artsi
Member
Yeah that's true, there is some overlap there.
And none of this data is "solid" anyway compared to something like actual sales numbers, but it's pretty much all we got right now.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
The High-end VR Discussion Thread (HTC Vive, Oculus Rift, Playstation VR)
- Thread starter Cartman86
- Start date
Yeah that's true, there is some overlap there.
And none of this data is "solid" anyway compared to something like actual sales numbers, but it's pretty much all we got right now.
DOT DASH DOT
Member
Yeah it will, I'm just concerned that when I put the headset on, I'm immediately going to think the resolution looks like shit, and bang that's £740..
But then you'll have a go on Tilt Brush and all will OK in the world.
Wrestlemania
Banned
When I tried the Vive the first thing I thought was that the resolution was low and there was still some SDE. It quickly becomes a much less pronounced issue once you actually become immersed though.
wanderingprostheyltite
Member
Thanks to Samsung? Nah, mostly FB ad dollars and all the the various cons they've been getting buzz at over the years, and especially youtube reaction vids, not to mention the various Hollywood tie-in experiences like that Game of Thrones Wall ride. Point being it's mostly PC space people or gamers in general in the know about Oculus specifically, and I think most of that's due to social media, not Sammy. I've demoed my Gear to a fair number of people and most have never heard of Oculus before, and usually when they come out of the experience it's the Samsung branding they recall, not the former. But hey, it's spreading the gospel of VR in general so win-win.
tbh even though I've never tried the gear VR, I dont really trust it simply because it's a smartphone based VR solution. The only time I tried VR was with a smartphone based VR headset and it literally felt like someone just strapped a phone to my eyes and called that "VR". I've been cautious/cynical about gear and other smartphone or low cost VR solutions since because another experience like that would have greatly degraded my opinion of VR as a whole.
GearVR is fantastic. Google Cardboard is not, which I'm guessing is what you tried. GearVR has the benefit of being developed at a very low level with the phone to optimize for performance so the experience is surprisingly good.
DOT DASH DOT
Member
Let's hope so!
To make matters worse I game on a 4KTV, and the thought of gaming with a 480p pic stuck in my face fills me with horror! Ha
wanderingprostheyltite
Member
If your only frame of reference for mobile vr has been crummy cardboard alikes then yeah, I can understand the hesitation, but it is def decent for an entry level experience. I expected it to be crap myself coming off the devkits and was surprised how good it was. No it isn't as good as the pc hmds coming out but it can still give you plenty of wowee moments just like the pc ones provide.
TrAcEr_x90
Member
Still waiting to hear back about my free Gear VR. Do people get sick with them? Or that issue has been solved on all VR platforms?
Depends on the game. Don't play Temple Run VR regardless that it's free.
It wasnt the cardboard, but it was probably something just as low of quality, since I dont think you can get any lower than what I tried. Unfortunately I dont have a Samsung smartphone and know no one who has a gear so I couldnt even try it out if I wanted.
Since my only frame of reference to VR is with that terrible experience, I'm probably gonna be extra critical of the quality of immersiveness once my Vive shipment comes in and I get to try real VR
wanderingprostheyltite
Member
It wasnt the cardboard, but it was probably something just as low of quality, since I dont think you can get any lower than what I tried. Unfortunately I dont have a Samsung smartphone and know no one who has a gear so I couldnt even try it out if I wanted.
Since my only frame of reference to VR is with that terrible experience, I'm probably gonna be extra critical of the quality of immersiveness once my Vive shipment comes in and I get to try real VR
Certain Best Buys give demos of GearVR, though unfortunately they show you 360 videos typically which isn't the full enchilada. They're certainly cool, but won't give the same kind of uncanny feeling of immersion anything geometry 3d provides. They should be showing people something like Androids Dream, has to be sideloaded but that's the best, seated, on-rails, great sense of scale, it's perfect for demo purposes.
