I was saying about the 4k screen in terms of not even being ready for that yet. 1080ti is just about a 4k60 card, we need another 50% for it to be 4k90. So, in terms of growth i am allowing for scaling to a large degree. Personally i would be happy with this. Play my older games at crisp 4k90, use upscaling for newer titles. Then in a year or two, i will be able to play most games at 4k90 (similar to now with 1080ti on rift). Then the next jump to 2x4k screens will be a 100% jump, with gpu's following the same trends of the last decade taking a good 4-5yrs to catch up. In GPU market, we have seen instances such as 4k monitors that needed far more gpu grunt then was available at the time of release. These did not speed up the progression of GPU's.
I am one of those people who are very sensitive to scaling. I agree that 1080 - 4k doesn't look as bad as others because of the linear scale, but it is still very noticeable to me and obvious without looking for it. I'm guessing if its obvious to me at the ppd of my monitor or tv, then it will be even more obvious at the relatively low ppd of the headset. Even with the scaling it will look superior to the current gen (thats why people are saying the upscaling looks great).
I also keep forgetting to say that i am looking at this from a purely gaming perspective. 4k-8k-16k will all be great upgrades that will be a lot easier to achieve for vr desktop use. But personally, i dont think i would even use it much for reading and browsing etc as i prefer to use my monitor in real life.
I am all for pushing forwards, and it's great to have competition. I am really sure the visuals in these headsets will be better than the current gen. But i am holding out, during the months before 8k x. Maybe there will be announcements of other headsets more suited to my preferences. I definitely want a new headset within a year. I want the pimax to be great, its about 6 months away during which i think we will hear about other headsets coming.
The 5k is more inline with what i think will give the overall better gaming experience for the next 1-2years. But i stepped back from it as i want more ppd upgrade. If it was 150-160 fov with higher ppd, i would've gambled (still other concerns such as software). In this case it's funny that i would have potentially backed a lower spec headset.
I guess my whole point is the 8k x is a step too far. Pushing forwards is great, i am 100000% for that. I am a tech head, need the latest and greatest. But sometimes pushing to far to quick can be a detriment. VR is still in it's infancy, lot's of outsiders don't really understand the need for high fps etc. Many when they finally jump in, will see 8k x pimax adverts etc, buy it then give vr a bad reputation because as "amazing" as it is they feel nausea etc... Stretching but maybe similar to 3d vision. Pushed into homes far to early, when LCD is clearly not fast enough. People bought in, gave 3d vision a bad rep for the ghosting etc. But use it on an OLED, my friends say that is not the 3d vision they remember, they would still be using it today.
It's not about not needing. I want it really bad. It's more one technology is far ahead of the other in this particular application. We are talking a jump of 6x the pixels, whilst gpu's have been progressing ~40% every 1.5-2yrs. In the monitor market it has taken a good few years for gpu's to overcome the jump from 1440p-4k@60hz. In vr we are shooting for 90hz, so even today the 1080ti is far being a 4k90hz card. 8K X is then taking this a step further, missing out a whole resolution generation. I feel Pimax may become a victim of their failed 4k and the need to market "8K". They are branding with resolution. Their usp. Ideally we are ready for a 4k headset with full tracking etc. But they already rode that train. They can't come back to market at 4K, so now its an "8K". The gpu market is very far from ready for this. I'm talking in terms of the next couple of years. No doubt we will all be using 16K headsets in the not so distant future, but in this instance it's a step too far for me. The 8K i see using upscaling from 4k res for 99% of people for the next 2years. This is a shame, as i think the better overall experience for the users will be using a native 4k screen.
I really like the idea of higher res screens, as do all of us. I want to be playing games 2x4k@90hz, and it seems that the screen and lens technology is not to far away. But i feel this res is overkill for today and tomorrows gpu's. I'm thinking its ~6x higher. Today most people will recommend a 1080ti to play most games with high settings and 90fps. On my 1080, there are games where i already feel i would like a better gpu. If the next ti is 1-1.5yr away, and is 40% faster. That is still nowhere near fast enough for the 8k X, plus as the years pass the games will be more demanding. How much faster will the 1280ti be in 3yrs time? My gut still says not enough gpu power for 2x4k@90hz native with the same kind of performance at current res and 1080. I'm thinking, personally an overall res the same as 4k is better balanced and will give the better overall experience. Being able to run games at native res for the next 1-2yr until we see the cv2, versus playing most games at 4k upscaled due to low fps. Upscaled can't look as good as native, and so the headset for the interim for me would have to be a more sensible resolution which can run a majority of games at native with todays gpu's. Then in a year or two, if gpu power has significantly risen and 2x4k seems more plausible then the cv2 will release... (16k eyetracked foveated )
My main reason for responding in these threads is i find it unfair for people to be told they have no basis to feel burned. I never said i deserve money back. I paid the price and was happy to do so. I am only saying i understand why people have a problem with it. Normally i take my past experience into consideration. Because it is extremely rare that hardware would lose half its value in 2 months after release. Now means i have lost value in my investment much quicker. Maybe part of my consideration was to sell at a later date?
"You've made the choice to buy it for the price that was given. End of story".... a little arrogant and not seeing my point. If your statement i quoted is indeed end of story why are there 1000's off people getting money given to them from oculus for nothing?
Anyways, i could be here all day trying to explain why things arent as black and white and that you are unfair with some of your accusations. Yes the 1080 and the oled and "i have everything" were worth the money/better value. They are not far from a year old and if i decided to sell them today after 1 years use. I'd still get more than 50% of what i paid. So my investment = Half paid price/year this is inline with my hardware purchases for many years. This is normal to me, and i have experience because i have "everything". To buy hardware at release and not be able to sell the item 2 months after release for maybe 1/3 the price i paid, is not value.