With the success achieved to date with some 2m Quest2 units in the field, and a new diverse and broad VR userbase joining the fray. It would seem a good time to through out a question for discussion. What is the way forwards for VR some five years since GearVR and CV1?
1. Standalone VR
Is this the path, a VR headset using mobile phone processing, with the capability to be tethered to a PC with limitations.
- examples – Quest2, Pico Neo3, Deepoon E3, HTC Focus+, Panasonic Eyewear[not released]
2. High-End PC VR
A dedicated VR headset, configured for usage with a high-end (but expensive) PC to achieve the immersive experience.
- examples – Index, HP G3, Pimax 4K, Varjo 4X, VRgineer, HTC Elite
…and the third and fourth options:
3. Console VR
A device connected to a console platform, with the ability to be untethered, benefiting from the console manufacturers content development resources and cost reduction for console bundling.
- examples – Sony PSVR2[not released]
4. XR Platform
The creation of a headset about to achieve see-through and complete VR experiences, linked by 5G to a mobile edge computing (MEC) solution.
- examples – Lynnix, Apple Glass[not released]
Comments (please stay on topic)?
Excellent point - "horses for courses".
Just because I was here for the high end PCVR does not mean the Quest2 is wrong. Its just aimed at a different demographics. Trying to force it to be a high-end PCVR headset is not an options.
The Oculus team achieved marvels to get the XR2 processor to do what it is, but again, I need to play MoH and HL:A natively and not compressed and condensed. But that is just me.
As the ex-founder of the company said, "what a world if the Rift 2 had been launched"!
You didn't mis-word. You didn't mis-state. Your bias is clear, pc master race bias is very clear. PC gaming has been very clear for the past few years. The problem is the general audience wants to fun. Elitist's snobs who can afford the cream of the crop, really don't enjoy the hobby to begin with. They get a lot of cash and spare no expense, then desperately try to convince themselves and others the cost is well worth it.
I have been in a wide range of hobbies
Cycling, cosplay, cars, and gaming and its all the same mentallity the elitist or people with a lot of money telling the general public what to buy.
@PITTCANNA I gotta be honest and say that I'm not embarrassed that I can afford the best, nor has it diminished my love of VR.
Like Marie Antoinette said, let them eat cake! Or in the case of VR, let them buy Q2's, lol!
Also none of us are getting any younger - and in 10 years who knows what life will be like. Not that we have to panic and buy the best we can get, but maybe it's a good idea not to postpone things too much.
At work, I meet several people for example having had a stroke in their early fifties - or other serious diseases. Going from 40 to 50 also impacts your vision etc. Thus think carefully about what you like and want to experience in life, and don't wait for too long making dreams come true 🙂
Btw, I waited 12 years for the next great chapter in Half-Life (actually closer to 16 years, counting from the Half-Life 2 main game), paying 1k for that experience was the easiest choice for me - I'll be an old man if I have to wait another 12 to 16 years for the next chapter, lol. Carpe diem 😉
i7 7700K (4.5GHz); MSI GTX 1080 8GB Gaming X (oc 2100MHz gpu boost, 11GHz mem speed); 16GB 3200MHz; MSI Z270I (VR-Ready) mainboard; Samsung 961 NVMe 128GB (OS) + Samsung 860 4TB SSD (games) + Toshiba P300 HDD 3TB (games); Win10; Valve Index and Oculus Rift CV1 using super sampling 2.0. "Ask not what VR can do for you – ask what you can do for VR"
True indeed, but I personally consider it a VR console,. Its a stand alone that also can do PCVR (which is a nice introduction for entry level VR gamers with an interest in PCVR) but why would I buy one when currently its sub-standard to dedicated PCVR headsets and Facebook are focusing on the Quest store.
Okay but you decided to publicly state that Quest is the equivalent of a Console. So in a public discussion, it serves to reason that some feedback will be generated on such a claim. Specifically, around the literal fact that Quest is nothing like a Console whatsoever. I mean... someone can "personally" feel that the Index is like a Ferrari, but surely if you try to sit on your Index and ride it down the street, you'll end up with some really bad results.
I also would not say that it is accurate to claim that Quest being used for PCVR is "sub-standard." There is no standard for PCVR to begin with. On top of which, Quest 2 works fantastic as a PCVR HMD. This is measurable and observable, not just "personal" sentiment.
Oculus was Ford, they had cheap and they had expensive - and then it was decided in mid stream to go only with cheap. But rather than telling the community that was the plan, we all woke up on day and saw Rift-S, and Go gone, the promise of the CV2 dropped and now the only platform on the table a white Quest2.
That is all 100% false. From the very beginning, Oculus has shared their roadmap at both Oculus Connect and the Facebook tech conferences. For years, Oculus and Facebook have shown the roadmap to make VR smaller, mobile, and more lightweight. They've showcased, repeatedly the ideal state of using "glasses" instead of "helmets." All this was established well before the release of Quest and GO. There was never a "mid-stream" change by Oculus nor Facebook.
Granted, those with a long history of hoping and wishing for Oculus to fail tend to overlook all these historical facts in order to rewrite history. But luckily, all of these conferences can be viewed on outlets like YouTube. So these attempts to rewrite history in order to spin Oculus and Facebook in a bad light really only works on Forums to generate responses.
Some of us knew the CV2 was not going to come, but others liked their safe space, Tick Tock.
Interesting jab you have chosen to take at those who felt like Oculus would maintain multiple product lines. If this is your definition for having a "safe space" then lets remember those who stayed in their safe space regarding VR Arcades; especially pre-pandemic. In Oculus' case, while the CV2 ended up being de-prioritized, we still have an amazing product in the Quest line. The legacy of the CV2 lives on in Quest. However, there is no legacy for OOH and VR Arcades, as they remain dead in the water. So everyone is guilty of having this so-called "safe space." The key difference being that some of us have been able to navigate out of it, while others remain in theirs.
OK I'm extremely sensitive to how this thread could go.
Partially because of the nature of the posters contributing and the nature of the reactivation of accounts.
I think the thread has served it's purpose tbh. Not least because this subject has been discussed pretty much ever since the Quest was announced so it's bound to go over extremely well trodden territory. I mean Glastonbury generally has less muddy fields than this area of the forum!
Perhaps it's a topic more suited to the forum you're now moderating kevin rather than re-worked here. Subtle references to those who have a different opinion to yours can also be made there without the problems they seem to always stir up here.
Intel 5820K OC@4Ghz, Titan X (Maxwell), 32GB Corsair Vengeance DDR4, ASRock X99 Taichi, Samsung 500Gb 960 Evo M.2, Corsair H100i v2 Cooler, Inateck KTU3FR-4P USB 3 card, Windows 10 Pro v20H2 (19042.867)