Support NeoGAF

[serversurfer]

Why is the PSVR—the cheapest of the "high end" devices and the one with the lowest system requirements—the only headset capable of displaying 120hz?

Don't listen to that other stuff. The real reason the PC headsets don't have a 120 Hz option is because they weren't able to drive their displays that fast. If they were, they'd offer both 90 Hz and 120 Hz to devs, just as Sony do. If someone tries to make it any more complicated than that, it's likely they're insecure, because it's just that simple.

PSVR doesn't need 120 Hz because lolPS4sux. That's FUD, and not even very good FUD at that. It has 120 Hz because faster is better. Sony added the 90 Hz mode later, mostly to ease porting for PC devs who'd already tuned their engines to 90 fps output.

 

[Exuro]

It sucks that the sensor for my rift wont work with my usb 3.0 slots I'm forced to use a usb 2.0 slot. The only way ive gotten the sensor to work with my 3.0 slots is to disable the usb controller in the device manager and when I enable it all of the fucking sudden the sensor finds the slots to be acceptable. Its such fucking bullshit and I cant be bothered to do that every time since it requires a restart so usb 2.0 it is I guess.

Yeah the usb 3.0 card I got for it was listed under the Oculus recommended ones and the tool passed, but if I plug my headset into it its recognized as a 2.0 port and if I plug in the camera it frequently disconnects. Really annoying, but thankfully I have available 3.0 ports on my motherboard that work.

 

[Mister Wolf]

Yeah the usb 3.0 card I got for it was listed under the Oculus recommended ones and the tool passed, but if I plug my headset into it its recognized as a 2.0 port and if I plug in the camera it frequently disconnects. Really annoying, but thankfully I have available 3.0 ports on my motherboard that work.

I tried luckys tale and chronos with the sensor in my 2.0 slot and they seemed to work just fine same as they did when I tricked the sensor to work for my 3.0 slots.

 

[Techies]

So I got a OSVR headset and I bricked it before I even got the chance to really use it.

I got it second hand so that's £200 wasted.

You bricked it?
Isn't it suppose to be open source?

 

[Zalusithix]

Don't listen to that other stuff. The real reason the PC headsets don't have a 120 Hz option is because they weren't able to drive their displays that fast. If they were, they'd offer both 90 Hz and 120 Hz to devs, just as Sony do. If someone tries to make it any more complicated than that, it's likely they're insecure, because it's just that simple.

PSVR doesn't need 120 Hz because lolPS4sux. That's FUD, and not even very good FUD at that. It has 120 Hz because faster is better. Sony added the 90 Hz mode later, mostly to ease porting for PC devs who'd already tuned their engines to 90 fps output.

Insecure? You're the only one that's ever insecure about the precious PSVR not being treated as some king of VR. 120Hz is needed for PSVR because they need reprojection from 60Hz which will make up a lot of the available content, especially for the base PS4 model. 90Hz gives an option for devs to target to give a better experience without the performance penalty of 120Hz. 120Hz rounds out the trio and has the best temporal experience, but at the cost of significantly reduced graphics quality.

As for the 90 for PC devs, that's a joke. Any game designed for 90 on the PC (which is just an arbitrary number - you just tune your assets, effects, etc to reach that number), won't straight port to the PS4 at 90. The base GPU and CPU for the PC space far exceed the PS4's power. Any port will require changes to work on the vastly different hardware. It'll be up to the dev whether they want to continue to target for 90, or go for 60->120. They could also hop to 120, but if they're capable of doing that, then they're on the simplistic side of things to begin with.

So no, the panel wasn't chosen because 120 is better than 90, and they wanted to beat the PC in some stupid spec war where no game is even forced to use it (and most wont). It was chosen because 60Hz reprojected is easier for the PS4 to handle, and for that they need a multiple of 60. Any slower panel and they'd be doing something like the Vive with 45->90 which sucks. Any faster would be a waste. You choose your panel for the average use case. In the PC's case, a 90Hz limit was a decent tradeoff on already expensive gear. PCs were already struggling to hit 90, so 120 wouldn't have made a ton of sense for gen one. Few games would hit 120, and 60->120 makes little sense in the PC realm.

 

[Krejlooc]

Why is the PSVR—the cheapest of the "high end" devices and the one with the lowest system requirements—the only headset capable of displaying 120hz?

It's not.

OSVR HDK1.3 has a 120 hz single panel display, and is cheaper than PSVR.

