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

Developer? Click here to go to the Developer Forums.

The VARJO thread (please keep to subject)

kevinw729kevinw729 Posts: 4,909 Valuable Player
Just back from #AWE_EU_2019 - and had a chance to use the new VARJO VR2 Pro - the system comes with dedicated Enterprise support and even includes a built in Leap Motion platform. We tried the eye tracking, the hand tracking and liked the quality of the image. The 1:1 eye-resolution screen quality makes this a serious contender.

Here is a little coverage of the system:
https://varjo.com/products/vr-2-pro/

And some images from the show:


Other than the price any of the posters here consider having this?
P6ftmuw.jpg
** 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: 4,345 Valuable Player
    kevinw729 said:
    Other than the price any of the posters here consider having this?

    Content before hardware, if they make Lone Echo 3 a Varjo exclusive then we're talking ;)
    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: 4,909 Valuable Player
    RuneSR2 said:
    Content before hardware, if they make Lone Echo 3 a Varjo exclusive then we're talking ;)

    I am not a fan of the "walled Garden" - exclusive model for headsets, I can see the business proposal proffered by Sony, and OculusVR to do this, and that they feel it will generate a workable business model, but I think that hardware has to speak for itself - it feels akin to having only Netflix run on Samsung flat-screens!
    P6ftmuw.jpg
    ** 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
  • LuciferousLuciferous Posts: 2,247 Valuable Player
    Whats the FOV Kevin?
  • RuneSR2RuneSR2 Posts: 4,345 Valuable Player
    kevinw729 said:
    RuneSR2 said:
    Content before hardware, if they make Lone Echo 3 a Varjo exclusive then we're talking ;)

    I am not a fan of the "walled Garden" - exclusive model for headsets, I can see the business proposal proffered by Sony, and OculusVR to do this, and that they feel it will generate a workable business model, but I think that hardware has to speak for itself - it feels akin to having only Netflix run on Samsung flat-screens!

    Agreed, but comparing tracking and controllers (or lack of) Varjo will have to show superior solutions in other areas than just the HMD. I have a hard time seeing myself getting Varjo VR2 Pro than Index right now, even if the price was similar and same games and apps were available. Varjo would have to make controllers and tracking similar or better compared to Index controllers - or just old Touch. Not sure I'd accept less fov than Index provides too. 
    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: 4,909 Valuable Player
    Like Index, Pimax and the new DE VR headset - they all share the open-source Valve Lighthouse and controllers @RuneSR2 - this approach offers a chance for adoption, rather than building a walled garden.


    P6ftmuw.jpg
    ** 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: 4,909 Valuable Player
    Whats the FOV Kevin?

    FIELD OF VIEW

    87 degrees

    P6ftmuw.jpg
    ** 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
  • snowdogsnowdog Posts: 7,243 Valuable Player
    It also offers a VERY expensive headset if you don't already own a VR headset using Lighthouse tracking.

    It's the wrong approach for a headset manufacturer to take if they want to sell headsets.

    A VR headset needs to have decent lenses and displays, decent tracking, decent controllers and have a competitive price if you're going to release a successful one.
    "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
  • RuneSR2RuneSR2 Posts: 4,345 Valuable Player
    kevinw729 said:
    Like Index, Pimax and the new DE VR headset - they all share the open-source Valve Lighthouse and controllers @RuneSR2 - this approach offers a chance for adoption, rather than building a walled garden.


    If working with Knuckles, Varjo VR2 Pro could indeed be very interesting, but fov and especially the price would probably then be the main issues.
    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: 4,909 Valuable Player
    edited October 2019
    snowdog said:
    ....
    It's the wrong approach for a headset manufacturer to take if they want to sell headsets.
    ....

    Interesting view - was it not Carmack, that stated that VR would not take-off before we had 1:1 resolution with the human eye?