Future PhaZe
Member
VR is about immersion, and the people with rigs to choose between OR and Vive are not going to let 200 dollars stand in the way between whatever they feel offers the most immersive experience.
habithipster
Member
Gear VR lacks positional tracking, which is major. It compensates for it somewhat by attaching the in-game camera to a neck model, so that when you turn your neck your head also moves a little. Still, no dodging, strafing, leaning. This mismatch between your movement and the game view causes sickness. Rift and Vive both have great positional tracking (except eyeball movement which isn't yet taken into account).
Another thing that causes sickness is artificial locomotion, turning/rotation in particular. Valve "solved motion sickness". How? Room scale. Your own movements, and your own movements only.
Also, all headsets (except perhaps the elusive Magic Leap) still have a vergence-accommodation conflict. How important is true accommodation? We don't know yet.
OmarTheHippo
Member
That my was response when the Vive was announced. "I already was willing to go $700, so might as well go $900 to get the absolute most out of VR immediately". And the motion controllers + potential extra cameras for OR room scale makes that gap minuscule
I'm 100% sure I'll frown at being unable to play an Oculus exclusive game, but that's heads and tails better than missing entirely unique VR experiences despite shelling out nearly the same $$$
And, most importantly, I buy hardware for what it CURRENTLY does, not for what it "might do in the future". Anyone with any experience regarding early adoption or cutting edge tech should have plenty of scars from getting burned by the latter
Correct me if i'm wrong but "finger "tracking isn't really finger tracking with the Touch. They are performing smart assumptions based on where your fingers are resting (or not resting) to create gestures. So if your thumb comes up off of the normal rested position then they assume you are doing a thumbs up. Maybe the same with pointing? Or that's the one finger they can detect when it occludes with the half moon shape? I feel like this hasn't been fully articulated yet.
OmarTheHippo
Member
Pretty universal agreement the Touch are more comfortable and natural feeling
The open question, and will remain open for months, is accuracy of tracking. Lighthouse are going to make Vive controllers superior for 360 room scale tracking and occlusion prevention compared to single camera OR. But both are getting near universal praise for accuracy at their respective use cases currently
Wrestlemania
Banned
The added benefits of the Touch are pretty much going to be the thing that mean I'll keep my Rift over the Vive. It's going to be painful waiting for it to release after playing with Vive though.
Vyse The Legend
Member
You're mostly right. There are capacitive sensors in the buttons, and that's how they know when your finger is resting on them or not. But, you're right, it's canned animations, not precise movements.
The Tested guys said it best: Touch gives you a way better sense that your hand is in the VR space, but the Vive controllers are way better for representing objects you're holding, i.e. guns, bats, lightsabers, etc.
When it comes to ergonomics, Touch is better, though.
What added benefits? The finger stuff?
Sleeping Lesson
Member
Case closed!
is this a consensus? havent seen many impressions of how the touch controllers themselves feel to use.
my pendulum might be swinging back towards OR again .. still unsure about 360 tracking and general robustness of tracking compared to vive
Zalusithix
Member
Yeah, I'm not exactly confident in the touch controllers tracking accurately as the distance from the camera increases. This is without even considering the occlusion issues. They're a lot smaller than the headset and have fewer light points for the camera to track. Either one of those conditions makes tracking harder / less accurate. Having both at the same time is not a good thing. They'll (probably) work fine for standing play, but room scale seems like it would be asking for trouble. Which is no doubt why Oculus is extremely cagey about supporting room scale VR.
plagiarize
Banned
Good lord did I have a busy day. Only just caught up on this thread, so forgive the dated topics.
Pinball FX 2 being Oculus exclusive.
Frankly I doubt this has anything to do with money. Pinball FX 2 has to my memory never launched on multiple systems at once. Zen are a small team. I know they didn't launch simultaneously on PC, Wii U, PS4 and Xbox One, for example.
All different launches.
So yeah, this just a case of Oculus being a better fit for their game (everyone gets a pad and they don't need motion controls) and probably the bigger launch numbers wise, so they're focusing on that first.
