CV1 and Touch Reviewed by Tested

[scottycam]

Just came out, it is long but they always do very good in-depth reviews.

[VizionVR]

Thank you for posting!
I can't watch it right now so NO SPOILERS! :lol:

[Sharpfish]

Been waiting for this one. Off to watch.... :mrgreen:

[scottycam]

I just finished watching it. As always it was the best coverage of the CV1 and Touch so far.

CV1 looks great, I am really excited for the Touch though. 6+ months can't come fast enough.

[RonsonPL]

OK, then I'm not even 10 minutes into the video and....

"distance from your eyes change the FOV.
Obviously if you wear glasses you'll have less than 100°"

I turned the video off.
I lost the will to watch the rest. 😞
The same rule - if they didn't talk about something, then when they finally do talk - it's bad news.
I don't want more bad news. It's just as I feared - the new lenses aren't "magic". "You have glasses? Then f.. you!".
DK2 smaller (A vs. B lenses) FOV is absolutely UNACCEPTABLE, and that's what I would get if I bought CV1 :cry:
Up until now I thought it's DK1 like, so at least with glasses I won't get the same borders as DK2 set to smaller FOV.

[frankzappa]

"RonsonPL" wrote:
OK, then I'm not even 10 minutes into the video and....

"distance from your eyes change the FOV. Obviously if you wear glasses you'll have less than 100°"

I turned the video off.
I lost the will to watch the rest. 😞
The same rule - if they didn't talk about something, then when they finally do talk - it's bad news.
I don't want more bad news. It's just as I feared - the new lenses aren't "magic". "You have glasses? Then f.. you!".
DK2 smaller (A vs. B lenses) FOV is absolutely UNACCEPTABLE. :cry:

He said the FOV is bigger than DK2. It's more than 100 degrees.

I think you should watch the rest. They seem really excited. Also, you should test it before making a judgment. All you know is a number.

[RonsonPL]

frankzappa

As I said - there are two FOV numbers for DK2. You have two types of lenses, you adjust the distance between the displays and your eyes. Guess which one of those will any marketing/PR guy choose when talking about CV1...

For me in DK2 it was:
- bigger: way too small, but (barely) acceptable
- smaller: imersion breaking, unacceptable. Any brighter scene and I was looking through some box instead of "being there".
It should've been 120+° but less than a 100? Sounds like a really bad joke.

[Sharpfish]

Tested give us the goods once more and all the details. Best video out there on CV1.

They asked some great questions, and in fairness to Palmer and Nate they answered them well. Palmer raised a few points about input that made sense, and now in some ways I can even see why not bundling touch may be a good thing (not that I think a gamepad is great but it does start us off on a level playing field with a 'worse case scenario' while leaving the future open to iteration and improvements).

Camera does seem vastly improved re Tracking volume, the spring system on the HMD to pull back on the face is a good idea of fast on/off (my main ergonomics complaint about DK2 was how fiddly it was to put on / off fast).

The screens move along with the lenses (partially the reason for 2 screens) during ipd adjustment, seems a no brainer with hindsight, and I continue to be impressed by the touch controllers.

I guess you could say I'm re-excited by the rift for sure now we actually have real details.

As for tech stuff like FOV, Res and the rest... well I see that more as the times we live in right now and a polished product is better than an unpolished higher spec thing. Naturally in time things like resolution, FPS and FOV will improve as tech gets better but getting the basics of ergonomics and input was probably more vital right now. DK2 may not have been amazing FOV but I honestly can't say it killed VR for me, I just ignored it after noting it and focussed on the scene. More would be better but that'll come in time.

Also nate did say at least a bit more than DK2, I don't wear glasses so maybe selfishly that'll do me for now as I can get closer (though bear in mind the closer you got in DK2 the more you saw the straight edges of the screen rather than the rounded edges of the lens so those that have to pull back a bit may not have it all that bad either).

And there's always a hope they are holding back a bit of extra FOV for CV1 final... but don't wish to say it just yet because it would give Valve a chance to match/beat them. Of course this may just be wishful thinking but - yeah the real Oculus Rift is almost here after all this time.

[gabrielinc]

"RonsonPL" wrote:
OK, then I'm not even 10 minutes into the video and....

"distance from your eyes change the FOV.
Obviously if you wear glasses you'll have less than 100°"

I turned the video off.
I lost the will to watch the rest. 😞
The same rule - if they didn't talk about something, then when they finally do talk - it's bad news.
I don't want more bad news. It's just as I feared - the new lenses aren't "magic". "You have glasses? Then f.. you!".
DK2 smaller (A vs. B lenses) FOV is absolutely UNACCEPTABLE, and that's what I would get if I bought CV1 :cry:
Up until now I thought it's DK1 like, so at least with glasses I won't get the same borders as DK2 set to smaller FOV.

What should they do? They wanted to make the Rift comfortable to wear even for people with glasses. They did but it should be clear that there has to be enough space between your eyes and lenses. Of course, this is bad for FOV. If FOV is really so important to you maybe you can wear contact lenses or if you have enough money try laser surgery for your eyes.

[danknugz]

Fov is absolutely vital to immersion and it will ultimately be a major factor for me (and most likely others) in deciding which HMD to buy.

Got strung along by oculus for way too long, and dealt with way too much crap with dk2 barely working, to be able to deal with finally paying for and getting cv1 only to have the FOV suck and feel like we're playing with some wannabe half ass fisher price toy.