 

[Zalusithix]

It's not.

OSVR HDK1.3 has a 120 hz single panel display, and is cheaper than PSVR.

OSVR is an oddball. You can't, from what I can tell at least, actually do anything greater than a true 60fps rendering. All 120/240Hz talk seems to be in relation to displaying 60Hz content in a low persistence fashion. Then there's the next model which will go to the same display and refresh specs of the Rift and Vive.

 

[Krejlooc]

OSVR is an oddball. You can't, from what I can tell at least, actually do anything greater than a true 60fps rendering. All 120/240Hz talk seems to be in relation to displaying 60Hz content in a low persistence fashion. Then there's the next model which will go to the same display and refresh specs of the Rift and Vive.

First up, refresh rate and frames per second should not be used interchangably. Refresh rate is the frequency in which the display lights the physical pixels, where framerate is the number of frames sent to the display device.

OSVR is limited to 60 fps input, but the display refreshes as 120 hz. There is no flubbing of numbers. The "simulated 240 hz" mode is marketing speak and where your confusion is coming from, they are describing low persistence here. The display is still only 120 hz.

Regardless, the claim that the PSVR is the only 120hz display out there and also the cheapest is incorrect. As is the assumption that 120hz was chosen in part of a spec race. The reason 90 hz was chosen in the first place is because Michael Abrash's research suggested that 90 hz was when a great majority of the population (as in, outliers become insignificant) stop perceiving flicker in their periphery. I'd wager Sony's 120hz screen is not just about reprojection but also because the low-spec nature of the PSVR will mean a heavier emphasis on VR Cinema and VR Film.

 

[Zalusithix]

First up, refresh rate and frames per second should not be used interchangably. Refresh rate is the frequency in which the display lights the physical pixels, where framerate is the number of frames sent to the display device.

OSVR is limited to 60 fps input, but the display refreshes as 120 hz. There is no flubbing of numbers. The "simulated 240 hz" mode is marketing speak and where your confusion is coming from, they are describing low persistence here. The display is still only 120 hz.

Regardless, the claim that the PSVR is the only 120hz display out there and also the cheapest is incorrect. As is the assumption that 120hz was chosen in part of a spec race. The reason 90 hz was chosen in the first place is because Michael Abrash's research suggested that 90 hz was when a great majority of the population (as in, outliers become insignificant) stop perceiving flicker in their periphery. I'd wager Sony's 120hz screen is not just about reprojection but also because the low-spec nature of the PSVR will mean a heavier emphasis on VR Cinema and VR Film.

Frames per second and refresh rate are two different things, but I'd wager that when most people are bringing up PSVR's 120Hz screen, they're regarding it with how it can display unique content at 120fps. Beyond that, the Vive's and Rift's displays are already low persistence at their marketed 90Hz. I assume the same is true for PSVR's display. Using a higher refresh rate screen to emulate low persistence is kind of a "technically correct, but somewhat besides the point" when directly compared with the competition.

That said, PSVR's 120Hz would indeed be useful for movies and TV, and I didn't even think about that aspect. Direct multiple of 24/30Hz, while remaining high enough that the virtual environment is updating at an acceptable clip.

 

[Wowfunhappy]

First up, refresh rate and frames per second should not be used interchangably. Refresh rate is the frequency in which the display lights the physical pixels, where framerate is the number of frames sent to the display device.

OSVR is limited to 60 fps input, but the display refreshes as 120 hz. There is no flubbing of numbers. The "simulated 240 hz" mode is marketing speak and where your confusion is coming from, they are describing low persistence here. The display is still only 120 hz.

Your first point is well taken, at least on a technical level. However, if a 120hz device can only accept 60fps input, can we really say that it's able to make full use of its 120hz?

Put another way: Imagine a monitor with a 4K panel that is limited to 1080p input. The extra pixels are used alongside some vudu on-board processing to make text look especially clean/sharp, and it works really well. Would it really be fair to call this a 4K monitor?

I'd wager Sony's 120hz screen is not just about reprojection but also because the low-spec nature of the PSVR will mean a heavier emphasis on VR Cinema and VR Film.

How does cinema specifically benefit from a 120hz refresh rate? Edit: Nevermind, Zalusithix answered that question.

