cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

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

bigmike20vt
Visionary
https://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=3&hl=de&nv=1&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=...

Pretty bleak reading imo excuse long link Google shortener not working on it
Fiat Coupe, gone. 350Z gone. Dirty nappies, no sleep & practical transport incoming. Thank goodness for VR 🙂
401 REPLIES 401

pyroth309
Visionary

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.

Anonymous
Not applicable

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.

RedRizla
Honored Visionary


<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.


Anonymous
Not applicable

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.

Zenbane
MVP
MVP



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!
🙂

Anonymous
Not applicable

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.

inovator
Consultant
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.

Anonymous
Not applicable

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.

Anonymous
Not applicable

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.

LZoltowski
Champion
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 🙂