131–140 of 212 posts
I just get the feeling VR technology simply will not work because the resolution isn't high enough, and even the most top-end monster PCs cannot handle standard resolution VR, let alone 4K or even 8K in the future. Graphics cards really need a huge performance jump to make VR work, and given both Nvidia and AMD seem to be happy releasing a new set each year with only modest 20-30% performance gains then what does thi…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As much as VR purists love to hate it, Google Cardboard was the first to market.
Not sure if trolling but... The first Oculus dev kit shipped 50k in 2013. Cardboard wasn't announced until I/O 2014.
We're talking about consumer items, not dev kits. In reality, Google Cardboard was the first (modern) VR kit released.
Can anyone speak to using the Rift as an extended desktop? I've seen some mention of using it as an extended monitor in both Windows and OS X - has anyone with development devices used it with head tracking and had an almost infinite display? How cool would it be to ditch multiple monitors and spread out over a 360 sphere code windows / browsers / documentation / etc... ? Use the head tracking to navigate the desktop…
What you're talking about however can easily be done with [Virtual Desktop](http://www.vrdesktop.net/) -- I've used it a few times while developing, it mostly works. It's definitely a nice experience to have your IDE infront of you, documentation a head tilt to the right, and Google a head tilt to the left, but the resolution was too low for me to be comfortable reading text for a long time on the DK2.
Mobile gaming became hugely popular without high-end graphics because of the easy of use, portability and touch input controls. I would have thought it would make more sense for VR games to focus on experiences you can only have with VR games (e.g. highly immersive, having sense of scale, use of hand input) and play to its strengths rather than limit its audience with high-end graphics.
I'm very excited about VR but having to buy a Rift and a high-end Windows gaming PC is asking a lot to get involved.
I am truly surprised at the lack of enthusiasm on this thread. The Oculus is the FIRST high-fidelity consumer VR experience. And they've got the horsepower of Facebook's cash-machine as their bankroll. Zuck gets this to the degree that I suspect he believes Facebook & VR will be synonymous within a decade (1) Do I wish that Oculus was owned by some benevolent billionaire trickster like OASIS in Ready Player One? Sure…
The vast majority of Facebook users has neither consoles nor PCs nor any interest in ever purchasing a peripheral in the targeted price range (even if it drops to 100USD).
I don't doubt that they can break even regarding development costs, but it won't be a cash cow.
I am truly surprised at the lack of enthusiasm on this thread. The Oculus is the FIRST high-fidelity consumer VR experience. And they've got the horsepower of Facebook's cash-machine as their bankroll. Zuck gets this to the degree that I suspect he believes Facebook & VR will be synonymous within a decade (1) Do I wish that Oculus was owned by some benevolent billionaire trickster like OASIS in Ready Player One? Sure…
> Zuck gets this to the degree that I suspect he believes Facebook & VR will be synonymous within a decade (1) The vast majority of Facebook users has neither consoles nor PCs nor any interest in ever purchasing a peripheral in the targeted price range (even if it drops to 100USD). I don't doubt that they can break even regarding development costs, but it won't be a cash cow.
https://www.oculus.com/en-us/gear-vr/
My impression is something like this is a big part of the future of the Oculus platform, and that the Rift is designed to deliver higher quality experiences until mobile catches up.
I'm more looking forward to seeing the Sony VR. It's rumoured to be around the $250-$350 price mark. Sony have a history of getting traction despite not having the best spec/product, for example, remember HD DVD vs Blu Ray?
I also think the Sony VR specs are pretty high. They want people to buy a PS4 and play games on their VR system.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Eh. VR "worked" quite well enough for presence on the now-ancient Rift devkit 2. And my machine is hardly top of the line. A many gens old Intel proc with modest RAM and a GTX970. Worst case? It means that details are scaled back in the name of framerate. Presence still works in a world that doesn't seem perfectly lifelike, so as long as the player is in another world, that's the single most important thing. Less AA,…
Exactly. Half Life 2 worked when hardware was 10x slower than today. Lots of 3D games worked even before that. They just didn't look like Star Wars Battlefront.
As a flight sim enthusiast, I am super pumped about this. Though a shame the hands-controller was delayed so I'll need to buy a third-party one (leap motion).
Flight sim in the rift is what I spend the majority of my free time doing. Not sure what type of flight sim you are into, but using a proper yoke, throttle, and rudder pedals makes the experience much more immersive.
I currently use a TrackIR with two monitors, but truth be told it's a bit janky and I find it very difficult to visually tell angles (for example: what's the angle of my plane to the runway? I could use the heading indicator for that purpose but I don't want to develop bad habits for real-life flights).
The hands thing would let me flip switches in-cockpit, which is nice. No more mouse!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've played with a DK2. It was cool. But reasons not to be super-excited are: 1. Hardware requirements are steep (GTX 970 minimum), so plenty of hardware -- including plenty of hardware that's good for high-end gaming today -- won't be good enough for this. 2. Only Windows support. No compatibility with Linux, SteamOS, or even OSX means that the techie enthusiasts who'd play with it as a tech toy are going to be less…
The biggest reason of all though(and what drives all technology)... porn. This will change porn forever and it will become a staple in homes solely for that fact.
http://www.digitaltrends.com/home-theater/does-porn-still-ha...
I also recall reading a different article (can't find it now and don't want to do too much Google searching at work for it) about how almost all the most trafficked porn sites are owned by a single entity now. From what I remember of the article, it posited that their technology has fallen behind and they have little incentive to keep pushing tech forward given the razor thin margins they have on operating the sites.