 

[Krejlooc]

Frames per second and refresh rate are two different things, but I'd wager that when most people are bringing up PSVR's 120Hz screen, they're regarding it with how it can display unique content at 120fps. Beyond that, the Vive's and Rift's displays are already low persistence at their marketed 90Hz. I assume the same is true for PSVR's display. Using a higher refresh rate screen to emulate low persistence is kind of a "technically correct, but somewhat besides the point" when directly compared with the competition.

120hz mode is actually full persistence, it's not being used to emulate low persistence. There is an actual low persistence mode, which is what they call the "240hz simulated mode."

The reason I bring up that OSVR is using a 120hz full persistence display, even though I know it only accepts a 60 fps input, is to further the point that 120hz displays are not some exotic beast that is unique to the PSVR. Actually, 120hz displays are much more common than 90hz displays. OSVR is limited to 60 fps not because of the display itself.

Your first point is well taken, at least on a technical level. However, if a 120hz device can only accept 60fps input, can we really say that it's able to make full use of its 120hz?

Whether or not it's making full use of it's 120hz is not the contention nor the point.

 

[pj]

Don't listen to that other stuff. The real reason the PC headsets don't have a 120 Hz option is because they weren't able to drive their displays that fast. If they were, they'd offer both 90 Hz and 120 Hz to devs, just as Sony do. If someone tries to make it any more complicated than that, it's likely they're insecure, because it's just that simple.

What do you mean they weren't able to? What evidence do you have that they tried and failed to do 120hz?

I assume it was done because 90hz rendering and display is "good enough". 120 would be better, but it would require more expensive components in every part of the chain (more GPU, HDMI 2.0, more powerful processing in the HMD) and would only benefit a small percentage of users. By the time the hardware necessary for 120hz is common, gen 2 headsets will probably be out. Seems more like a prudent choice than a lack of ability.

 

[Krejlooc]

The original Valve Room demo used dual 120hz screens in portrait orientation, btw. That's the one they had at Dev Days.

 

[Durante]

90 Hz is above the point Abrash (and the VR research team at Valve) determined was required for low-persistence HMDs to work without issues for almost everyone, while compromising between getting as high as possible and the goal of still running at native refresh for VR target spec PCs in reasonably complex games.

That's why these HMDs use 90 Hz.

 

[Burgess_101]

You bricked it?
Isn't it suppose to be open source?

There is a very rare but known issue with the OSVR and the SteamVR plugin that bricks it. There is a way to reset the board but it didn't work for me.

Thankfully, I managed to RMA it and my replacement should be here tomorrow.

 

[mrklaw]

it does seem that quite a few games need to lean on ATW/reprojection fairly often, which means they're running at 45fps. I wonder if a 120Hz option would be useful for some types of games that would be able to run at 60 but struggle to hit 90fps.

 

[Zaptruder]

90 Hz is above the point Abrash (and the VR research team at Valve) determined was required for low-persistence HMDs to work without issues for almost everyone, while compromising between getting as high as possible and the goal of still running at native refresh for VR target spec PCs in reasonably complex games.

That's why these HMDs use 90 Hz.

Also because there's technical limitations to the panels and these displays are pushing the boundaries of what display tech were capable of at the time of manufacture.

So it was a designed compromise between all the various limitations (resolution, refresh rate, % of people it would be comfortable for, frame rate of PCs, etc).

 

[Durante]

it does seem that quite a few games need to lean on ATW/reprojection fairly often, which means they're running at 45fps.

Which ones? I usually have the dev overlay configured for Vive and almost everything runs at a solid 90 FPS (outside of loading screens for some games, or setting graphical options that are too high for my HW to deal with).

Edit: And the same applies for the Oculus games I've tried.

 

[vermadas]

it does seem that quite a few games need to lean on ATW/reprojection fairly often, which means they're running at 45fps. I wonder if a 120Hz option would be useful for some types of games that would be able to run at 60 but struggle to hit 90fps.

It's worth noting that ATW and reprojection don't function entirely the same. Someone more technical can clarify/correct me if I'm wrong on this.

With ATW, if the framerate drops below 90, it does not force the game down to 45 and reproject every other frame. If a new rendered frame is not ready when the display needs to update, it takes the last rendered frame and performs adjustments based on IMU data changes and delivers that.

Edit: The only game I've played that heavily leaned on ATW was Project Cars, which is quite demanding. Cockpit games probably hide the drawbacks of ATW/reprojection better than other games.

 

[Zalusithix]

It's worth noting that ATW and reprojection don't function entirely the same. Someone more technical can clarify/correct me if I'm wrong on this.

