HTC Vive Launch Thread -- Computer, activate holodeck

Status
Not open for further replies.
Did some minor googling on the question of why the Vive doesn't do asynchronous time-warp. Stumbled across a random reddit comment:
vrprophecy said:
While handy for sit down rotational situations, [asynchronous time-warp] can make you sicker in stand up roomscale translational scenario.
Click to expand...


No idea if this is true (he didn't post source links), but it would make sense.
 
It would be cool if someone made a bridge builder game and force you to walk/drive across it to see if it would hold. If it didn't, it would send you flying towards water/lava/etc.
 
Wowfunhappy said:
Did some minor googling on the question of why the Vive doesn't do asynchronous time-warp. Stumbled across a random reddit comment:


No idea if this is true (he didn't post source links), but it would make sense.
Click to expand...
Yes I think it's mostly true. AT is really only good for seated cockpit based games from what I've read. I think it can cause blurring of nearby textures in games where you turn fast, or something like that anyway. Whether it can induce sickness or not is another matter. It's not a problem when you are sitting in a virtual car or planes cockpit. For most Vive games Asynchronous Timewarp is probably useless, but it would be nice to have it available for traditional sim games.
 
Wowfunhappy said:
Did some minor googling on the question of why the Vive doesn't do asynchronous time-warp. Stumbled across a random reddit comment:


No idea if this is true (he didn't post source links), but it would make sense.
Click to expand...

I hadn't thought of that - ATW is limited to rotational movement only, and room scale games are much more likely to have positional changes that ATW doesn't account for.
 
mrklaw said:
I hadn't thought of that - ATW is limited to rotational movement only, and room scale games are much more likely to have positional changes that ATW doesn't account for.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Rotational only correction is of minimal use when standing and moving around where you're constantly having some level of translation in addition to rotation. Until we have solved that fundamental issue (if it even is even solvable), reprojection/time warp is a half functional band-aid.

The only time this is an issue in the first place is with games that are overly demanding for VR. Bolting on VR to existing games vs designing around the limitations VR presents. I'd rather just not play a game in VR that isn't hitting the required framerate consistently than rely on a hack to make it less noticeable. 90fps. Accept no substitutions. ;)
 
I'd rather have it as a fallback than not, as even well-loved and polished VR software can drop the occasional frame, but it does make sense that it would benefit roomscale games less and I understand Valve not prioritizing it.
 
Wowfunhappy said:
Did some minor googling on the question of why the Vive doesn't do asynchronous time-warp. Stumbled across a random reddit comment:


No idea if this is true (he didn't post source links), but it would make sense.
Click to expand...

Valve knowlingly and purposely opted out of ATW because they have what they believe is the better method, that being a prediction model.

Despera said:
So I let a friend play around in my vive room and halfway through Budget Cuts he decided to order one :)

Now I really hope that we get a bunch of coop games in the near future.


Pool Nation VR looks sweet, but the lack of a table irl could be a problem. I don't know how you're meant to take long precision shots without support for your non-dominant hand.
Click to expand...


If you watched the video you can see that you can lock your dominant hand once you've aimed or lined up your shot.
 
qa_engineer said:
Valve knowlingly and purposely opted out of ATW because they have what they believe is the better method, that being a prediction model.
Click to expand...

They're related, but not quite the same thing. Reprojection / time warp is there to serve as a last ditch fallback when the frame isn't going to be ready in time for whatever reason. The auto-scaling of settings exists to minimize the occurrences of that situation in the first place. Reprojection can also be added to all games using the VR API. The scaling that Valve is using needs to be put in place by an individual game's devs.
 
qa_engineer said:
Valve knowlingly and purposely opted out of ATW because they have what they believe is the better method, that being a prediction model.




If you watched the video you can see that you can lock your dominant hand once you've aimed or lined up your shot.
Click to expand...

But they should let us decide it based on the app/game we will use.