Most successful headset longterm of Vive, PSVR and Rift
Depends on how you count it. I think Oculus are likely to be the most successful long term, given the money behind them and their established name value... but the Rift is very unlikely to be the most successful headset. The Rift 2 will be more successful. Then the Rift 3, etc.
Same for the Vive. Really the big unknown with the Vive is two fold. How much are people going to want room scale, and how many people have or are willing to give up the suitable space. The less space you have for room scale, the less and less advantage the Vive has over the touch. Sure I could play job simulator in a small environment with the Vive too if I wanted. But why buy a Vive then?
Trust me, part of that is jealously. I'd love to have the space for a projector too, but I don't... and I love this house we're in the process of buying... so that's not going to change.
By virtue of the fixed hardware I'd wager the PSVR will be the most successful long term of these three.
Pentile vs RGB
Whether pentile 1440p is better than RGB 1080p or not, RGB 1080p was absolutely the right choice for Sony because it eases the number of pixels they need to draw every frame... and will definitely look better than pentile 1080p.
But yeah, pixel perfect scaling etc just isn't a thing in VR as Durante explains. On Gear VR the games that render at lower resolutions... you can still tell, but there isn't really native 1:1 output under any circumstances... so it's not as obvious as some scaling vs no scaling.
The job simulator guy in the Tested video from yesterday sure seemed to be saying that putting the sensors in opposite corners of the room worked with 360 degree environments in the Touch. And we can throw out that stupid debate about it being different versions between Touch and the Vive, since he seemed to be saying both would offer all the different environments.
Pinball FX 2 being Oculus exclusive.
Frankly I doubt this has anything to do with money. Pinball FX 2 has to my memory never launched on multiple systems at once. Zen are a small team. I know they didn't launch simultaneously on PC, Wii U, PS4 and Xbox One, for example.
All different launches.
So yeah, this just a case of Oculus being a better fit for their game (everyone gets a pad and they don't need motion controls) and probably the bigger launch numbers wise, so they're focusing on that first.
Most successful headset longterm of Vive, PSVR and Rift
Depends on how you count it. I think Oculus are likely to be the most successful long term, given the money behind them and their established name value... but the Rift is very unlikely to be the most successful headset. The Rift 2 will be more successful. Then the Rift 3, etc.
Same for the Vive. Really the big unknown with the Vive is two fold. How much are people going to want room scale, and how many people have or are willing to give up the suitable space. The less space you have for room scale, the less and less advantage the Vive has over the touch. Sure I could play job simulator in a small environment with the Vive too if I wanted. But why buy a Vive then?
Trust me, part of that is jealously. I'd love to have the space for a projector too, but I don't... and I love this house we're in the process of buying... so that's not going to change.
By virtue of the fixed hardware I'd wager the PSVR will be the most successful long term of these three.
Pentile vs RGB
Whether pentile 1440p is better than RGB 1080p or not, RGB 1080p was absolutely the right choice for Sony because it eases the number of pixels they need to draw every frame... and will definitely look better than pentile 1080p.
But yeah, pixel perfect scaling etc just isn't a thing in VR as Durante explains. On Gear VR the games that render at lower resolutions... you can still tell, but there isn't really native 1:1 output under any circumstances... so it's not as obvious as some scaling vs no scaling.
The job simulator guy in the Tested video from yesterday sure seemed to be saying that putting the sensors in opposite corners of the room worked with 360 degree environments in the Touch. And we can throw out that stupid debate about it being different versions between Touch and the Vive, since he seemed to be saying both would offer all the different environments.
wanderingprostheyltite
Member
Well that's refreshing to hear, hopefully the budget cuts dev will change their tune about changing the fundamental gameplay design to suit the "limited" Oculus tracking.
Sleeping Lesson
Member
Get two pendulums!
i might need to go back and rewatch, because that part wasn't clear to me. sounded lime the dev was hedging because oculus haven't come out with clear guidance on how touch will work.
edit: yeah he is definitely hedging. he is talking generically about all three systems when he first mentions opposing trackers, and then clearly mentions that oculus is not demoing touch like that, and they'll have to wait and see what the final version will be like
Wrestlemania
Banned
Finger stuff, better ergonomics, looks like it'll get closer to making it feel like your hands are present.
