Oculus Rift S

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Mar 20, 2019, 7:38 PM UTC

pradn wrote: post #54

an4rchy wrote: post #42

One of the biggest barriers to consumer adoption of VR seems to be the cost. Is there a reason why it doesn't make sense for the manufacturers to do a subscription service? Seems like everything from phones and consoles to game streaming subscriptions is the trend (and makes sense). If nothing else, it can help increase distribution and awareness -- at the end of the day, more people using the devices is probably gon…

I doubt if there's a strong market for VR even if a great headset was $50. Do people who are not enthusiasts really want to immerse themselves like this? A good chunk of the population doesn't seem interested even in game consoles. I imagine a subset of them are interested in VR gaming. Outside of VR gaming, there's little mainstream content designed for VR.

Post by CraftThatBlock » Wed, Mar 20, 2019, 7:40 PM UTC

CraftThatBlock wrote: post #102

zamalek wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Can't track hands behind you This is a personal deal-breaker. The rest I can live with. I get it. There's much less hardware involved, there's much lower manufacturing costs, those savings can be passed down to the consumer, bringing us closer to that hypothetical VR mainstream moment. I agree we need more headsets with this technology. I've "grown up" with full tracking, though, and I'm used to it. It adds an addi…

Using 3 sensors you can track full 360°, it works very well with my setup

Post by w1nst0nsm1th » Wed, Mar 20, 2019, 7:43 PM UTC

smacktoward wrote: post #20

notus wrote: post #3

Higher resolution and built in tracking and only 400. Probably going to buy. Someone convince me not to

Is there actually any software compelling enough to make the hardware worth the expense? After the wave of interest that followed the release of the original Rift petered out, most developers seem to have dropped VR like a hot rock...

Post by Ajedi32 » Wed, Mar 20, 2019, 7:47 PM UTC

mikenew wrote: post #98

Ajedi32 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the other hand, there are a lot of things that were improved: - Slightly higher resolution (1080×1200 per-eye -> 1,280×1,440 per-eye) - Inside-out tracking - Guardian can be set up via video passthrough - More comfortable halo head strap (better weight distribution, more surface area) - Wider lens sweet spot - Fewer god rays (better lenses) - Less pronounced screen door effect (better lenses, RGB-stripe subpixel l…

I'm not saying you're wrong, but we're on year 3 of this brand new tech and it's "kinda better, kinda worse". Think about the iPhone in 2007 vs 2010. They can call it whatever they like; it's still an utter disappointment, at least to a gamer like myself. If we're going to get to a point where VR actually feels like virtual reality then someone is going to have to push the envelope, and it clearly isn't going to be F…

Post by gcbw2 » Wed, Mar 20, 2019, 7:49 PM UTC

Ajedi32 wrote: post #50

mikenew wrote: post #47

They really phoned it in on this one. No physical IPD adjustment, an 80hz LCD rather than the 90hz OLED, a very marginal resolution increase to 1280×1440 (which is still less than the $200 WMR headset I bought almost two years ago), and no FOV increase. The move to inside-out tracking means a more convenient setup, but it will lose tracking when you put your hands behind you (like shooting a bow, which just about rui…

On the other hand, there are a lot of things that were improved: - Slightly higher resolution (1080×1200 per-eye -> 1,280×1,440 per-eye) - Inside-out tracking - Guardian can be set up via video passthrough - More comfortable halo head strap (better weight distribution, more surface area) - Wider lens sweet spot - Fewer god rays (better lenses) - Less pronounced screen door effect (better lenses, RGB-stripe subpixel l…