ATW is amazing for games like Elite =/
 
qa_engineer said:
Valve knowlingly and purposely opted out of ATW because they have what they believe is the better method, that being a prediction model.




If you watched the video you can see that you can lock your dominant hand once you've aimed or lined up your shot.
Click to expand...
Yeah it's a pretty decent workaround, but you'd still have to put in the effort of lining your shot.

Of course I could be exaggerating at this point. Nothing a quick demo couldn't clarify tho :)
 
Zalusithix said:
Exactly. Rotational only correction is of minimal use when standing and moving around where you're constantly having some level of translation in addition to rotation. Until we have solved that fundamental issue (if it even is even solvable), reprojection/time warp is a half functional band-aid.

The only time this is an issue in the first place is with games that are overly demanding for VR. Bolting on VR to existing games vs designing around the limitations VR presents. I'd rather just not play a game in VR that isn't hitting the required framerate consistently than rely on a hack to make it less noticeable. 90fps. Accept no substitutions. ;)
Click to expand...

If this "half functional band-aid" allows me to turn everything up to max settings while also adding 10 more cars on the track while still running more smoothly with no visible side effects that I can see, then I'll take that band aid every time. There is literally no way I would ever choose to play Pcars or Assetto Corsa on the Vive when I can get much better performance on the Rift. You should at least compare both versions before completely dismissing AT as a band aid hack. Nobody is suggesting that this makes the Rift the better piece of hardware. The Vive is clearly the best choice out there for the vast majority of game types. It's bizarre how many people just completely write off AT as some cheap gimmick without even trying it. I've got hours on both versions of Pcars. The difference is huge.

I really don't understand why anyone would be against something that provides noticeable benefits. Who cares how they achieve them as long as there are no negative effects. I'm speaking strictly of seated cockpit based games. Obviously AT is not something you're going to want for stand up stuff. I just want the Vive to run sims as smoothly as the Rift does so I can sell my Rift and have no regrets, but right now it just can't.
 
ValleyJoe said:
I really don't understand why anyone would be against something that provides noticeable benefits. Who cares how they achieve them as long as their are no negative effects. I'm speaking strictly of seated cockpit based games. Obviously AT is not something you're going to want for stand up stuff. I just want the Vive to run sims as smoothly as the Rift does so I can sell my Rift and have no regrets, but right now it just can't.
Click to expand...

I agree with you about timewarp (anything that improves performance is good in my book), but in terms of owning both, wouldn't it be cheaper to sell the rift and then use that money to update your hardware? You could get a Pascal card.
 
Finally made an appointment with the optometrist because I've been experiencing a lot of eye strain while using my Vive. I'm positive my left eye is worse than the right, so VR could be exacerbating already present issues of one eye compensating for the other. I really hope contacts help, because currently I can only last about an hour with the Vive.
 
Wowfunhappy said:
I agree with you about timewarp (anything that improves performance is good in my book), but in terms of owning both, wouldn't it be cheaper to sell the rift and then use that money to update your hardware? You could get a Pascal card.
Click to expand...
I'm already running a 980ti with a 4790k@4.6. I would certainly love to have a 1080, but I was really hoping to hold off until the next batch of cards. The new multi projection stuff built into the new series of cards could very well be the game changer that makes AT irrelevant though. You make a good point though. The newer cards coming out should be able to just brute force excellent performance without relying on software tricks. I'll probably cave and buy a 1080ti when they come out. I just hate to upgrade already when the 980ti is such a capable card still.
 
HordeZ has potential, but there are some immersion breaking things. I also hit the wall really hard with the controller and that did not feel great at all.... no more melee!
Jeeboman is something I could just not get behind at all, at least the Demo. It seems unfair and confusing? Still looking for a go-to game.
 
I wonder if the VR only games will be included in the Steam summer sale. Maybe too small a market for that to be worthwhile?
 
Showed it to the family. The verdict: a tracked HMD is cool, but the headset-plus-roomscale-plus-tracked controllers combo is the real game-changer.
 