With ATW, if the framerate drops below 90, it does not force the game down to 45 and reproject every other frame. If a new rendered frame is not ready when the display needs to update, it takes the last rendered frame and performs adjustments based on IMU data changes and delivers that.

Edit: The only game I've played that heavily leaned on ATW was Project Cars, which is quite demanding. Cockpit games probably hide the drawbacks of ATW/reprojection better than other games.

Yes, that's the "A" part of ATW - asynchronous. Preempting the GPU right before the "too late" point and doing a reprojection instead. Beyond that, I'm pretty sure Oculus is reprojecting every frame to the latest positional readings before being displayed, regardless of whether the frame time went over.

Valve basically said that the preemption of (then) current GPUs wasn't entirely reliable and decided to fall back to a 45 plus reprojection mode when the game can't hit a solid 90. To get around frame drops in the first place, they advocated for scaling the rendering on the fly.

 

[vermadas]

Beyond that, I'm pretty sure Oculus is reprojecting every frame to the latest positional readings before being displayed, regardless of whether the frame time went over.

I was wondering if that's the case but didn't know for sure.

 

[mckmas8808]

Insecure? You're the only one that's ever insecure about the precious PSVR not being treated as some king of VR. 120Hz is needed for PSVR because they need reprojection from 60Hz which will make up a lot of the available content, especially for the base PS4 model. 90Hz gives an option for devs to target to give a better experience without the performance penalty of 120Hz. 120Hz rounds out the trio and has the best temporal experience, but at the cost of significantly reduced graphics quality.

As for the 90 for PC devs, that's a joke. Any game designed for 90 on the PC (which is just an arbitrary number - you just tune your assets, effects, etc to reach that number), won't straight port to the PS4 at 90. The base GPU and CPU for the PC space far exceed the PS4's power. Any port will require changes to work on the vastly different hardware. It'll be up to the dev whether they want to continue to target for 90, or go for 60->120. They could also hop to 120, but if they're capable of doing that, then they're on the simplistic side of things to begin with.

So no, the panel wasn't chosen because 120 is better than 90, and they wanted to beat the PC in some stupid spec war where no game is even forced to use it (and most wont). It was chosen because 60Hz reprojected is easier for the PS4 to handle, and for that they need a multiple of 60. Any slower panel and they'd be doing something like the Vive with 45->90 which sucks. Any faster would be a waste. You choose your panel for the average use case. In the PC's case, a 90Hz limit was a decent tradeoff on already expensive gear. PCs were already struggling to hit 90, so 120 wouldn't have made a ton of sense for gen one. Few games would hit 120, and 60->120 makes little sense in the PC realm.

You say this as if most PS4 VR games are 60 fps, while a few are 90 fps. It's actually the other way around. Most are 90 fps or higher. And a few are 60 fps.

 

[Zalusithix]

You say this as if most PS4 VR games are 60 fps, while a few are 90 fps. It's actually the other way around. Most are 90 fps or higher. And a few are 60 fps.

There's going to be more 60->120 than 120 native which is the focus of the "why a 120Hz screen" question. 90 is neither here nor there on that front.

That said, I'd love to see where you're getting a comprehensive listing of framerates of PSVR games when nothing has been released.

 

[cheezcake]

.

.

I think we've all been in this thread long enough to understand where these conversations with serversurfer lead.

Hint:

Spoiler

Nowhere

You say this as if most PS4 VR games are 60 fps, while a few are 90 fps. It's actually the other way around. Most are 90 fps or higher. And a few are 60 fps.

I expect most PSVR games to run native 90 with permanent asynchronous reprojection because Sony strongly recommended that in their GDC talk this year. They seem to have shied away from touting 60->120 lately.

 

[Raticus79]

Wish my 4k monitor was low persistence and had a 90Hz setting. It's a nice sweet spot between motion quality and image quality.

 

[mckmas8808]

There's going to be more 60->120 than 120 native which is the focus of the "why a 120Hz screen" question. 90 is neither here nor there on that front.

That said, I'd love to see where you're getting a comprehensive listing of framerates of PSVR games when nothing has been released.

Developers over time have stated what their framerates are. Some I believe have even stated so right here on NeoGaf.

We have a PSVR data gather in another thread that's great at getting this info.

 

[XiaNaphryz]

I think we've all been in this thread long enough to understand where these conversations with serversurfer lead.

Hint:

Spoiler

Nowhere[/spoiler

Spoiler

Let's keep the platform warrior nonsense to a minimum please from all parties.