One of my concerns about the Vive's success is almost entirely down to perception. Even now you can see a lot of folks being introduced to VR thinking that Vive is strictly a room-scale experience style platform. This is somewhat getting reinforced I think by folks that have pre-ordered the Vive almost always talking about the room-scale experience as that is what separates the Vive from the other two HMDs, to the point where some people have said things like "the future of VR is room scale".
As a developer, it seems fairly obvious to me that room scale is not the future of VR. Neither is the seated or standing experience. The future of VR needs - not wants - to be all of these things and experiences we haven't yet identified. The promise of VR is in potential - having an unknown quantity in a market that hasn't really had such a thing in a long time - and it would be nothing but a total squandering if VR development collapsed into just one of those directions. If the future of VR is only any one of those things, VR probably doesn't have much of a future in the long run. I don't think this is what is going to take place, as both Sony and Oculus are taking positions that mostly ensure that, but it's important I think for enthusiasts to understand it needs to not happen.
I think HTC and Valve should probably work on broadening their messaging a bit about what their device is capable of so it doesn't become a device that consumers see and think "I don't really have space for room scale, so I guess I should get one of the other ones", especially when I think room scale is without a doubt the least accessible in terms of leisure use in the average home. People on forums or Reddit aren't going to do anywhere near enough to combat that perception if it takes root, that messaging needs to come from the source in their marketing. They need to show that they're just as interested in bringing the rest of those possible experiences besides room scale to their device. That'll be the most relevant now at the introduction of consumer VR than at any point going forward.
Wrestlemania
Banned
I don't think that's entirely how it'll finally be - in a Tested video from last year Luckey said that the canned animations were how it was for that event, but that wasn't necessarily binary and they'd rather under promise and overdeliver.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=asduqdRizqs
About 19m into that.
DOT DASH DOT
Member
I'm gonna try and get hold of a Virtual Boy.
plagiarize
Banned
The way I heard it was him not wanting to say for definite that it works since Oculus aren't talking about it, but that it works. He was saying things like 'well they've set the cameras up here this way, but if you have cameras in opposite corners you can do 360 degree environments.' I mean, why was he even talking about opposing sensors when demoing the touch version, you know?
He's definitely hedging and probably didn't want to go against message of every thing else Oculus were showing, but I took from it that he has the kit and all but said that they'd tested it that way and it worked.
He wouldn't be hedging if it didn't work, is how I read it.
Right, the future of VR is whatever gets us vastly explorable VR worlds without needing to teleport all over the place. Whether that's Omni directional treadmills, or robotic exo skeletons, or spinal implants, or something else entirely... that's clearly what we're aiming for.
Room scale is definitely compelling right now, and for a lot of people that have tried it, the most compelling thing right now. I do think a lot of the way people talk about it as the be all and end all is tinged a bit by system warriors, because as far as presence goes, I don't see how a racing game with a wheel and pedals is inferior in any way shape and form. Heck I can see how it's superior.
And of course the Vive supports everything from room scale on down. Right now it's the premium headset that covers all bases. I don't think room scale is just a talking point that'll be dropped like a brick once Oculus can do it too (even if that needs Touch 2.0 and Rift 2.0) but I do believe that it's a relatively transient thing. Like, single screen platformers and screen flipping in the days before technology allowed for smooth scrolling.
Mixed reality could replace it nearly entirely... and again, once you have a way of moving around an infinite space that doesn't break presence... room scale will be a thing of the past. But it's hard to guess how quickly we'll get there. Certainly a lot of work is being done along numerous vectors to achieve it. I've not seen anything close to a good solution... but then I was completely shocked to hear that Samsung had vestibular stimulation working as well as they do in their 4D headphones. I thought we were much further behind with that technology.
So who knows.
