|
KillHour posted:poo poo like this is why I'm so surprised the internet hasn't said "gently caress you" to Oculus. This actually happened when Facebook bought Oculus, told everyone about their walled garden storefront and anytime Palmer Luckey opened his stupid loving mouth. Dunno if anyone's interested, but Space Engine just hit Steam and it has VR support. Space Engine is less of a game than it is a space exploration program that let's you explore not just the whole of the Milky Way with all of it's celestial bodies, but billions of other galaxies as well. I made a thread for it some years ago and thought I might do it again but it never gained much traction. If you want to get blown away by the scope of our universe and travel among the stars I say give it a shot.
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 07:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 06:03 |
|
|
s.i.r.e. posted:Dunno if anyone's interested, but Space Engine just hit Steam and it has VR support. Space Engine is less of a game than it is a space exploration program that let's you explore not just the whole of the Milky Way with all of it's celestial bodies, but billions of other galaxies as well. I made a thread for it some years ago and thought I might do it again but it never gained much traction. If you want to get blown away by the scope of our universe and travel among the stars I say give it a shot. I want this to be good. Please let this be good.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 08:07
|
|
|
Lemming posted:Their entire attitude towards software in their store right now is they want minimal jank and for everything to give you a guaranteed good experience. Any kind of streaming solution right now is super jank and definitely not a good experience. I don't think this move is great, but it does make sense, and as long as they're not touching sideloading it's not like they're preventing you from doing whatever. This is almost certainly not the reason as many have pointed out. Many of the quest ports right now are unoptimized that can at times be nauseating at the worst and unplayable at the best. This was a move because they don't want anything that allows competition into their walled garden. Lemming posted:If they take away sideloading then yeah absolutely it'd be worth some outrage, but as far as this I think they're just being conservative about the level of potential bad experiences they're willing to risk. Its all speculation but once they get enough of a foothold in the market I'd bet dollars to donuts we will see things like side loading and revive being shut down.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 08:28
|
|
|
SCheeseman posted:They don't give a poo poo about jank as evidenced by the janky-rear end port of Rec Room. The only people who are actually gonna sideload content are people who understand and care about what sideloading is. It's a group that probably isn't gonna have a whole lot of overlap with the average person buying a Quest for Beat Saber and SuperHot VR. And if sideloading got taken away I doubt the actual quantity of the playerbase complaining would be all that significant. I'd expect a very vocal group of enthusiasts getting justifiably pissed, but they're not making Facebook money so there's not a whole lot of reason for Facebook to lose sleep over it. There's no real reason to think they'd go one way or the other, but if they did kill sideloading I wouldn't exactly be surprised or expect them to lose sleep over the fallout. KillHour posted:poo poo like this is why I'm so surprised the internet hasn't said "gently caress you" to Oculus. They do this, raise hell and complain, and then go right back to buying Oculus software or hardware. Repeat for service or company of choice since forever. That said, if Facebook had done something stupid in the PCVR userbase up until now like, say, the Rift suddenly being blocked from SteamVR content it'd probably have been significant enough for them to pay attention and reverse it because of how relatively-small the market is. With the Quest just able to be sold to the average person, however, they really don't have to care a whole lot anymore if part of their market gets upset. Skyarb posted:Its all speculation but once they get enough of a foothold in the market I'd bet dollars to donuts we will see things like side loading and revive being shut down. I actually think ReVive's fairly safe for one simple reason; It makes Oculus money. All it does is get other headsets into their storefront relatively-legitimately, users still have to pay out money to play their games and that's just gravy for them. Neddy Seagoon fucked around with this message at 08:32 on Jun 12, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 08:30
