment.