• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

General VR discussion thread

Page 11 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Kaido

Elite Member & Kitchen Overlord
Feb 14, 2004
45,576
2,833
126
Lilliputing has links to a bunch of Oculus reviews:

http://liliputing.com/2016/03/oculus-rift-begins-shipping-early-reviews-mixed-best.html

The negatives pretty much sound like what we already know:

1. The headset is expensive, as is the PC to run it
2. Still has some mild SDE, is heavy, can be an issue if you wear glasses
3. Needs better controllers, and should have better motion tracking (lighthouses)
4. Needs more quality games

Another couple of generations & the hardware will get cheaper, the specs will get better, and the ecosystem will improve to have lots of good gaming options. Gaming & filming are still WIP in terms of workflows & seeing what works and what doesn't. Just needs time!
 

Aikouka

Lifer
Nov 27, 2001
29,937
596
126
After looking at that other Reddit link, I stumbled across the Issue du Jour being that the Rift CV1 apparently has a lower (horizontal) FOV of 80.
 

Subyman

Moderator <br> VC&G Forum
Mar 18, 2005
7,876
32
86
I wish Vive had an option of no controllers and no light house. They could probably get just the head set down to a very reasonable price. I wish Vive didn't exist and Oculus had partnered with Valve for Steam integration. That would have been my dream scenario.
 

ImpulsE69

Lifer
Jan 8, 2010
14,793
825
126
In this case, I believe they're looking at it from a per-eye perspective:

https://as.reddit.com/r/Vive/comments/4cese2/brandonjla_from_stresslevelzero_confirms_that_the/
Interesting. I wonder if this is the result of the 'blurry at the edges' comments with DK2. I personally did not see that as an issue because peripheral vision typically isn't 100% clear. To just cut it off seems a bit odd though. Granted many early reviews are saying SDE is barely noticeable if at all, and some speculate this is why.

I do find it hilarious that like everything else, everyone has to 'take a side' and are fanboys etc...for stuff that isn't even out yet calling for the failure of VR etc. Internet people are idiots.

I will say this.

For products that cost this much there should be no NDA and there should be WAY more information available than what there is even after the pre-orders. I find the secrecy around it all a bit unnerving and underhanded. It's a "trust us it's good, just give us your money" mentality that is bad for business and leads to overreactions.
 
Last edited:

flexy

Diamond Member
Sep 28, 2001
8,464
154
106
Lilliputing has links to a bunch of Oculus reviews:

http://liliputing.com/2016/03/oculus-rift-begins-shipping-early-reviews-mixed-best.html

The negatives pretty much sound like what we already know:

1. The headset is expensive, as is the PC to run it
2. Still has some mild SDE, is heavy, can be an issue if you wear glasses
3. Needs better controllers, and should have better motion tracking (lighthouses)
4. Needs more quality games

Another couple of generations & the hardware will get cheaper, the specs will get better, and the ecosystem will improve to have lots of good gaming options. Gaming & filming are still WIP in terms of workflows & seeing what works and what doesn't. Just needs time!
The Vive and Rift are "essentially" the same in terms of display, so resolution, SDE would be literally identical on both systems.

The "PC expensive" argument doesn't count AT ALL since it's no secret you need a (at least) "decent" machine for serious gaming and especially newer titles, so this is not surprising. You know, not being anywhere near "high end" here but you can buy used mainboards like a Z87 board, i7 CPU,16GB and a "decent" card from the 970 upwards and this is NOT a system that would cost you an arm and a leg...it would be a decent start into VR.

*** Someone earlier posted one really "enlightening" review of the Vive here
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oq5IyQOHFMw

And there was something said which I think sums up what this (VR in general) is actually about and what makes it special.

That guy saying how often the simplest games can "open up" a gaming experience in VR which is "entirely new"...he is referring to some simple shooters that make use of room scale, for instance.