|
|
|
Skyarb posted:This is almost certainly not the reason as many have pointed out. Many of the quest ports right now are unoptimized that can at times be nauseating at the worst and unplayable at the best. This was a move because they don't want anything that allows competition into their walled garden. Most everything on the Quest runs really well. I think Rec Room had some issues at launch but I went back and tried out the quest they added and the paintball and dodgeball and it all ran fine. What's nauseating and unplayable? Maybe VRChat? I can see that one being problematic, I'm guessing its popularity meant they gave it an exception. If they had longer term plans to close it off further, why would they allow sideloading now, which they knew would allow for the streaming to happen because ALVR and VRidge already worked on the Go, instead of starting locked down and heading off the outage? That doesn't really make sense to me, I don't see what advantage they would get.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 09:01
|
|
|
Quest VRCover trip report: What the hell are they thinking with this thicc rear end XXXL pad? It's way too big and despite being squishy puts the weight balance of the device completely on my cheekbones. The pad seems well made but they only have two of the same size in the basic kit. Fortunately the interface is designed basically identically to the Rift interface, so I popped on a standard thick pleather that I had and it was perfect. I prefer the thin on my Rift and while my Rift still feels a bit more comfortable, this is a HUGE leap from the stock comfort level, which wasn't all that bad just too abrasive and stiff.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 09:16
|
|
|
Lemming posted:Most everything on the Quest runs really well. I think Rec Room had some issues at launch but I went back and tried out the quest they added and the paintball and dodgeball and it all ran fine. What's nauseating and unplayable? Maybe VRChat? I can see that one being problematic, I'm guessing its popularity meant they gave it an exception. I'm curious, do you have a connection, personally or professionally with either Facebook or Oculus?
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 09:19
|
|
|
My uncle works for nintendo. In defense fo the quest, ive got a friend at work with one and they love it, even their parents (60+) love it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 09:26
|
|
|
s.i.r.e. posted:This actually happened when Facebook bought Oculus, told everyone about their walled garden storefront and anytime Palmer Luckey opened his stupid loving mouth. Whenever the Valve Index 2 comes out I'm gonna put a space station in orbit around XYZ planet in this "game" with a window to my computer's desktop and turn in to a giant hermit in my space outpost on the edge of space Space engine is just immensely good for zooming around from Star system to star system, then flying down to the surface to check things out, then back out to orbit, then off to the Moon before going to another Galaxy I always thought no man's sky was an ugly certain of space
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 09:30
|
|
|
I just remembered that Google banned Amazon from distributing their Amazon App Store via Google Play, but you can still sideload it. Seems slightly analogous, except that Virtual Desktop is just enabling the second storefront rather than being it. Having shipped to the Amazon App Store, oh god the lovely support requests from people who got an app through their store instead of google play and then the app got hosed up because of the hidden complexity of presenting compatible APKs for download (as well as Amazon's lovely SDK at the time) was really loving infuriating. When poo poo didn't work the vitriol flew like they didn't realize there were people on the other end of it. And there was nothing we could do except loving complain to Amazon, who didn't give a poo poo because clearly the user should have bought a kindle fire instead (...and about all the Kindle Fire has going for it is being a consistent hardware target to program against, warts and all...which to be fair is not a small thing). The analogy here should be somewhat easy to make. Also, however useful Virtual Desktop has been in the past, I can't help but think that it's going to be a struggle to stay relevant in the long term. It's occupying gaps that seem bound to get filled and once they are, who's gonna pay?