    Sorry, I know you want both cost reduction, but also offer strong performance. - I am not sure that the performance needs for the next phase of VR are going to come from a 3-year-old Qualcomm 835 Snapdraogn mobile phone platform!
    P6ftmuw.jpg
    ** 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
  • kojackkojack Posts: 5,949 Volunteer Moderator
    It's certainly interesting.
    Although SteamVR games will miss out on the biggest feature: the dual res (effectively fixed foveated) screens. The Varjo headsets have a small high res screen (the focus screen) in the centre, on top of a larger low res screen (the context screen). But according to Varjo only their native sdk supports the screens having independent res, SteamVR can't do it so just shows one res.
    The larger context screens are the same res as a Quest, it's the small focus screens that give you the extra high res.
    RoadToVR:
    Varjo clarified that only its native API currently supports independent resolution rendering of the high density focus display and the lower density context display, while SteamVR content only supports a single resolution.


    AMD GPU owners are out of luck, only Nvidia GPUs support the Varjo.

    The non pro model doesn't have the leap motion built in, but does still have eye tracking. The non pro also comes with a 5m cable instead of 10m.


    $5000 for the cheapest model with no leap motion hand tracking, then buy a full Lighthouse setup (Varjo recommend 4 light house base stations), then $800 per year support fee, and you get a headset where the majority of software can't use it's dual res screens.


    My main concern would be how obvious the split between the overlapped screens is. Is it obvious in general use that there is a 1920x1080 region inside of a larger 1440x1600 screen? That kind of thing would annoy me if it was obvious.
  • snowdogsnowdog Posts: 7,243 Valuable Player
    edited October 2019
    kevinw729 said:
    snowdog said:
    ....
    It's the wrong approach for a headset manufacturer to take if they want to sell headsets.
    ....

    Interesting view - was it not Carmack, that stated that VR would not take-off before we had 1:1 resolution with the human eye?

    Sorry, I know you want both cost reduction, but also offer strong performance. - I am not sure that the performance needs for the next phase of VR are going to come from a 3-year-old Qualcomm 835 Snapdraogn mobile phone platform!

    What's that first paragraph got to do with the price of chips? That sort of hardware is WAY into the future.

    Oculus will end up having cost AND performance when the Rift 2 and Quest 2 are released, and don't be surprised if the Quest 2 is $100 cheaper than the Rift 2 as well thanks to not having the varifocal feature and having fast-switch LCDs.

    I did originally say that the Rifg 2 would be at $600 when it launched but I think now that they've made those changes we could be looking at $400 and Oculus breaking even.

    My point was that hardly ANYONE will buy one at that price, it's d00med to failure. You won't even find businesses buying that many.
    "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
  • kevinw729kevinw729 Posts: 4,909 Valuable Player
    As always @snowdog - thanks for sharing your views.
    I think we are at a point of the three phases of VR - the hope that consumer can have good adoption. The need of Enterprise to have the best immersive tech, and finally - location-based entertainments' drive to generate a new VR environment. 

    P6ftmuw.jpg
    ** 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
  • MorgrumMorgrum Posts: 1,666 Valuable Player
    Its nice and has cool options but that price yeesh.
    Were still looking at a good 5-7 years before wide fov+ options + res comes along and thats only if we have the vid cards to push em.

    Still heres to the future and hopefully more companies throwing their hats in the ring means faster inovation.

    I honestly see Oculus going the Nintendo approach to VR where other compainies are trying the playstation route.

    Both ways make money qual software has kept Nintwndo alive and well where PS keeps bleeding edge gamers happy.
    WAAAGH!
  • MradrMradr Posts: 3,564 Valuable Player
    edited October 2019
    snowdog said:

    What's that first paragraph got to do with the price of chips? That sort of hardware is WAY into the future.

    Oculus will end up having cost AND performance when the Rift 2 and Quest 2 are released, and don't be surprised if the Quest 2 is $100 cheaper than the Rift 2 as well thanks to not having the varifocal feature and having fast-switch LCDs.

    I did originally say that the Rifg 2 would be at $600 when it launched but I think now that they've made those changes we could be looking at $400 and Oculus breaking even.

    My point was that hardly ANYONE will buy one at that price, it's d00med to failure. You won't even find businesses buying that many.
    But they already said - it wont be coming out for a while ~ that was the big point of last OC. Moving forward - they are most likely going to double down on the idea of added CPU chip/pocket PC or doubling up on moving forward with Quest with more added bandwidth to support the PC vs a headset only design for PC. 