He mentions a little how it is a different and entirely new experience when you all have a sudden find yourself being truly interactive playing a game, either w/ motion controllers or both, motion controllers and then of course room-scale by moving about. You are literally immersed in a game, this time with your entire body.

Say, you shoot some aliens, need to jump left right, duck, target, etc.. he's talking about a sense of achievement similar as if you were to do some sporty activity.

Someone else summed it up like this: "Gaming becomes NEW again".

It is NOT only that you perceive a gaming world now "in 3D", it is really that we'll play games in ways that we couldn't before.

But this entirely new way to experience is of course not just limited to games, you can "create" and visualize things like we couldn't do before.

A game then might not be the best and your most favorite because of, say, a story line, or graphics, or whatever criteria we're often using...BUT because a game can create new experiences or, if you will, "sensations".

Say, a game where you can fly around and mindlessly blow up and destroy stuff, a simple as it sounds, might give you more joy/satisfaction than some more complex game.

This is the MAJOR aspect here. It allows us to do things that we couldn't do before.
 

ImpulsE69

Lifer
Jan 8, 2010
14,793
825
126
Yes, that is what is most intriguing, but again I would guess most people do not have the luxury which will be a large hurdle.
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
105,923
20,851
136
I am nowhere near being interested in VR, and not sure if I ever will be, but I have a simple tech question after reading the various comments.

It seems that the current headsets are pretty terrible for those with glasses. I have contacts but hate them, so I wear my glasses 99% of the waking hours in a year. I also use various microscopes daily at work, including some very very fancy ones.

For these headsets, is it not possible to install a relatively low-tech eyepiece, perhaps as a modular piece of hardware, at the front of the goggles so that you can wear without glasses or contacts, and adjust the image on the displays into whatever focus you need? I still use my glasses at the scope, but you generally don't want to (I only do it because it is shared equipment...oh and when going from the eyepiece to a live image on the computer is totally effed if can't see anything)

This is really old, relatively simple tech--think of a telescope or binoculars, even with a biopter that can adjust different focus between eyes--that doesn't require much fancy glass.
 

sxr7171

Diamond Member
Jun 21, 2002
5,079
40
91
I wish Vive had an option of no controllers and no light house. They could probably get just the head set down to a very reasonable price. I wish Vive didn't exist and Oculus had partnered with Valve for Steam integration. That would have been my dream scenario.
I heard that they were partnered until FB got involved. I know this has nothing to do with the quality of the system or the experience but it would take a lot for me to spend money at anything owned by FB.
 

sxr7171

Diamond Member
Jun 21, 2002
5,079
40
91
I am nowhere near being interested in VR, and not sure if I ever will be, but I have a simple tech question after reading the various comments.

It seems that the current headsets are pretty terrible for those with glasses. I have contacts but hate them, so I wear my glasses 99% of the waking hours in a year. I also use various microscopes daily at work, including some very very fancy ones.

For these headsets, is it not possible to install a relatively low-tech eyepiece, perhaps as a modular piece of hardware, at the front of the goggles so that you can wear without glasses or contacts, and adjust the image on the displays into whatever focus you need? I still use my glasses at the scope, but you generally don't want to (I only do it because it is shared equipment...oh and when going from the eyepiece to a live image on the computer is totally effed if can't see anything)

This is really old, relatively simple tech--think of a telescope or binoculars, even with a biopter that can adjust different focus between eyes--that doesn't require much fancy glass.
I have no doubt that could be designed in. Binoculars have had that for a long time.
 