Wowfunhappy said:
That's great, but it doesn't change the fact that Oculus is ALSO helping VR game development move forward. More games getting larger budgets is an always a good thing.

(The one exception would be if Oculus, or Valve for that matter, was moneyhating titles that were already being developed in order to get exclusivity, a la Microsoft with Rise of the Tomb Raider. As far as I'm aware, however, this isn't happening)
Click to expand...

That's exactly what they must have done with Superhot
 
ValleyJoe said:
If this "half functional band-aid" allows me to turn everything up to max settings while also adding 10 more cars on the track while still running more smoothly with no visible side effects that I can see, then I'll take that band aid every time. There is literally no way I would ever choose to play Pcars or Assetto Corsa on the Vive when I can get much better performance on the Rift. You should at least compare both versions before completely dismissing AT as a band aid hack. Nobody is suggesting that this makes the Rift the better piece of hardware. The Vive is clearly the best choice out there for the vast majority of game types. It's bizarre how many people just completely write off AT as some cheap gimmick without even trying it. I've got hours on both versions of Pcars. The difference is huge.

I really don't understand why anyone would be against something that provides noticeable benefits. Who cares how they achieve them as long as there are no negative effects. I'm speaking strictly of seated cockpit based games. Obviously AT is not something you're going to want for stand up stuff. I just want the Vive to run sims as smoothly as the Rift does so I can sell my Rift and have no regrets, but right now it just can't.
Click to expand...

It is a band-aid, and it is half-functional. Whether that band-aid helps you in those games is orthogonal to that fact. Nobody is claiming it doesn't help in certain use cases. I only "write it off" in so much as a game shouldn't need it the vast majority of the time if properly designed for VR in the first place. It should be a worst case basis failsafe. Not a crutch for games that can't otherwise keep anything close to a stable 90fps. As an analogy, ATW/reprojection usage should be akin to a 401k, not a bank account. Manage your spending and savings so you don't have to borrow from the 401k.

So yeah, I see the reliance on ATW by devs as a "bad" thing. The feature itself isn't bad. The abuse of it is. Alas, when you're bolting VR onto a non-VR game, relying on ATW is easier since nothing you've done with the game has been designed around VR in the first place. Doing it right (with the sacrifices that entails) would be far more work.
 
From a purely speculatory position, when do you guys think we'd see a second revision of the Vive?

I'm guessing the resolution is the biggest thing in need of improvement, but does that mean jumping to 4k per eye? Is that even remotely possible for even high-end graphics cards to handle? It makes me think that even if a resolution revision was on the way, it wouldn't be practical until a handful of years from now, meaning any revisions would merely be aesthetic/weight related.

But I'd be interested in insight from people more informed than me on the subject. The thing is $800 bucks, and I want one really badly, so the sting of a new model next year would really burn, lol.
 
PeakPointMatrix said:
From a purely speculatory position, when do you guys think we'd see a second revision of the Vive?

I'm guessing the resolution is the biggest thing in need of improvement, but does that mean jumping to 4k per eye? Is that even remotely possible for even high-end graphics cards to handle? It makes me think that even if a resolution revision was on the way, it wouldn't be practical until a handful of years from now, meaning any revisions would merely be aesthetic/weight related.

But I'd be interested in insight from people more informed than me on the subject. The thing is $800 bucks, and I want one really badly, so the sting of a new model next year would really burn, lol.
Click to expand...

I can definitely see a revision coming next year, the question is what exactly they improve. At the very least I'm hoping for big improvements to the comfort of the headset, which there's nothing really stopping them from doing at any point. I'm not expecting any big increases in resolution until they can add eye tracking for foveated rendering, and I don't think that's coming too soon.
 
PeakPointMatrix said:
From a purely speculatory position, when do you guys think we'd see a second revision of the Vive?

I'm guessing the resolution is the biggest thing in need of improvement, but does that mean jumping to 4k per eye? Is that even remotely possible for even high-end graphics cards to handle? It makes me think that even if a resolution revision was on the way, it wouldn't be practical until a handful of years from now, meaning any revisions would merely be aesthetic/weight related.