    I agree this headset is for the future - but at the same time - it's a "now" technology for business that need something like this. Granted the price is out there for customers - but again - that isnt a customer price same as CAD cards are not really design for gaming. Can it? Yea, but you are blowing a ton of money to do so.

    Not sure what the future for Rift 2 is - but whatever it is - I dont think Quest will be left out. Whatever technology will land for Rift S 2 will be found in Quest 2 unless they change their price to market stance for PCVR owners. Remember, whatever a game devs releases - it'll have to be able to support both versions of the headsets. If one headset has a feature that the other doesn't have - then that is going to cause problems for customers and they want to keep it as simple as possible. For this very reason - HD may never come to PCVR first - but broken up into segments for release instead aka another Rift S 2/Quest 2.

    At beast - they might try the whole PC Pocket idea and allow upgrade ability - thus allowing more technology to be push into the headset it self and splitting the cost away for the mobile half if you wish to "upgrade" or "use" that. I don't see t his really moving forward well because that also breaks over all cost they are trying to hit - but they may if they release a stander and a pro version. Thus - I think the days of seeing leaps in PCVR is over and a more slow growth for mass adoption is in the works instead.
  • snowdogsnowdog Posts: 7,243 Valuable Player
    Mradr said:
    snowdog said:

    What's that first paragraph got to do with the price of chips? That sort of hardware is WAY into the future.

    Oculus will end up having cost AND performance when the Rift 2 and Quest 2 are released, and don't be surprised if the Quest 2 is $100 cheaper than the Rift 2 as well thanks to not having the varifocal feature and having fast-switch LCDs.

    I did originally say that the Rifg 2 would be at $600 when it launched but I think now that they've made those changes we could be looking at $400 and Oculus breaking even.

    My point was that hardly ANYONE will buy one at that price, it's d00med to failure. You won't even find businesses buying that many.
    But they already said - it wont be coming out for a while ~ that was the big point of last OC. Moving forward - they are most likely going to double down on the idea of added CPU chip/pocket PC or doubling up on moving forward with Quest with more added bandwidth to support the PC vs a headset only design for PC. 

    I agree this headset is for the future - but at the same time - it's a "now" technology for business that need something like this. Granted the price is out there for customers - but again - that isnt a customer price same as CAD cards are not really design for gaming. Can it? Yea, but you are blowing a ton of money to do so.

    Not sure what the future for Rift 2 is - but whatever it is - I dont think Quest will be left out. Whatever technology will land for Rift S 2 will be found in Quest 2 unless they change their price to market stance for PCVR owners. Remember, whatever a game devs releases - it'll have to be able to support both versions of the headsets. If one headset has a feature that the other doesn't have - then that is going to cause problems for customers and they want to keep it as simple as possible. For this very reason - HD may never come to PCVR first - but broken up into segments for release instead aka another Rift S 2/Quest 2.

    At beast - they might try the whole PC Pocket idea and allow upgrade ability - thus allowing more technology to be push into the headset it self and splitting the cost away for the mobile half if you wish to "upgrade" or "use" that. I don't see t his really moving forward well because that also breaks over all cost they are trying to hit - but they may if they release a stander and a pro version. Thus - I think the days of seeing leaps in PCVR is over and a more slow growth for mass adoption is in the works instead.

    Adding the mobile hardware into the Half Dome is all fine and dandy...until you start to consider the room needed inside the headset for heatsink and fans.

    The Quest 2 will end up having eye tracking and foveated rendering but won't have the varifocal feature. You've also got to consider the cost of the thing too.

    By the time 2022 comes along we'll see the Rift 2 being £399 and the Quest 2 being £299.
    "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
  • MradrMradr Posts: 3,564 Valuable Player
    edited October 2019
    snowdog said:

    Adding the mobile hardware into the Half Dome is all fine and dandy...until you start to consider the room needed inside the headset for heatsink and fans.

    The Quest 2 will end up having eye tracking and foveated rendering but won't have the varifocal feature. You've also got to consider the cost of the thing too.