Aikouka

Lifer
Nov 27, 2001
29,937
596
126
It seems that the current headsets are pretty terrible for those with glasses. I have contacts but hate them, so I wear my glasses 99% of the waking hours in a year. I also use various microscopes daily at work, including some very very fancy ones.
You can buy lenses to put in: http://vr-lens-lab.com
 
Last edited:

gorobei

Diamond Member
Jan 7, 2007
3,188
333
126
I wish Vive had an option of no controllers and no light house. They could probably get just the head set down to a very reasonable price. I wish Vive didn't exist and Oculus had partnered with Valve for Steam integration. That would have been my dream scenario.
vive doesnt work without the lighthouse, just as rift wouldnt work without the camera(constellation). lighthouse is the fundamental part of tracking, plus it is inherently expandable, far more so than constellation. with lighthouse you can keep adding as many headsets or controllers with negligible penalty cpu load-wise. constellation incurs a cpu penalty with each camera/controller/headset added.

prices are high at the moment, htc cant afford to lose any money unlike FB. by the time other headset competitors get actual products out the price of the second generation rift/vive should be back down to the ~$350 of the original kickstarter estimates as economies of scale hit from the ramp for the vr specific oled displays needed for all the clones/alternatives.
 

Sabrewings

Golden Member
Jun 27, 2015
1,942
35
51
Yes, that is what is most intriguing, but again I would guess most people do not have the luxury which will be a large hurdle.
Devs are supposed to make it work down to the 1.5mx1.5m minimum. I find it hard to believe 1.5mx1.5m is too hard for most people to manage.
 

HeXen

Diamond Member
Dec 13, 2009
7,818
30
91
I dunno about you guys, but I want to sit the fuck down while playing. The Wii had me moving around and imagining that in VR, regardless of the increased "i'm there" immersion just doesn't interest me. After moving around all day at work, I'd rather just have the visual immersion and no so much the physical....which to me seems like 15' of moving forward/side to side isn't going to cut it in an open world measured in square miles but I'm sure it is interesting experience for interacting with things near to you but I bet most gamer's will eventually Wii out and end up just sitting down.

The big negative that I've read so far is just that the Oculus UI is just too barebones. I'll admit that I'd be annoyed if I had to install everything to my OS drive.
I read that you can use SteamVR with the Oculus or at least theoretically could use it to launch games. I hope that's true, I don't even see desktop on my gaming rig, I boot straight to big screen mode.
 

JTsyo

Lifer
Nov 18, 2007
10,950
239
106
I saw a discussion on if VR would be too scary for horror games. The thinking was it would be too realistic and get actual terror responses rather than just emotional ones like we get from TV.
 

StinkyPinky

Diamond Member
Jul 6, 2002
6,559
482
126
I saw a discussion on if VR would be too scary for horror games. The thinking was it would be too realistic and get actual terror responses rather than just emotional ones like we get from TV.
What? You mean brown underpants and urine stained floors? Sounds like a regular day with my toddler to be honest. Won't notice much difference
 

ImpulsE69

Lifer
Jan 8, 2010
14,793
825
126
I saw a discussion on if VR would be too scary for horror games. The thinking was it would be too realistic and get actual terror responses rather than just emotional ones like we get from TV.
I've read that it can be pretty unsettling. Bring it on!!
 
Feb 4, 2009
30,351
10,849
136
Can someone explain how textures in a shooter would look? To me if you super enlarge an image it usually looks pretty crappy how do the current VR solutions deal with this?
 

ImpulsE69

Lifer
Jan 8, 2010
14,793
825
126
Can someone explain how textures in a shooter would look? To me if you super enlarge an image it usually looks pretty crappy how do the current VR solutions deal with this?
The image isn't being enlarged and the pixels are dense, but its been repeatedly said the image quality is not as great as looking at your high end monitor and takes a moment of adjustment. They said it won't be as crisp or as bright, but depending on what you are doing, you don't notice much of it.
 

SMOGZINN

Lifer
Jun 17, 2005
13,287
2,916
136
More like flight or flee instincts kicking in. People reacting irrationally and forgetting it's a game.
I don't think that would happen much more than it does now. People would still have that degree of separation generated from the knowledge that it is just a game. If it did become a problem the game makers could just add something in to remind the players that it is a game. A slight intentional immersion breaking element, used just enough to maintain a degree of separation.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
aigomorla PC Games 1
JujuFish PC Games 95
rivethead PC Games 30

ASK THE COMMUNITY