But I'd be interested in insight from people more informed than me on the subject. The thing is $800 bucks, and I want one really badly, so the sting of a new model next year would really burn, lol.
Click to expand...

We're at 1k per eye and taxing hardware to the limits. Now think about what 4k per eye would mean. Then there's the bandwidth issue. No, 4k per eye isn't happening. Not in the next gen at least.

As for when we'll see the next generation, it's all speculation. Don't expect console like lifespans out them at least. They'll likely have a couple of years before being outdated at most.
 
Zalusithix said:
It is a band-aid, and it is half-functional. Whether that band-aid helps you in those games is orthogonal to that fact. Nobody is claiming it doesn't help in certain use cases. I only "write it off" in so much as a game shouldn't need it the vast majority of the time if properly designed for VR in the first place. It should be a worst case basis failsafe. Not a crutch for games that can't otherwise keep anything close to a stable 90fps. As an analogy, ATW/reprojection usage should be akin to a 401k, not a bank account. Manage your spending and savings so you don't have to borrow from the 401k.

So yeah, I see the reliance on ATW by devs as a "bad" thing. The feature itself isn't bad. The abuse of it is. Alas, when you're bolting VR onto a non-VR game, relying on ATW is easier since nothing you've done with the game has been designed around VR in the first place. Doing it right (with the sacrifices that entails) would be far more work.
Click to expand...

I don't know why you're painting ATW as something that would only see use with traditional games that are later given VR support. As VR matures and as GPUs get further and further away from that GTX 970 baseline, games built from the ground-up for VR will be targeting a wider and wider range of cards. VR games will become more scalable, and ATW will help.
 
Zalusithix said:
It is a band-aid, and it is half-functional. Whether that band-aid helps you in those games is orthogonal to that fact. Nobody is claiming it doesn't help in certain use cases. I only "write it off" in so much as a game shouldn't need it the vast majority of the time if properly designed for VR in the first place. It should be a worst case basis failsafe. Not a crutch for games that can't otherwise keep anything close to a stable 90fps. As an analogy, ATW/reprojection usage should be akin to a 401k, not a bank account. Manage your spending and savings so you don't have to borrow from the 401k.

So yeah, I see the reliance on ATW by devs as a "bad" thing. The feature itself isn't bad. The abuse of it is. Alas, when you're bolting VR onto a non-VR game, relying on ATW is easier since nothing you've done with the game has been designed around VR in the first place. Doing it right (with the sacrifices that entails) would be far more work.
Click to expand...

Which games have abused ATW?
 
Tain said:
I don't know why you're painting ATW as something that would only see use with traditional games that are later given VR support. As VR matures and as GPUs get further and further away from that GTX 970 baseline, games built from the ground-up for VR will be targeting a wider and wider range of cards. VR games will become more scalable, and ATW will help.
Click to expand...
Currently, that's mostly what ATW is used for. Traditional games given VR support. The ones developed from the ground up have been, for the most part, designed so they don't require it in the first place with adequate "min spec" hardware. Sure as we move on and hardware evolves, things aren't as simple, but ATW should still be a last ditch effort to save the framerate. Proper automated scaling solutions are what should exist there to keep framerates in the target zone.

Once again, reprojection/ATW is a tool that isn't bad by itself, but it isn't something that should be used a primary means of performance scaling. Ideally you don't see it engage often. If a game is literally unplayable without ATW, then it's relying too much on it.

Wrestlemania said:
Which games have abused ATW?
Click to expand...

Virtually every game with VR support pegged on. The assets, effects, etc weren't designed for VR use, and the engines were never designed to dynamically scale to maintain performance. Making a round peg game fit in a square hole isn't easy after you've polished up that round peg significantly.
 
Sky Chief said:
That's exactly what they must have done with Superhot
Click to expand...