    By the time 2022 comes along we'll see the Rift 2 being £399 and the Quest 2 being £299.
    That’s the whole point of the pocket pc in that it is move away from the front half and place some where else removing the space issue. Thus you can ignore space as being the issue. As for a pocket pc I mean it still use mobile hardware, but could be deattach and reattach later down the road as needed. Wouldn’t need to be any larger than the fan needed to cool it. I mean even if they don’t go down that route, the can still move it around like to the back of the headset. I mean Oculus already shown it can make the impossible happen so I wouldn’t put it past them to be able to really add it in.

    I don’t think they can split it up like that. Aka, if one headset has the feature, the other will too. So might not see veritable focus in either in this case because both of a cost reason and to keep it simple between the two while offering a headset that can maybe do both in one shot or add mobile to improve it. Its like the whole you have 5 quarters, pennys, dimes, and nickels - with said coins - make a total value of 55 cents. Lots of ways to get to it with different count values. Thus - lots of ways for them to do the same for hardware value - but still limited to that 55 cap (399) and that is what we will see. Um, I mean look at Quest and Rift S - if Rift S didn't have the mobile hardware - why was there little little differences vs major differences?

    I know we still want them to keep supporting PCVR on a different level, but I don’t think now they need to. I don’t mean they will stop supporting PCVR or not offer a headset for it, but more in like of slower growth and trying to keep prices down. Why make a PCVR headset when you could make one headset that can do all of it + have a bag of chips. Granted - what we will see is a pro and basic version instead. Both Quest 2 - but offering different level of hardware instead while having access to both mobile and PC. More bandwidth is coming from USB4 and wifi 6. Then there is the whole 5G network thing coming along as well. Over all - it still will need some help to really push over a cable - but over all - I think they might be able to pull it off and be 99% of what it be like to be connected to a PC over an HDMI cable over USB like cable.
  • kevinw729kevinw729 Posts: 4,909 Valuable Player
    edited October 2019
    So are you saying @snowdog - you think HD will be the Rift2 path, and Quest2 would just be a wireless update of the current hardware?

    I have to agree with @Mradr - I do not think we will see a selection, but a conjoined platform solution from this point on. I expect to see a AR/VR platform for 2022 that combines the pass-through / AR work and the HalfDome / Quest line. 

    As we stated some time back CV2 is not going to be a thing, but the HD and Quest line is the future direction, with AR thrown in to spread the investment.

    Now with the HTC Focus Plus news regarding their new FocusLink 5G VR streaming capability (without the need for a cable) things are definitely heating up - we wait to see if Samsung and Sony will add their weight to this move.  

    P6ftmuw.jpg
    ** 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
  • LuciferousLuciferous Posts: 2,247 Valuable Player
    edited October 2019
    87 is pretty poor no matter how clear the display is. Complete immersion killer. I have no doubt that it is also the max FOV and in reality it is probably less. I was also pretty disappointed when Oculus said they had reduced the half dome prototype FOV. 


  • MradrMradr Posts: 3,564 Valuable Player
    87 is pretty poor no matter how clear the display is. Complete immersion killer. I have no doubt that it is also the max FOV and in reality it is probably less. I was also pretty disappointed when Oculus said they had reduced the half dome prototype FOV. 


    These headsets are not really about immersion - but more about how to train users on a task or looking at fine details. More or less you wouldn't need that much FOV to see that. Aka, its a bit of moot point to complain about the FOV when it's not about immersion/gaming. 
  • kevinw729kevinw729 Posts: 4,909 Valuable Player
    That is a really excellent point @Mradr - the difference between immersive-training and just general VR deployment are considerable. The Enterprise sector has continued to use "Head-Mounted-Displays" long after the crash of the first phase of adoption of VR. And unlike the hype filled "Top-Trumps" spec run-down that most VR forums descended into, the Enterprise Vis-Sim sector look for quality of image for training and performance. FOV and compact size are issues that are secondary. The current situation with StarVR and the VRgineer platforms aside, the VR-2 is shaping up to be a very suitable Vis-Sim and immersive CAD platform - while the consumer VR community will poke holes at price and FOV. I worry that at some point the consumer VR forums may wake up to the situation that the caravan has moved on, and their "needs" may not be relevant. 
    P6ftmuw.jpg
    ** 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
  • Hiro_Protag0nistHiro_Protag0nist Posts: 4,879 Valuable Player
    I tried the first Varjo headset earlier this year (first production, not a dev kit) and yes, was quite blown away (only seeing 2 demos), especially by the eye tracking which was pin-point and just 20 seconds to calibrate!  

