|
Danith posted:No price is listed, so is it actually out? I'm betting it's going to be $499. I hope it's a bit cheaper than that, but I fully expect $499 as well. I have a HP WMR right now, which is just fine enough to not drop $500, and instead put that towards a Quest in spring
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 14:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 21:18 |
|
|
mobby_6kl posted:
Can it track more than like 100 degrees in front of you yet?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 14:58
|
|
New Samsung Odyssey+ is out
|
^^^ Yeah it always tracked quite a bit more than the actual headset FOV Danith posted:No price is listed, so is it actually out? I'm betting it's going to be $499. Stick100 posted:Integrated BT receiver is a huge deal. Getting Bluetooth working for the controllers has been a giant pain in the rear end, I think this should have been standard from day one. This is a substantial improvement (weight reduction, anti-sde screen, and built-in Bluetooth).
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 15:45
|
|
|
Surprise Giraffe posted:An external cam or two might help right? Shouldn't be too hardware-expensive? The problem with that is inside-out tracking is a cost-saving measure and marketing angle. Going to external cameras also puts the WMR headsets up against the Oculus and Vive price-wise. Then they're just losing money when people buy Oculus Rifts instead. The existing controllers also aren't designed for an external camera to detect them; They're specifically engineered so the sensors face towards the HMD.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 15:57
|
|
|
mobby_6kl posted:^^^ I bought a $5 usb dongle, but I have problems because I have built-in (but not working BT on two computers). I have to go into device manager and disable the built-in Bluetooth, before I can find and connect. Also, I have issues if I get more than about 6 feet from the dongle the tracking would start to flake out as the antenna is so weak. Having a 100% rock solid and simple BT connection makes WMR a much easier product to recommend.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 17:00
|
|
|
They should add a 180 degree camera on each side of the headset like it's a huge 360 camera.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 18:26
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/lucasmtny/status/1054430242603982848
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 19:22
|
|
|
Honestly I thought Oculus were still going to keep up the pretense of caring about PC VR for one more generation. I guess takeup on the Go and interest in the Quest has been healthy enough that they don't think that's necessary? It'll be interesting to see who ends up replacing them as the "polished, high-end" option for PCVR.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 19:32
|
|
|
Man, that really sucks. I don't want a cellphone-level VR headset that I can't hook up to a PC, I was really hoping for another Rift headset with better FOV/image quality and those touch controllers.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 19:40
|
|
|
It's entirely possible that the product he was developing couldn't be delivered for anything resembling a reasonable cost, so it got scrapped in favor of something that'll actually sell. Oculus has always been about making VR cheap and accessible, the most expensive product they ever launched was the Rift for $600 and that was pretty widely considered a mistake and got knocked down to $400 a year later, which is a price barrier they're probably not eager to cross again.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 19:47
|
|
|
Gen 2 needs rock solid eye tracking combined with foveated rendering, a higher res screen to take advantage of that, and higher FOV would be good. Without those things higher res alone isn't enough because no hardware will be able to drive it enough to take advantage of it. I'm guessing there's all sorts of other stuff that's being worked out (like the varifocal display) but that's pretty clearly $$$ and not in the near future. I'm still really only excited for Quest at this point in terms of hardware. As far as I'm concerned the Vive, Rift etc are still incredibly fantastic hardware and the software hasn't come close to catching up. You only really notice the drawbacks and imperfections when you're not sufficiently immersed in the game. I don't think I've heard anyone say "yeah Beat Saber is fine, but it would be soooo much better if the resolution was twice as good! Then it would actually be fun!" You only say that about the games that aren't particularly good anyway, so you notice the problems and wish they were better.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 19:54
|
|
|
Imo that article is trash clickbait. The amount of R&D that has gone into the Half Dome that has a long list of patents associated with it, combined with the MASSIVE hiring that Oculus has done for stuff that is most likely to show up in CV2 long before a Quest 2 indicates that there will still be a CV2 and it will be incredible. I would not be surprised if Quest 2 in say 2023 combines the two platforms and there not being a Rift 3. Instead, the Quest 2 can be plugged in and powered by a PC or standalone. rage-saq fucked around with this message at 20:25 on Oct 22, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 20:23
|
|
|