Wasn't SuperHOT a Kickstarter game though? I'm not convinced they'd be making a VR version if Oculus wasn't funding its development.

Zalusithix said:
Once again, reprojection/ATW is a tool that isn't bad by itself, but it isn't something that should be used a primary means of performance scaling. Ideally you don't see it engage often. If a game is literally unplayable without ATW, then it's relying too much on it.
Click to expand...

Are there any games like this though? People have been saying that a lot of games are smoother on the Oculus, but not that they're unplayable on the Vive.

I don't think it's right to just blame (relatively minor!) performance issues on developer ineptitude.
 
Zalusithix said:
We're at 1k per eye and taxing hardware to the limits. Now think about what 4k per eye would mean. Then there's the bandwidth issue. No, 4k per eye isn't happening. Not in the next gen at least.

As for when we'll see the next generation, it's all speculation. Don't expect console like lifespans out them at least. They'll likely have a couple of years before being outdated at most.
Click to expand...

Have faith :)

In 2 years we'll have nice and mature big die GPUs with HBM2 - if we're lucky maybe even 10nm. 1080 is already double the performance of a 970, so double again should be easily doable in another couple of generations. That could already drive 4K per eye at the same level as a 970 would drive a vive.

But add in more mature tech like
- multires shading to reduce the resolution around the edges which aren't sharp anyway
- single pass stereo to significantly reduce geometry overhead (render two views for the effective cost of one)
- simultaneous multi projection to pre warp the view so reducing the number of pixels you need to render.

These could combine to reduce overheads significantly - single pass stereo and simultaneous multiprojection supposedly increasing performance by up to 2.7x.

I could see mid-high end systems being able to drive 4K per eye in two years. Hopefully
 
Wowfunhappy said:
Wasn't SuperHOT a Kickstarter game though? I'm not convinced they'd be making a VR version if Oculus wasn't funding its development.
Click to expand...

I don't think they've said that the game is Oculus exclusive or even timed-exclusive, have they? Both Assetto Corsa and Project CARS started with Oculus support but have it planned for the former and already implemented in the latter. I'm not surprised Oculus is working with them since I'm sure they would love to have that ready for Touch launch at least but I don't know as I'd jump to any conclusions there yet.
 
Wowfunhappy said:
Are there any games like this though? People have been saying that a lot of games are smoother on the Oculus, but not that they're unplayable on the Vive.

I don't think it's right to just blame (relatively minor!) performance issues on developer ineptitude.
Click to expand...
Perhaps using the term 'unplayable' was a bit over the top. Still, if it's noticeable enough that you're constantly seeing the lack of ATW in the Vive version, then it's leaning too much on the feature.

Also, it's not developer ineptitude so much as a logistics thing. Doing things right, particularly after they're otherwise finalized, isn't easy. It demands time and money. For the relative payback from the small VR market, this is rarely worth it to the dev. Some folks clamor for VR in game X, and the dev gives it to them. Sub-optimally perhaps, but it's either that or nothing.
mrklaw said:
Have faith :)

In 2 years we'll have nice and mature big die GPUs with HBM2 - if we're lucky maybe even 10nm. 1080 is already double the performance of a 970, so double again should be easily doable in another couple of generations. That could already drive 4K per eye at the same level as a 970 would drive a vive.

But add in more mature tech like
- multires shading to reduce the resolution around the edges which aren't sharp anyway
- single pass stereo to significantly reduce geometry overhead (render two views for the effective cost of one)
- simultaneous multi projection to pre warp the view so reducing the number of pixels you need to render.

These could combine to reduce overheads significantly - single pass stereo and simultaneous multiprojection supposedly increasing performance by up to 2.7x.

I could see mid-high end systems being able to drive 4K per eye in two years. Hopefully
Click to expand...