    Stepping away from gaming, the headsets i recommend these days are the Rift S and Samsung Odyssey + - the reason is ease of use, controllers and image quality (price?  yes, probably)  
    Price wouldn't matter if i believed the users needed something that the Varjo had and the others didn't but the software i and others use just don't need that resolution.

    Inside out tracking is so much easier than the external sensors - ok, if it is just the one setup that's fine but many people are taking VR on the road.

    My one item on the wish list these days is larger FOV, so 87 doesn't cut it.  It's all a balancing act at the moment.
  • LuciferousLuciferous Posts: 2,247 Valuable Player
    edited October 2019
    Mradr said:
    87 is pretty poor no matter how clear the display is. Complete immersion killer. I have no doubt that it is also the max FOV and in reality it is probably less. I was also pretty disappointed when Oculus said they had reduced the half dome prototype FOV. 


    These headsets are not really about immersion - but more about how to train users on a task or looking at fine details. More or less you wouldn't need that much FOV to see that. Aka, its a bit of moot point to complain about the FOV when it's not about immersion/gaming. 
    No it's not a moot point, if you read Kevin's intro he asks, would we be interested in using this headset despite the price. Hence I said no the FOV sucks.

    So it was not that great a point with regard to my response but I am sure if anybody had commented on the importance of immersion in the VR commercial world it would have been very profound.

  • kojackkojack Posts: 5,949 Volunteer Moderator
    RuneSR2 said:
    kevinw729 said:
    Like Index, Pimax and the new DE VR headset - they all share the open-source Valve Lighthouse and controllers @RuneSR2 - this approach offers a chance for adoption, rather than building a walled garden.


    If working with Knuckles, Varjo VR2 Pro could indeed be very interesting, but fov and especially the price would probably then be the main issues.
    Well, since the Varjo doesn't support it's key feature (dual res overlapped screens for 60ppd) when using steamvr, how well does their proprietary sdk (needed for the screens to run their best) support knuckles? Does their sdk replace all of steamvr or only the rendering part of it? Do you need a hybrid of steamvr input and varjo sdk rendering?


  • hoppingbunny123hoppingbunny123 Posts: 713
    Trinity
    idk about buying it but if i had the option of renting one if i bought my own faceplate for an addition 50 cad on top of the rental fee i would like to play with it for a day for 100 bucks. maybe 75 cad. add in shipping looking at 200 bucks to rent it for a day. yolo.
  • RedRizlaRedRizla Posts: 6,869 Valuable Player
    edited October 2019
    I'm just glad HP Reverb came along and saved the day for those people wanting the best image quality ever. It blows the rest of the competition out of the water in this regard. I'm seeing an image that Oculus HTC and Valve won't see for years to come. Then maybe when that day come - HP will save the day again and double the resolution of a HP Reverb+ :D
    I feel I'm light years into the future from a Rift S with the HP Reverb's resolution. I'm even going to buy another one soon just in case HP decide to shelve them at any point in the near future.
  • RuneSR2RuneSR2 Posts: 4,345 Valuable Player
    RedRizla said:
    I'm just glad HP Reverb came along and saved the day for those people wanting the best image quality ever. It blows the rest of the competition out of the water in this regard. I'm seeing an image that Oculus HTC and Valve won't see for years to come. Then maybe when that day come - HP will save the day again and double the resolution of a HP Reverb+ :D
    I feel I'm light years into the future from a Rift S with the HP Reverb's resolution. I'm even going to buy another one soon just in case HP decide to shelve them at any point in the near future.