What the gently caress. So Half Dome will never see the light of day? gently caress YOU FACEBOOK! For once Valve does deliver though; I'm really glad we finally have ASW like motion smoothing. Going to give that a spin, but it's extremely disappointing news that there will be no CV2 especially when multiple people kept promising that Oculus won't give up on PCVR. Steam VR's per application settings for super sampling is broken now though. Every time I want to change to another game like Racket NX for example, it just quickly resets back to Steam VR Home. How the gently caress am I supposed to set super sampling settings for other VR games now? Edit: Also where do I find my normal non motion smoothing re-projection settings? They seem missing now. iceaim fucked around with this message at 20:26 on Oct 22, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 20:23
|
|
|
Lemming posted:Gen 2 needs rock solid eye tracking combined with foveated rendering, a higher res screen to take advantage of that, and higher FOV would be good. Without those things higher res alone isn't enough because no hardware will be able to drive it enough to take advantage of it. I'm guessing there's all sorts of other stuff that's being worked out (like the varifocal display) but that's pretty clearly $$$ and not in the near future. Sims absolutely need a higher resolution than what we can currently get, it affects playability in a real way, and this also goes for anything that has much reading. The best VR games are the ones that work with our current limitations, but those limitations are absolutely guiding development to some degree. That said... yeah, if the Quest winds up being as comfortable as the Go I'll probably never use my Rift again.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 20:26
|
|
|
iceaim posted:What the gently caress. So Half Dome will never see the light of day? gently caress YOU FACEBOOK! Nah, Half Dome was a late engineering sample for CV2, it’s gotten far enough that it will definitely exist.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 20:26
|
|
|
I'm a Vive user anyways, so maybe somewhat less hurt by the lack (or potential lack, but I tend to agree it sounds like they're focusing on standalone headsets) of a Rift 2, but ouch if true. I'm no diehard HTC fanboy - I was thinking after the Vive Pro and wireless upgrades that a potential Vive 2 looks far off, and was hoping for a Rift 2 to really push next gen VR.Lemming posted:Gen 2 needs rock solid eye tracking combined with foveated rendering, a higher res screen to take advantage of that, and higher FOV would be good. Without those things higher res alone isn't enough because no hardware will be able to drive it enough to take advantage of it. I'm guessing there's all sorts of other stuff that's being worked out (like the varifocal display) but that's pretty clearly $$$ and not in the near future. I think foveated rendering is way oversold in the VR community. Eye tracking has all the problems of camera based head tracking (as opposed to IR LED tracking like the Vive and Rift), with a bunch more problems, and the eyes move much faster than the head. I've been very skeptical that it'll really be working smoothly and dependably in a consumer product in the next 5 years. I was more hoping for a next gen headset to use a moderate resolution bump and improved subpixel layout and optics to improve the display instead of hoping for a revolution from foveated rendering. Bremen fucked around with this message at 20:35 on Oct 22, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 20:30
|
|
|
Facebook have denied that's why he left. They did not deny CV2 is cancelled.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 20:30
|
|
|
rage-saq posted:Nah, Half Dome was a late engineering sample for CV2, it’s gotten far enough that it will definitely exist. https://twitter.com/lucasmtny/status/1054447200078573568
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 20:33
|
|
|
sethsez posted:Sims absolutely need a higher resolution than what we can currently get, it affects playability in a real way, and this also goes for anything that has much reading. The best VR games are the ones that work with our current limitations, but those limitations are absolutely guiding development to some degree. Yeah, there are a few edge cases, but really even in VR I think the sims is still a relatively small percentage of the user base. The limitations drive things, sure, but I still maintain that the hardware limitations (specifically talking about resolution etc here, not the tethered to the PC part) aren't the biggest problem right now. The problem is a lack of investment in quality software, which is a chicken and egg problem to some degree with the userbase. Bremen posted:I think foveated rendering is way oversold in the VR community. Eye tracking has all the problems of camera based head tracking (as opposed to IR LED tracking like the Vive and Rift), with a bunch more problems, and the eyes move much faster than the head. I've been very skeptical that it'll really be working smoothly and dependably in a consumer product in the next 5 years. The reason eye tracking is important because hardware is already really expensive and starting to run into serious diminishing returns. Nvidia is pushing their RTX thing hard because outside of that, the 20xx cards are not really a significant step up over the 10xx line. Even if you have a higher res, you aren't really going to be able to drive it particularly well. A resolution "bump" needs to be fairly significant to really be worth it, as the Odyssey/Vive Pro have shown; they're better, but not so much better that other factors like comfort, controllers, and sweet spot don't override how valuable it is, and the higher resolution is already a decent bit more taxing. I just don't think there's too much to pack into a new headset that makes an upgrade worth it right now. Like best case if you're totally new to VR you might be able to get the newer one, but you're going to fundamentally have the same experience as someone with a current gen headset.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 20:41