You're more optimistic about the market than I am. We were stuck for so long, I don't have high hopes on seeing another major boost so soon. We'll see. Still, 4K in that size of screen requires a much higher PPI screen. The ones we have are already quite high. Getting that much more so soon is yet another "we'll see" sort of thing. If the stars align perhaps everything is possible. I still see it as rather pointless to jump up so high so fast. Just 2k per eye would already be double the density. Do we really need to jump to 4K on the second itteration? =P
 
Wallach said:
I don't think they've said that the game is Oculus exclusive or even timed-exclusive, have they? Both Assetto Corsa and Project CARS started with Oculus support but have it planned for the former and already implemented in the latter. I'm not surprised Oculus is working with them since I'm sure they would love to have that ready for Touch launch at least but I don't know as I'd jump to any conclusions there yet.
Click to expand...

https://www.reddit.com/r/superhot/comments/4ld39q/superhot_dev_log_1/d3p14yp

SzymonKrukowski said:
For now we concentrate on Oculus.
Click to expand...
dev log said:
We’re now working super close with the guys at Oculus to release SUPERHOT VR later this year.
Click to expand...

This being a VR implementation designed for motion controls. Touch doesn't have a fixed launch date yet beyond "months". While there is already on the market a similar solution.

There's really no logical explanation other than a timed exclusivity bought by Oculus. Or the developer hates Vive.
 
Redid my base station setup this weekend. Managed to put together 3.7m x 3.1m and it has been more stable than a Vita firmware update. Thanks to whoever suggested the clamp/rod setup. Height was the biggest factor and that setup let me get it way higher. Previously the best I could do was about 3-6 inches above my head.

Wowfunhappy said:
Is Holopoint really worth $8? Everyone says it's good, but just seems really, really simple, and I don't like the aesthetics at all.
Click to expand...

Nevermind, I am an idiot and can't read. I thought you said Holoball, but I guess I'll leave this in case anyone is looking for a Holoball impression..

How do you feel about tennis, racquetball, squash or similar? Either real life versions or video game. If you are on 'like it' side of the scale, even a little, check it out. If you are on the dislike side then probably give it a pass.
 
Lightblade VR is up on steam for €3.99.

Pretty threadbare, hope more locations get added.
Lightsabers, sorry, Lightblades sometimes jidder a bit, and loose tracking (happened twice in my short 10 minute session).

Doesn't really get interesting or hard until you hit Legend difficulty (4th difficulty). Also, the lightsabers, sorry lightblades tend to obstruct your view too much, I think it could be due to overuse of some type of blur filter.

Fun nonetheless. Enjoyed it and will be playing it more as time goes :)
 
What's everyone's opinion on the vorpx driver for VR games? It's a bit pricy, but has a pretty impressive compatibility list of games I'd love to try VR with. Apparently Vive support came to it about a month ago and I'm having a hard time finding impressions about how it works
 
Wii Tank said:
What's everyone's opinion on the vorpx driver for VR games? It's a bit pricy, but has a pretty impressive compatibility list of games I'd love to try VR with. Apparently Vive support came to it about a month ago and I'm having a hard time finding impressions about how it works
Click to expand...

from what I've gathered Vive support isn't the best right now.
 
Wowfunhappy said:
Is Holopoint really worth $8? Everyone says it's good, but just seems really, really simple, and I don't like the aesthetics at all.
Click to expand...
I feel exactly like you. The game looks like bland, uninspired garbage. It is incredibly ugly and demonstrates zero taste or pride with the developers. But everyone seems to love it. I question whether people enjoy the games because of the game or because of the lack of games. Too many people love it to not believe it's good, though.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Macabre - Official Launch Trailer
Trailer 
0
98
IbizaPocholo replied
Dungeons of Eternity Steam launch trailer
3
107
drotahorror replied
Mortal Sin - Launch Trailer - OUT NOW!!!
12
165
Gtafans93 replied
MGS Delta surpasses one million at launch
2 3
109
752
Heimdall_Xtreme replied
Fallout 76: C.A.M.P. Revamp Launch Trailer
Trailer 
3
95
Sethbacca replied
Top Bottom