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 11:05
|
|
|
Lemming posted:Their entire attitude towards software in their store right now is they want minimal jank and for everything to give you a guaranteed good experience. Any kind of streaming solution right now is super jank and definitely not a good experience. I don't think this move is great, but it does make sense, and as long as they're not touching sideloading it's not like they're preventing you from doing whatever.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 11:25
|
|
|
Lets be real, its got to be at least a little of both
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 12:34
|
|
|
Doctor w-rw-rw- posted:I just remembered that Google banned Amazon from distributing their Amazon App Store via Google Play, but you can still sideload it. Seems slightly analogous, except that Virtual Desktop is just enabling the second storefront rather than being it. Apple banning the Steam Link app would be an even closer analogy, except obviously without the sideloading. Apple did eventually reverse that decision, but only after Valve removed the ability to buy Steam games using the app.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 12:59
|
|
|
SirViver posted:That sounds just like a somewhat-believable-at-first-glance corporate excuse for their walled garden approach; what seems more likely is that they're selling the hardware at cost and the only way to make something back is through software. So someone buying a Quest and worst case (for Oculus) only buying/playing SteamVR content straight up loses them money - which is why they're going after that, especially if it starts to get too comfortable/easy to do that. ReVive is the exact opposite; free extra money rolling in that they didn't have to take a loss for. As long as their hardware is a loss leader they really couldn't care less what headset you use when buying their software. Hell, the Index controllers are probably as good for Oculus as SteamVR users if you think about it; Full parity with their software and no more fudging goddamn touchpads to thumbsticks AND buttons.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 13:37
|
|
|
Skyarb posted:I'm curious, do you have a connection, personally or professionally with either Facebook or Oculus? It is severely illegal to have opinions outside the consensus on the internet SirViver posted:That sounds just like a somewhat-believable-at-first-glance corporate excuse for their walled garden approach; what seems more likely is that they're selling the hardware at cost and the only way to make something back is through software. So someone buying a Quest and worst case (for Oculus) only buying/playing SteamVR content straight up loses them money - which is why they're going after that, especially if it starts to get too comfortable/easy to do that. ReVive is the exact opposite; free extra money rolling in that they didn't have to take a loss for. As long as their hardware is a loss leader they really couldn't care less what headset you use when buying their software. The main thing for me is that I find it really hard to believe they're caring a lot about making back their money in the short term. They made $5 mil over the first two weeks in Oculus software sales - a quick Google search indicates they make about $180 million every day from Facebook. What the gently caress. I get the argument they want to lock people into their store, and I agree that giving people access to Steam makes that less solid, but it still feels like that's putting the cart before the horse. Right now there are no users to fight over, and it makes more sense to me that they're focusing on things that would prevent new users in the form of janky software that turns people off from VR.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 14:34
|
|
|
Lemming posted:It is severely illegal to have opinions outside the consensus on the internet It's not that you're "having opinions outside the consensus", it's that you're giving Facebook a frankly ludicrous amount of credit here given their history, and I've never really seen you not come down really heavily on the side of Oculus stuff in this thread at any point, so I can get why people would think you have a personal investment Like claiming they're locking off access to their competition just because they care so much about their customer that they don't want to have any chance that they might have a sub-par experience is a laughable position, and saying that they still allow sideloading doesn't really argue against that when you admit yourself that they'd experience huge backlash for doing that Simply, the reason they haven't disabled sideloading is that they'd experience backlash for it, and they won't experience all that much backlash for this, so they're doing it
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 14:53
|
|
|
You say that like Facebook has a huge physical product history. They have a huge social media market sure, but as far as physical products go, their history is quite checkered with failures and other garbage. Oculus is probably one of the few ventured that while Facebook owns them, is still making reasonable strides not only in hardware, but the technology, and bank rolling many of the games/devs that first made VR what it is today. You should be just as mad that you can't play games not sold by Nintendo on the Switch, or iOS apps not sold through the App Store. As long as the Quest has sideloading abilities, they don't care what you can do unofficially, but officially, they want to know what you are installing and the experience it is going to give you. It's exactly the same as how the Rift can play SteamVR but you have to install and use SteamVR and toggle the switch to allow it in the Oculus software.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 15:22
|
|
|
Does MS care enough about VR to add support to the new Flight Sim? Because that's all I want in this world right now. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ReDDgFfWlS4
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 15:24
|
|
|
I have a feeling you'd need a monster of a machine to run that in VR. It would be cool though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 15:27
|
|
|
Blade Runner posted:It's not that you're "having opinions outside the consensus", it's that you're giving Facebook a frankly ludicrous amount of credit here given their history, and I've never really seen you not come down really heavily on the side of Oculus stuff in this thread at any point, so I can get why people would think you have a personal investment It makes more sense for a social media company to concentrate on getting users over anything else though, right?