    Those are good points - I guess a new HMD with higher res than Reverb should provide some new tech to lower hardware requirements compared to the Reverb - or at least offer much better tracking and controllers. But Reverb with 4K res for just $500 is probably very hard to trounce...   
    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"
  • MradrMradr Posts: 3,564 Valuable Player
    edited October 2019
    Mradr said:
    87 is pretty poor no matter how clear the display is. Complete immersion killer. I have no doubt that it is also the max FOV and in reality it is probably less. I was also pretty disappointed when Oculus said they had reduced the half dome prototype FOV. 


    These headsets are not really about immersion - but more about how to train users on a task or looking at fine details. More or less you wouldn't need that much FOV to see that. Aka, its a bit of moot point to complain about the FOV when it's not about immersion/gaming. 
    No it's not a moot point, if you read Kevin's intro he asks, would we be interested in using this headset despite the price. Hence I said no the FOV sucks.

    So it was not that great a point with regard to my response but I am sure if anybody had commented on the importance of immersion in the VR commercial world it would have been very profound.

    Oh sorry. Hmm, but most users here are gammers rather than CAD programmers or software training users. If we look at it from its real audience (witch is what I thought Kevin was meaning) then have to break it down. FOV unless it's super small - its a bit of a moot point from that view. It's actually around the same FOV as one of the first DK units. Over all CAD just want to make sure what they are looking at works and rather have more detail than FOV to they can see how something reacts or looks. After that - I would have to look at how to make it work type thing. Having to use their SDK seems like I would have to custom create software to use it and that might be the first problem. It cost a ton to make apps/programs so that would be out of the question for a lot of users that might want to use it with their CAD software if it doesn't support it nativity. Then there is the price. The price really isn't that high - but this added "support" fee seems a bit silly. Like being nickle and dime for little reason. Granted, I know why they do it - but the customer already bought your product - not like you really offer much more support after that. Then there are the features it does support. such as higher clearity and eye tracking. This would be useful for like training on the human body and/or areas of research where we need clear idea in what we are looking at. 

    So, while I dont think it be for everyone - I can still see a need for this type of device in the future or for fields that really need the best of the best. For gamers - this is is a bit of a moot point in looking at this headset because of price alone - but just over all it doesn't support the software we would need it to support in the first place. On the other hand, if you are into the medical field and trying to perform a surgery over xxxx distant away using VR - you would want the HIGHEST clarity you can get with eye tracking supporting you as you work. More or less this headset is for primary CAD though for now. They wont be Oculus size - but they might be able to swim around the enterpise pool long as they keep their niche reason to keep around.

    Short of the problems of the other companies - I do wonder how Enterprise only headsets will be able to continue to keep growing in. There is money there - but can't be that much of a pool to really be that amazing in without dipping toes into the customer market at some point. Once the perfect Enterprise headset comes along that check marks all the boxes - it'll be a hard sell for other headsets I would assume. This headset markets the final boxes for clarity and eye tracking. A few more boxes and I am sure it'll be the go to Enterprise headset. On the other hand, you do have the Pimax coming up behind that with boxers check for FOV and soon eye tracking as well with only being limited to hardware that could run higher res screens just needing to scale with the technology.
  • remi_arnaudremi_arnaud Posts: 1 Oculus Start Member
    RuneSR2 said:
    Varjo would have to make controllers and tracking similar or better compared to Index controllers..
    Varjo VR2 is compatible with Index controllers; it is using LH tracking. 
  • RuneSR2RuneSR2 Posts: 4,345 Valuable Player
    edited October 2019
    RuneSR2 said:
    Varjo would have to make controllers and tracking similar or better compared to Index controllers..
    Varjo VR2 is compatible with Index controllers; it is using LH tracking. 
    Admitted, this does look incredible:

    Vive Pro:


    Varjo VR2 Pro:


    - and I do like the design:


    SteamVR compatibility is great, but $5K will be way too expensive for most enthusiasts - even if you can play Half-Life VR in "retina res". Eye relief would probably be important for immersion, 87 degrees fov does sound as too small - especially when used to the Index (or Pimax). 
    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: 4,909 Valuable Player
    The more that I think about this platform, the more I think this could be the perfect 2.0 headset for the Out-of-Home entertainment sector - as it would offer a "unachievable @ home" platform, that the majority of consumer VR users would never get to experience. 
    P6ftmuw.jpg
    ** 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
Sign In or Register to comment.