07-25-2020 03:47 AM
07-25-2020 08:12 AM
07-25-2020 08:57 AM
07-25-2020 09:04 AM
RuneSR2 said:I think most agree that VR is awesome - so why doesn't it sell to the masses?
07-25-2020 09:17 AM
RedRizla said:
RuneSR2 said:I think most agree that VR is awesome - so why doesn't it sell to the masses?
I think there's a simple answer to that Question. You have to cater for a very large amount of people if you want to sell something to a large amount of people. A cheap Oculus Quest might sell to a large amount of people, but look what happened to a cheap VR Headset like the Oculus GO and to the cheap WMR VR headsets. They just didn't get very far unless I'm mistaken.This is just my opinion and it's just looking at the PC -VR side of things and not standalone VR. I think people have got too used to playing on anything from a 1080p monitor to a 4k monitor. I'm usually always asked the question when people have tried my Oculus CV1 VR headset -Why it so blurry? I have now made a habit of showing them the HP Reverb after showing the Oculus CV1 and they tell me how much better it looks.I think once VR doesn't look like it's a step back from a at-least a 1080p monitor that's when more PC users will buy into PC -VR. Lets see what happens with the HP G2 with it's higher resolution displays. Lets see if it makes a difference to the PC market because the only way to tell if some of this is about visuals.I do think it's a great idea for Oculus Facebook to also try and keep getting more people into VR with a cheap standalone VR headset and I hope it does well. Nobody knows the resolution of this new standalone headset yet either.
07-25-2020 10:02 AM
inovator said:
RedRizla said:
RuneSR2 said:I think most agree that VR is awesome - so why doesn't it sell to the masses?
I think there's a simple answer to that Question. You have to cater for a very large amount of people if you want to sell something to a large amount of people. A cheap Oculus Quest might sell to a large amount of people, but look what happened to a cheap VR Headset like the Oculus GO and to the cheap WMR VR headsets. They just didn't get very far unless I'm mistaken.This is just my opinion and it's just looking at the PC -VR side of things and not standalone VR. I think people have got too used to playing on anything from a 1080p monitor to a 4k monitor. I'm usually always asked the question when people have tried my Oculus CV1 VR headset -Why it so blurry? I have now made a habit of showing them the HP Reverb after showing the Oculus CV1 and they tell me how much better it looks.I think once VR doesn't look like it's a step back from a at-least a 1080p monitor that's when more PC users will buy into PC -VR. Lets see what happens with the HP G2 with it's higher resolution displays. Lets see if it makes a difference to the PC market because the only way to tell if some of this is about visuals.I do think it's a great idea for Oculus Facebook to also try and keep getting more people into VR with a cheap standalone VR headset and I hope it does well. Nobody knows the resolution of this new standalone headset yet either.
I think in addition to content you need what you mentioned very clear visuals and I also feel a much lighter headset is needed for the masses. Headsets are still very big and bulky for the masses to accept in my opinion.
07-25-2020 11:19 AM
i7 8700, 16GB, RTX 2080 TI, Rift CV1 | i5 4690K, 16GB, GTX 1660 TI, Rift CV1 | Quest | Quest 2
07-25-2020 11:24 AM
Nunyabinez said:I'm fairly confident that Oculus is done with "Pure PCVR" headsets. Whatever they come out with will be a standalone/PC hybrid
I have been saying that as well that any high end will be a hybrid.
07-25-2020 11:47 AM
kevinw729 said:
RuneSR2 said:
...
I'm sure it won't. To be frank, I have no idea if Oculus is going to focus on high-end PCVR for a long time - it certainly isn't my impression, but seems that Oculus likes to surprise us now and then. Also HP and Valve have set the bar rather high if Oculus wants to deliver a high-end solution priced below the Index......
Let's all blame Nvidia and AMD for being too slow! B)
Ha. yeah - blaming things is tight!
Seriously, I think the progression in these areas have been amazing, and the reason HP and Valve can benefit from a educated market is down to much of what HTC and Oculus (and Sony) achieved first. I will not blame Lenovo - but am looking forward to their new high-end VR system with Varjo (which some still seem to be brushing under the carpet as not relevant).
Its nice to see HP and Valve getting credit for pushing the bar so high - I noticed a trend in some postings to try and dismiss the high-end VR scene, and always trying to shoehorn Rift-S into these discussions. The Rift-S is a great little low-end headset at a price point that was deemed needed. But trying to claim its comparable to the new phase of high-end dev is a little blinkered.
I agree, Oculus liked their surprises, and hopefully the remaining management still carry over this ethos. It would be nice to see a brand new Rift (CV1) replacement with powerful performance launched next year as some have foretold - but I remember how long it took to see the replacement to the CV1, and we know how that turned out in reality (against the promised speculation).
07-25-2020 12:51 PM
snowdog said:
kevinw729 said:
RuneSR2 said:
...
I'm sure it won't. To be frank, I have no idea if Oculus is going to focus on high-end PCVR for a long time - it certainly isn't my impression, but seems that Oculus likes to surprise us now and then. Also HP and Valve have set the bar rather high if Oculus wants to deliver a high-end solution priced below the Index......
Let's all blame Nvidia and AMD for being too slow! B)
Ha. yeah - blaming things is tight!
Seriously, I think the progression in these areas have been amazing, and the reason HP and Valve can benefit from a educated market is down to much of what HTC and Oculus (and Sony) achieved first. I will not blame Lenovo - but am looking forward to their new high-end VR system with Varjo (which some still seem to be brushing under the carpet as not relevant).
Its nice to see HP and Valve getting credit for pushing the bar so high - I noticed a trend in some postings to try and dismiss the high-end VR scene, and always trying to shoehorn Rift-S into these discussions. The Rift-S is a great little low-end headset at a price point that was deemed needed. But trying to claim its comparable to the new phase of high-end dev is a little blinkered.
I agree, Oculus liked their surprises, and hopefully the remaining management still carry over this ethos. It would be nice to see a brand new Rift (CV1) replacement with powerful performance launched next year as some have foretold - but I remember how long it took to see the replacement to the CV1, and we know how that turned out in reality (against the promised speculation).
There REALLY isn't a great deal of difference between the Rift S and the Valve Index in terms of resolution. You're looking at a 1440p headset compared to a 1600p headset.
The major difference is the refresh rate and controllers, but how many people out there have a PC capable of powering a 1600p headset at 120Hz? Not many.
Which leaves the controllers. For those coming from previously using the Rift there really isn't THAT much difference either because the Touch controllers have had finger tracking for YEARS.
The Rift S is a high-end headset, particularly when you consider that you can supersample just as much as you can with the Rift at a higher resolution thanks to Oculus' decision regarding the refresh rate of the display.
Is it AS high end as the Index or G2? No, of course not. But it's still a high end PC VR headset.
07-25-2020 01:11 PM