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 15:27
|
|
|
Blade Runner posted:It's not that you're "having opinions outside the consensus", it's that you're giving Facebook a frankly ludicrous amount of credit here given their history, and I've never really seen you not come down really heavily on the side of Oculus stuff in this thread at any point, so I can get why people would think you have a personal investment Because I think things are more nuanced than "Oculus Bad" automatically means I'm a shill is totally reasonable, sure  If they wanted to get rid of sideloading it would've made much more sense to just... not have had it enabled in the first place, like three weeks ago? Saying they're only not removing it because of potential backlash makes literally 0 zero sense. Believe me, I'm not arguing that they "care so much about their customer," I'm arguing their goals don't boil down to trying to beat Steam. They're playing a completely different game, and from what I can tell, their actions line up with the stated goals of trying to get as many people into VR as possible. In this case caring about whether or not people have a sub par experience is absolutely reasonable; they want to expand the market of VR, and one of the big potential issues is having people who try it get turned off from that product, specifically. They don't need to care about the customer to make any of these decisions. Besides, look at sideloading more closely. From what I've heard, it's already super easy to pirate everything from the store because of being able to load the APKs. Beat Saber is already modded to hell, which is going to interfere with DLC plans for the game. They could have already forseen that this was going to happen, because similar things happened to the Go with respect to piracy. But, they allowed it anyway. This doesn't really line up with the idea of trying to make money now or block off any potential for people using Steam with their headset. It does line up with the idea that leaving it open and easy for devs to make stuff with is worth the tradeoff of these potential downsides. This doesn't require Oculus to care about developers either, just about creating an environment where more software can get made, which would potentially lead to more people getting into VR. I don't think Oculus is looking out for anyone but themselves, but my point is that I think their goal of getting as many people into VR as possible as their primary motivator makes way more sense than anything else, and that I think that overarching goal is really, really good for VR as a whole.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 15:39
|
|
|
It's not like Oculus said the quest was going to be a much more curated and closed platform than the rift or anything pretty much from the moment it was announced or anything. Oh that's right they did. I'd bet that that feature of virtual desktop wasn't noticed by whomever is responsible for greenlighting quest apps so now they are "fixing" it. Annecdote time. Three people on my crew at work bought the quest on launch day. For all of them it is their first VR device. I mentioned to one of them when they we're talking about beatsaber that they could get custom songs via sideloading and they had no interest in messing with that. Said they would just wait for it to be in the official version. So that type of VR user does exist in my very small sample size. I'm pretty sure though that that's the type of user oculus really cares about with the quest.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 15:43
|
|
|
Enos Cabell posted:Does MS care enough about VR to add support to the new Flight Sim? Because that's all I want in this world right now. WTF they are actually finally making another one! Woo! I do think it will have VR support but drat that does look like it may need some good hardware to play with all the bells and whistles turned up to 11.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 15:58
|
|
|
Lemming posted:Because I think things are more nuanced than "Oculus Bad" automatically means I'm a shill is totally reasonable, sure No, you're a shill because I have never once seen you come down on the other side of Oculus at any time, ever. Like, you can claim it's a coincidence, but it's almost comedic, at this point. The vast majority of people aren't going to use sideloading, and it's easier to put it in and not deal with the backlash of the people who can and want to do it complaining, especially when their main customer base is never going to bother looking into anything like that. I think they absolutely are trying to beat Steam, because they want everyone on their store, more for data analytics than software sales. Your overall point is basically, again, giving Oculus a pretty amazing amount of credit in this situation; again, you're arguing that the reason they disabled access to their competitor, by telling the dev to take it out, is because they didn't feel it was a good enough experience to be on their device. You're actually claiming that they took out access to their competitor not for competitive reasons, but just because they felt it wouldn't be good enough. Like, c'mon, if that doesn't sound like being too far in the corner for one company, I literally can't think of anything that does.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 16:05
|
|
|