But if I had an appropriate space for the Vive... I'd be all over it. I have no hesitation in saying that.
That's how I heard it as well. It didn't really sound like a confirmation of anything.
can't really go wrong with either. one gets you touch now - one later. one might be a bit lighter or more comfortable, or have slightly less screendoor, or slightly larger fov.
but it feels like that 5% tiny differences that nobody except crazy enthusiasts will worry about.
Cuban Legend
Member
So where can i go to try out a Vive and an Oculous Rift? Are any retailers doing demos?
Vanishing Realms is up on the Steam store.
The screenshots looks really good and Chet was hyping it up but I haven't seen anything else about it. Anyone seen any videos or impressions?
The screenshots looks really good and Chet was hyping it up but I haven't seen anything else about it. Anyone seen any videos or impressions?
Sounds cool but I wonder how they will handle moving through the game world.
MiamiWesker
Member
So is oculus ever going to tell us when our rifts will ship?
wanderingprostheyltite
Member
Will probably get emails a week prior like they did with the devkits saying ours will be shipping soon (if you're in that wave), giving you last chance to update shipping info and the like. I don't think you'll get a notification from them when it actually ships but I could be wrong. UPS MyChoice is good for seeing alerts when packages will be coming to your address, not sure where it works outside US though.
I apologize for not paying too much attention to sony's side of things, but have they stated they were going to have other VR experience beyond games? I was looking into being able to have trips to different places with VR as my main interest but was going to pick up a PSVR to start off baby steps into VR world. Eventually picking up the iterations of VR headsets on PC, so I would get to experience those later on. But as for now, is Sony planning on doing something like this?
TAJ
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
Why would anyone using a single screen not taper the nosepiece to a point as it gets further from the nose?
Unless you mean because pixels towards the edges are less useful?
mrchampipi
Member
What I don't picture in such a scenario with the Rift is how are you suposed to have a camera in each corner of the room, while each camera needs to be connected to your pc. 5 meters usb3 cables both ways? That doesn't seem very realistic honestly, unless they come up with a wireless camera for the touch.
VlaudTheImpaler
tl;dr
Apologies, it took me a while to find the answer to your question but this is the best I could do.
Source,
So as many as possible it would seem.
MiamiWesker
Member
Do you know when they will charge us? I want to make sure to not get a block from the bank.
I'm very jealous.
I really don't see your point. Oculus and PS do more than enough to support non-room-scale VR on their own, either through marketing or through developer support, and most of those experiences which aren't held down by exclusivity agreements will eventually end up on Vive too. (And maybe/probably even those held down by such if they are for Oculus)
Room-scale only has a single champion, Valve, so that's what they should focus on.
(I will also admit that I'm personally simply far more interested in that than anything else)
Valve's VR optimization presentation just now was good stuff.
Their Adaptve Quality technique was 'straight forward' (think dynamic resolution but applied to most effects) but what surprised them was how it made their games look dramatically better across the line. This by providing a large stack of higher quality presets above normal and keeping the GPU bouncing between 70-90% utilization.
Even a GTX 680 spiked to crazy high preset territories. People who saw it in action thought they were using higher resolution screens than Rift.
Transcript here:
http://www.roadtovr.com/gdc-2016-va...ormance-live-blog-4pm-pst/?platform=hootsuite
Their Adaptve Quality technique was 'straight forward' (think dynamic resolution but applied to most effects) but what surprised them was how it made their games look dramatically better across the line. This by providing a large stack of higher quality presets above normal and keeping the GPU bouncing between 70-90% utilization.
Even a GTX 680 spiked to crazy high preset territories. People who saw it in action thought they were using higher resolution screens than Rift.
Transcript here:
http://www.roadtovr.com/gdc-2016-va...ormance-live-blog-4pm-pst/?platform=hootsuite
wanderingprostheyltite
Member
Tested's GDC Long VR Minute for those that missed it
VR talk starts around 40 mins, timestamped anyway but just in case.
VR talk starts around 40 mins, timestamped anyway but just in case.