Thanks.

 

[Felix Lighter]

it does seem that quite a few games need to lean on ATW/reprojection fairly often, which means they're running at 45fps. I wonder if a 120Hz option would be useful for some types of games that would be able to run at 60 but struggle to hit 90fps.

On the Rift I noticed with Elite, ATW works at 60 fps already. With the Vive, the last time I tried it, it did drop to 45fps when doing reprojection.

 

[Zalusithix]

On the Rift I noticed with Elite, ATW works at 60 fps already. With the Vive, the last time I tried it, it did drop to 45fps when doing reprojection.

The Rift can reproject at any arbitrary framerate due to the asynchronous nature of ATW. On the flip side, the non-perfect ratio of reprojection to true frames can make the reprojection artifacts worse / more noticeable.

 

[bj00rn_]

Don't listen to that other stuff. The real reason the PC headsets don't have a 120 Hz option is because they weren't able to drive their displays that fast. If they were, they'd offer both 90 Hz and 120 Hz to devs, just as Sony do. If someone tries to make it any more complicated than that, it's likely they're insecure, because it's just that simple.

PSVR doesn't need 120 Hz because lolPS4sux. That's FUD, and not even very good FUD at that. It has 120 Hz because faster is better. Sony added the 90 Hz mode later, mostly to ease porting for PC devs who'd already tuned their engines to 90 fps output.

Are you ok?

 

[mckmas8808]

Are you ok?

odd question.

 

[Strafebogey]

Nvidia's VR Funhouse is out.

http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/articles/nvidia-vr-funhouse-released-download-for-free

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Ao_uAb6Jkw

 

[Raticus79]

Nvidia's VR Funhouse is out.

http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/articles/nvidia-vr-funhouse-released-download-for-free

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Ao_uAb6Jkw

Woohoo, I finally get to try out VR SLI.

Glad to see this old post about Flex in VR finally happening

Oh man, imagine this with VR and a six-axis controller (e.g. STEM or lighthouse) as your 3D input. Simple little experiences like throwing a pie at someone would be amazing.

 

[FlyinJ]

Nvidia's VR Funhouse is out.

http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/articles/nvidia-vr-funhouse-released-download-for-free

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Ao_uAb6Jkw

That page links to a Steam page, and it says "Coming in July" on the Steam page. You can't download it.

 

[Zaptruder]

Nvidia's VR Funhouse is out.

http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/articles/nvidia-vr-funhouse-released-download-for-free

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Ao_uAb6Jkw

Oh man... Triple 980tis for max quality mode. Hahaha... Thanks for the peek into the future Nvidia!

Too bad I'll have to wait for the future to actually try it out (in all its glory).

 

[dgco86]

That page links to a Steam page, and it says "Coming in July" on the Steam page. You can't download it.

It's up for download now.

 

[Fried Food]

The graphical splendor of that VR funhouse thing is kinda wasted on the resolution of the screens.

Still going to give it a go though.

 

[Strafebogey]

Oh man... Triple 980tis for max quality mode. Hahaha... Thanks for the peek into the future Nvidia!

Too bad I'll have to wait for the future to actually try it out (in all its glory).

Or two 1080s in SLI. My eyes went wide when I saw that.

I ran it in High nonetheless, smooth to me. My 1080 is overclocked to 2012Mhz core/10800Mhz memory though.

My favorite mini game? Cannon Skeet. Once the targets starts flying, I feel like Marty McFly in BTTF3.

http://www.roadtovr.com/nvidias-vr-funhouse-is-proof-that-good-physics-can-make-great-vr/

 

[Strafebogey]

"Raw Data" is out on Steam, Early Access Game.

http://store.steampowered.com/app/436320/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8phhKZn4DuM

 

[Strafebogey]

Got a half hour session in into "Raw Data". I made the mistake of using Saija instead of Bishop and ended up in a wet heap of fatigue and tiredness as I flailed and maimed my way through instead of using Bishop and his gun kata. After the 6th wave, I gave up.

Gonna continue later in the day, it's 4am here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pNuSm4BYg2Y

 

[plagiarize]

Oh man... Triple 980tis for max quality mode. Hahaha... Thanks for the peek into the future Nvidia!

Too bad I'll have to wait for the future to actually try it out (in all its glory).

My triple 980s handle high quality just fine (well, dips to the mid seventies, but it's totally playable).