Lemming posted:The main thing for me is that I find it really hard to believe they're caring a lot about making back their money in the short term. They made $5 mil over the first two weeks in Oculus software sales - a quick Google search indicates they make about $180 million every day from Facebook. What the gently caress. Taking control of the market before it's massively profitable is the the best way to do it. There are whole industries built on the principle, and it's why Amazon became a giant by famously losing enormous amounts of money every year. I have no insider info on Oculus or Facebook, so I can't say what their plans are, but I just wanted to point out the statement shouldn't be "It's less likely they care about locking in users when the market is so small", it should be "It's much more likely they care more about locking in users when the market is still small." Also, I'm fairly certain blocking streaming had nothing to do with jank for the simple matter that if it was they would have told the developer to remove it until the jank was fixed. At most, it's a convenient corporate excuse.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 16:12
|
|
|
Blade Runner posted:No, you're a shill because I have never once seen you come down on the other side of Oculus at any time, ever. Like, you can claim it's a coincidence, but it's almost comedic, at this point. The vast majority of people aren't going to use sideloading, and it's easier to put it in and not deal with the backlash of the people who can and want to do it complaining, especially when their main customer base is never going to bother looking into anything like that. I think they absolutely are trying to beat Steam, because they want everyone on their store, more for data analytics than software sales. Streaming anything from your PC to the Quest is jank poo poo right now, it's laggy, there's huge latency, there's frame drops everywhere, nothing works quite the way it should, interactions are all hosed, and on and on and on. It's terrible for anyone but enthusiasts and enthusiasts can still access it. If you try to use it for anything but novelty you either have a very high tolerance for poo poo or you're going to have a very, very bad time (or you have access to enterprise level wifi hardware yeah yeah saq I know you have the fancy stuff). It literally goes against their entire goal for the store, which is to make sure that there's a level of quality that everything hits some level of quality, and while they're still hit and miss on this, most notably for me Creed is pretty bad with the blocking, streaming right now is some next level garbage. It's objectively terrible. If you wanted to make your point more clear you would've pointed out that they probably wouldn't let that feature in even if it was really, really good, and as far as that goes I think that's probably correct. It does seem likely that they're still plugging away at their own solution for it: https://twitter.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/1137485097425354752 If it gets to the case where there's a wireless streaming solution and they still block access to the Steam store in some fashion I'll agree it's lovely, but considering how they're handling giving the Rift/Rift S access to steam stuff through the "allow unknown sources" option, I think it'd be likely that they would allow it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 16:19
|
|
|
Enos Cabell posted:Does MS care enough about VR to add support to the new Flight Sim? Because that's all I want in this world right now. just buy x-plane
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 16:21
|
|
|
Blade Runner posted:No, you're a shill because  Everyone that disagrees with anyone in this thread is obviously a shill. Never change goons.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 16:26
|
|
|
Bremen posted:Taking control of the market before it's massively profitable is the the best way to do it. There are whole industries built on the principle, and it's why Amazon became a giant by famously losing enormous amounts of money every year. My point was more that it makes sense they'd try to get new users into VR through their hardware/software (which effectively locks them in) rather than knife fight for control of the existing, tiny user base. I do think it's likely that without a way to natively run Oculus stuff through any streaming solution (like right now you have to do Virtual Desktop/ALVR/VRidge -> SteamVR -> ReVive if you wanna do any Oculus stuff) they would probably block it anyway, but the jank is so inherent and pervasive in anything streaming related right now that I don't think you can really ignore it as a factor, especially since there's literally no way the guy could solve it on his own that saying "oh yeah as soon as you fix it we'll allow it back in" would just be taunting him
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 16:28
|
|
|
Truga posted:just buy x-plane X-Plane is nice, but it won't let me fly a Cessna 172 into a giraffe.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 16:29
|
|
|
neither will microsoft's thing. reminder when FSX pulled this before/after poo poo:  
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 16:34
|
|
|
rafikki posted:Does anyone have problems with beat saber in the quest where letting your arms, pretty much always my left arm, swing behind your body cause occasional tracking issues? It's pretty frustrating to miss a beat because the quest "lost" the saber for sec. If I try to recreate it on purpose, it never happens. Yes, constantly. It loses tracking when ever my arms are on the side of the headset. I feel like i have to play with my arms extended im front of me to not lose tracking. I feel the S's camera positions do better at tracking side motions. As I don't have to keep my arms extended in front to beat my saber.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 16:36
|
|
|