|
|
|
I think the hardware is fine, they just need more and better games. I like my Oculus but if version 2 came out tomorrow I probably wouldn't buy it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 20:53
|
|
|
Eh, I bought into Rift knowing full well that the PC end was likely to be an enthusiasts' side-show, and that the real focus would be on self-contained units, since ease of use is critical to wide adoption. The tech is simply not there yet for a meaningful upgrade over the CV1 and Vive; slightly higher res/FOV/sweet spot aren't enough to justify another $600+ purchase, especially with the steep increase in hardware requirements.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 21:00
|
|
|
rage-saq posted:Imo that article is trash clickbait. The amount of R&D that has gone into the Half Dome that has a long list of patents associated with it, combined with the MASSIVE hiring that Oculus has done for stuff that is most likely to show up in CV2 long before a Quest 2 indicates that there will still be a CV2 and it will be incredible. None of that investment is inconsistent with the claim that it was cancelled last week. It's perfectly common for companies to continuously dump millions of dollars into a project and then can it with no warning, sometimes within weeks of release, sometimes immediately after hiring hundreds of people who are then just as suddenly fired; if you've decided something's not going to be profitable then ramping down slowly is just throwing good money after bad. Big companies generally don't get to be big unless they know how to avoid the sunk cost fallacy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 21:15
|
|
|
Lemming posted:The reason eye tracking is important because hardware is already really expensive and starting to run into serious diminishing returns. Nvidia is pushing their RTX thing hard because outside of that, the 20xx cards are not really a significant step up over the 10xx line. Even if you have a higher res, you aren't really going to be able to drive it particularly well. A resolution "bump" needs to be fairly significant to really be worth it, as the Odyssey/Vive Pro have shown; they're better, but not so much better that other factors like comfort, controllers, and sweet spot don't override how valuable it is, and the higher resolution is already a decent bit more taxing. If you combine a bunch of small improvements they can work out to be a large one, though. The Rift/Vive originally launched with minimum requirements of a 970, and we've had a lot of improvements since then, so a next gen headset can squeeze in a somewhat higher resolution. Better subpixel arrangements could provide the effect of a larger resolution without increasing the processing load, better optics could further improve clarity as well as sweet spot, and improve FOV without increasing resolution by taking advantage of the fact that you can get away with lower clarity around the edges. So yeah, you're not going to be able to quadruple resolution without foveated rendering, but combine enough small improvements and you could get a similar effect.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 21:16
|
|
|
Bremen posted:If you combine a bunch of small improvements they can work out to be a large one, though. The Rift/Vive originally launched with minimum requirements of a 970, and we've had a lot of improvements since then, so a next gen headset can squeeze in a somewhat higher resolution. Better subpixel arrangements could provide the effect of a larger resolution without increasing the processing load, better optics could further improve clarity as well as sweet spot, and improve FOV without increasing resolution by taking advantage of the fact that you can get away with lower clarity around the edges. My point is that we've already seen an increase in resolution with the Odyssey and Vive Pro, but it hasn't really been a significant step up. I find it hard to believe that something more expensive that isn't a bigger leap really has a place in the market right now.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 21:20
|
|
|
Lemming posted:My point is that we've already seen an increase in resolution with the Odyssey and Vive Pro, but it hasn't really been a significant step up. I find it hard to believe that something more expensive that isn't a bigger leap really has a place in the market right now. The bigger danger is that people just avoid buying what's available now because it's "old" and they want to wait for the next generation to hit. Sometimes iterating isn't about making a product meaningfully better, but about ensuring that the customer knows they're getting something that isn't going to be massively upstaged in a month or two. And really, the Rift could do just fine with the optics, screens and ergonomics of the Quest added in (and if the Quest can use those parts and come in at under $400, I don't see why a revised Rift couldn't, either). I find the Go a significantly nicer experience than the Rift solely because it actually fits my fat head, glasses included, without issue, and the optics don't glare every which way the second a hint of contrast appears. And a way to streamline the camera setup so it doesn't require multiple USB 3 ports on different controllers wouldn't hurt, either.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 21:29
|
|
|