I wish it wasn't just using the horse power for PhysX though really. It doesn't really look that great beyond the fluid FXs etc.

At first I thought it wasn't really doing it, so I disabled SLI and set my PhysX card to be the one the game was running on, and performance TANKED, so yeah... it's working. I just wish it was prettier beyond the fancy PhysX.

My favorite effect is in the balloon pop game. The motions of your swords create currents in the air which swirl the confetti about. It's pretty neat.

The Razer Hydra + Rift combo worked quite well for this, although I think the sword game especially would be way more fun with Vive controllers. Unlike say, brookhaven where it 'works' but they get really twitchy when your body is between you and the base station.

For this Nvidia thing, I just had to quick calibrate pointing the headset 90 degrees to the right of my base station and I was good to go. I'll probably play it some more. Not bad at all for free.

 

[ashbash159]

I've been so tempted recently to get an Oculus Rift.

I can't really consider a HTC Vive because I don't and can't get the room space.

Really want to play Project CARS and Dirt Rally more than anything. I play those games all the time non-VR.

If I really want VR, should I wait now or just order an Oculus Rift today?

 

[Strafebogey]

Arriving soon from a craftsman in the Netherlands. Ordered both the Rift and the Vive version in Mahogany.

 

[JetSetRadio]

How do a couple of drinks affect your experience?

 

[120v]

How do a couple of drinks affect your experience?

doesn't really affect me one way or another. though you don't want to play hammered for obvious reasons

 

[cheezcake]

I've been so tempted recently to get an Oculus Rift.

I can't really consider a HTC Vive because I don't and can't get the room space.

Really want to play Project CARS and Dirt Rally more than anything. I play those games all the time non-VR.

If I really want VR, should I wait now or just order an Oculus Rift today?

Try before you buy is the best advice I can give. If you try the Rift, like it, then jump on in friend.

Arriving soon from a craftsman in the Netherlands. Ordered both the Rift and the Vive version in Mahogany.

Hot damn, got a link to share?

 

[Strafebogey]

Hot damn, got a link to share?

https://www.etsy.com/listing/464225...&ga_search_query=oculus rift&ref=sr_gallery_1

You'll have to ask the Etsy store owner for the Vive version. He has not placed the Vive version for sale yet, although he has them almost completed. These are handmade, so they do take time to make.

 

[MrFrankFontaine]

I've been so tempted recently to get an Oculus Rift.

I can't really consider a HTC Vive because I don't and can't get the room space.

Really want to play Project CARS and Dirt Rally more than anything. I play those games all the time non-VR.

If I really want VR, should I wait now or just order an Oculus Rift today?

If you love those games now then you'll wonder how you ever played them without VR. There really isn't a way to explain the immersion of being in the car. I have both games (Rift) and while they are perfectly playable with a controller, I'm planning to get a wheel setup now as soon as I can.

The only thing to consider is that there isn't a lot of other full games out there right now. I got sucked into Elite Dangerous and that is my main time suck game right now, so it's been worth it. I think if you love either driving or space shooters then it's safe to jump in IMHO.

 

[cleveridea]

I've been so tempted recently to get an Oculus Rift.

I can't really consider a HTC Vive because I don't and can't get the room space.

Really want to play Project CARS and Dirt Rally more than anything. I play those games all the time non-VR.

If I really want VR, should I wait now or just order an Oculus Rift today?

Project cars looks stunning on the Rift. I dont even like Sim games on tracks (I prefer arcade handling in open worlds/cities etc) and I love this game on Rift, its stunning. I love that the external view works great which is my favorite view but of course if you are inside the car you get to see all the interior too. Once you see the cars in VR you wont want to go back. If you have a friend into cars, launch a quick race with his/her favorite car and let them see the internal and external view (external view, use right analog stick to rotate around the car to see all angles). Its just stunning.

I plan on getting Dirt Rally at some point but will wait for a cheaper price, given how many other games I have to play.

Also I recommend getting games that you are unsure about on steam versus Oculus store. I bought Project Cars gold on GMG with their 20% discount, but I dont think Steam refund policy covers third party key vendors (fortunately game looks amazing)

I plan on getting Euro truck simulator 2 (gold version on GMG with 20% discount) since that works on oculus rift too.

What graphics card do you have?

 

[MrFrankFontaine]

I plan on getting Dirt Rally at some point but will wait for a cheaper price, given how many other games I have to play.

Picked up Dirt Rally on CDKeys for $25.