EdEddnEddy posted:WTF they are actually finally making another one! I said this in the flight sim thread, if they don't take this opportunity to make the only good-performing VR flight sim, they're idiots
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 16:37
|
|
|
Lemming posted:My point was more that it makes sense they'd try to get new users into VR through their hardware/software (which effectively locks them in) rather than knife fight for control of the existing, tiny user base. And my point is that you are demonstrably wrong about it. Business wise, it's far better for Oculus to ensure they dominate a slower growing market than share a fast growing one. The problem with your second point is that now if someone does fix the streaming, the developer is still blocked from bringing it back. There's a world of difference between telling him "Don't do x" and "We won't allow x unless it's sufficient quality" and it's kind of weird you don't seem to be acknowledging it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 16:38
|
|
|
Side-loading is an afterthought. At best. When the Quest was designed years ago, Oculus was quite probably mostly still OG Oculus with engineers wanting to make cool neat VR toys able to make design decisions. As of about a month ago, at least, it is under the direct helm of Facebook who likely have very specific ideas about what their flagship device gets used for (ie; buying Oculus software in the Oculus Store on the Oculus Headset). The only people who will care side-loading exists are the hardcore enthusiasts, the average person won't know how it is or how to use it. Or miss it if it's gone. And there's gonna be a shitload more of them than the enthusiasts to make money off of with software sales. Especially when there's zero revenue coming in from side-loading anyway. Lemming posted:If it gets to the case where there's a wireless streaming solution and they still block access to the Steam store in some fashion I'll agree it's lovely, but considering how they're handling giving the Rift/Rift S access to steam stuff through the "allow unknown sources" option, I think it'd be likely that they would allow it. Lol, they're not bringing it back. Also, they haven't blocked the PC headsets from Steam because they know full-well it'd be a goddamn fool's errand as hackers would get around the block inside of a week of implementing it. If not sooner. The Quest, on the other hand, is theirs. Top to bottom, software and hardware. No open platform API's to abide by, no third-party security holes to contend with, it is theirs to do with as they please.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 16:42
|
|
|
Has Oculus actually published their acceptable content for the quest store policies ? Or is that something you only get to find out if you are a developer applying to have an app on quest. IIRC you are supposed to get your software greenlit before developing it for quest going forward. I imagine it was a bit different for porting existing applications over to it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 16:42
|
|
|
Bremen posted:And my point is that you are demonstrably wrong about it. Business wise, it's far better for Oculus to ensure they dominate a slower growing market than share a fast growing one. They wouldn't potentially be sharing a fast growing market, every other company is loving around with stupid bullshit. They're the only ones doing a play for mainstream penetration. There is no "fixing streaming." It's not something some guys are just going to come up with a solution for. It's a full stack problem. The current streaming solutions that provide a good experience includes hardware that's literally hundreds of dollars on its own. We also don't know what he was told exactly, he only paraphrased, so splitting hairs over the exact terminology seems kind of pointless. But, again, they're blocking him from putting it on the Oculus store. Sideloading is still an option, and the guy said he was working on an APK.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 16:44
|
|
|
I do wonder if the TPCast guys are going to release some sort of dongle set you can plug into both your PC, and the other into your Quest and that can bypass all the latency issues of having to go through the Quest Wireless alone.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 16:50
|
|
|
Lemming posted:They wouldn't potentially be sharing a fast growing market, every other company is loving around with stupid bullshit. They're the only ones doing a play for mainstream penetration. Yes, I'm sure Oculus demanded there be no SteamVR streaming because they believe it will never be brought to an acceptable quality level, and know they couldn't be wrong. Not because of other reasons. EdEddnEddy posted:I do wonder if the TPCast guys are going to release some sort of dongle set you can plug into both your PC, and the other into your Quest and that can bypass all the latency issues of having to go through the Quest Wireless alone. Well, if they were they're probably now reconsidering.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 16:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 06:03 |
|
|
EdEddnEddy posted:I do wonder if the TPCast guys are going to release some sort of dongle set you can plug into both your PC, and the other into your Quest and that can bypass all the latency issues of having to go through the Quest Wireless alone. That could be pretty sweet because you could probably avoid the garbage compression that the current wifi streaming setups are using. High ghz radios are really needed to get "cable quality" streaming to a wireless headset. Those radios are expensive though 
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 16:53
|
|