sethsez posted:The bigger danger is that people just avoid buying what's available now because it's "old" and they want to wait for the next generation to hit. Sometimes iterating isn't about making a product meaningfully better, but about ensuring that the customer knows they're getting something that isn't going to be massively upstaged in a month or two. True, but it's not trivial to upgrade all the infrastructure around a new SKU and realistically, how many more Rifts would they sell? The barrier to entry isn't just price, it's how much of a pain in the rear end the whole process is. You need either more killer software, or a different style of hardware. The Quest is the main thing that's going to overcome that, because realistically it's the main thing Oculus can do to jump start mass adoption (they've been trying with funding software, I think it's a necessary part of the process but it's clearly not sufficient)
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 21:38
|
|
|
The Walrus posted:Facebook have denied that's why he left. They did not deny CV2 is cancelled. Yes, they specifically did. https://variety.com/2018/digital/news/oculus-co-founder-brendan-iribe-is-leaving-facebook-1202988298/ variety posted:Facebook subsequently denied this report, with a spokesperson telling Variety: “Yes, we are planning a future version of Rift.” Nobody's cancelling poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 21:41
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:Nobody's cancelling poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 21:52
|
|
|
Yes, that's a tweet from the guy who wrote the article. I'm saying I'm not sure I believe the article. If another source backs it up, then sure, but TechCrunch isn't exactly a paragon of journalism and Facebook flat-out denied everything in it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 21:57
|
|
|
IMO It's in facebook's best interest to deny everything until they've got a game plan to tackle this, they don't want to lose brand confidence.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 22:04
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:Yes, that's a tweet from the guy who wrote the article. I'm saying I'm not sure I believe the article. If another source backs it up, then sure, but TechCrunch isn't exactly a paragon of journalism and Facebook flat-out denied everything in it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 22:06
|
|
|
Serious question, why shouldn't we trust what Facebook have said? Have they lied before about Oculus stuff?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 22:12
|
|
|
Some people are freaking the gently caress out over this being the end of Oculus in PC VR. I mean, Bethesda cancelled Doom 4 because it was going to suck but that doesn't mean we never got another Doom. It's entirely possible the Rift 2 that existed was just a dead end they couldn't manage to figure out.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 22:14
|
|
|
sethsez posted:Some people are freaking the gently caress out over this being the end of Oculus in PC VR. I mean, Bethesda cancelled Doom 4 because it was going to suck but that doesn't mean we never got another Doom. It's entirely possible the Rift 2 that existed was just a dead end they couldn't manage to figure out.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 22:16
|
|
|
Skyarb posted:Serious question, why shouldn't we trust what Facebook have said? Have they lied before about Oculus stuff?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 22:17
|
|
|
Skyarb posted:why shouldn't we trust what Facebook have said? can't resist an easy driveby "loving lol" at this
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 22:19
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:Yes, that's a tweet from the guy who wrote the article. I'm saying I'm not sure I believe the article. If another source backs it up, then sure, but TechCrunch isn't exactly a paragon of journalism and Facebook flat-out denied everything in it. His point is that they did not deny it. There's a massive difference between what they said - there will be a future PC headset with the Rift name - and what his article claims - that the current PC headset project that Iribe was spearheading, known externally variously as CV2 or Half Dome, has been cancelled. I'm not going to take his article as gospel; there's certainly room for it to come from bad information. So far, though, the responses from Facebook have been weasel-worded to the point where his claims merit the benefit of the doubt. Until and unless someone from Oculus comes out and says "Half dome/CV2 is still in development" I'm inclined to believe it's dead.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 22:26
|
|
|
Ciaphas posted:can't resist an easy driveby "loving lol" at this I understand not trust facebook in general, but my question is more, as it pertains to VR, has facebook lied in the past or twisted the truth about Oculus related things?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 22:33
|
|
|
Skyarb posted:I understand not trust facebook in general, but my question is more, as it pertains to VR, has facebook lied in the past or twisted the truth about Oculus related things? maybe not but i'm going to continue on the Never Trust Corporations take anyway past performance not indicative something something
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 22:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 21:18 |
|
|
NRVNQSR posted:His point is that they did not deny it. There's a massive difference between what they said - there will be a future PC headset with the Rift name - and what his article claims - that the current PC headset project that Iribe was spearheading, known externally variously as CV2 or Half Dome, has been cancelled. They could both be true. A follow-up to the Rift is going to be released, it just won't be a direct evolution of that particular prototype. This probably all comes down to the use of the term "Rift 2," which has significant connotations that may be leading people to the wrong conclusions.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 22:50
|
|