Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Oculus Rift S

oculus.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 272 posts

Re: Oculus Rift S

#131

Post by Judgmentality »

SebastianKra wrote: post #125
mikenew wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

The gameplay-experience isn't what is holding VR back. VR was good enough 3 years ago. Price, PC-Specs, and ridiculously complicated setups are the reason, why VR hasn't taken off yet. The Rift-S helps with all of those issues. It makes some smart tradeoffs, so that it is accessible to more people.

> The gameplay-experience isn't what is holding VR back. VR was good enough 3 years ago.

This is wrong. All of the other things you mention matter, but at the end of the day I cannot buy a compelling VR experience at any price. VR itself still needs to be improved before all of those other things matter.

VR is incredibly underwhelming at this point, regardless of price. I'd say it's still a few years away from being good enough I'd want to buy it, and I'd expect to have to pay over $1000 for that pleasure when the time comes (ignoring the cost of the top-of-the-line gaming PC to accompany it).

And that's only talking about the actual technology in the headset, that's not even discussing the lack of good content.

And many (maybe most) people still get sick when using VR for more than an hour, so the argument it's "good enough" is absurd.

Re: Oculus Rift S

#132

Post by admax88q »

KallDrexx wrote: post #128
outworlder wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The move to inside-out tracking means a more convenient setup, but it will lose tracking when you put your hands behind you If that's correct, this ruins Robo Recall, of all things. Yeah, maybe it will make setup more convenient, but are people really being thrown off by that? A 10 year old can figure it out (tested!). Yes, taking USB ports is not convenient, but the camera positioning is more forgiving than Vive's…

If you look at the 5 camera placement on the headset it looks to cover a pretty heavy margin, including a wide FOV camera on the top. So you'd have to have your hand directly behind your back (and not at a height above your head) for it to not be able to track it, which seems like it would be uncomfortable in real gaming scenarios. John Carmack has also talked a decent bit about their inside-out tracking extrapolatio…

> which seems like it would be uncomfortable in real gaming scenarios.

I routinely want to grab things of tables behind me in VR without turning my head off of the enemy in front. It's one of the things that makes VR feel immersive, the world keeps existing even if its outside your field of view.

Re: Oculus Rift S

#133

Post by [deleted] »

Sohcahtoa82 wrote: post #78
notus wrote: post #3

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

A lot of people are bringing up the fact that some headsets like the Oculus Quest aren't tethered to a PC. I'm here to say that being tethered to a PC is a feature , not a bug. The advantage to being tethered to a PC is processing power. Any standalone headset is going to be running purely off of batteries. That means there are MASSIVE trade-offs in processing power, especially for the graphics. The GPU in a standalo…

[deleted]

Re: Oculus Rift S

#134

Post by AnIdiotOnTheNet »

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...

Short answer: no.

There's some stuff that convinces me of the potential (SuperHot VR), but the whole thing is still too much of an expensive pain in the ass to be worth the trouble.

Re: Oculus Rift S

#135

Post by ganoushoreilly »

RussianCow wrote: post #126
gcbw2 wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Rift S and not the Rift 2 from cars industry: S version of any model means worse upholstery, worse radio, worse trim, worse engine, worse everything, but with a plastic spoiler!

Unless you're Tesla. ;)

Or Audi!

Re: Oculus Rift S

#136

Post by jron »

John Carmack and his friends made it clear that they have no interest in the PC being a first class VR platform when they tossed Brendan Iribe to the curb. The Rift-s is a big fuck you to all of the hardcore early adopters that made the Rift a reality.

I skipped gen-1 thinking gen-2 was right around the corner; unfortunately, three long years later the future truly looks like a "race to the bottom." VR is starting to feel like a cheap trick instead of something that promised the future of gaming - a toy that just collects dust on the shelf after playing a handful of crap mobile games.

The state of the industry from my perspective:

1. The VR industry seems to think PC gaming is dead

2. Oculus hasn't released better HMD in three years:

- Worse inside out tracking despite the need to be tethered to a PC anyway

- A downgraded refresh rate of 80hz after claiming 120hz was the sweet spot

- A single panel and a downgrade from OLED to LCD with no ability for IPD adjustment

- Is outsourcing work from Lenovo instead of doing in-house RND

- Scrapped headphones despite saying it was a critical feature of the OG rift

- Rumored to have a slightly worse FOV than the OG Rift's already small FOV

- Attempting to roll their own walled garden store

- Owned by Facebook

3. HTC hasn't released a marginally better headset in three years:

- Lenses are garbage despite the better display

- Future headsets are adopting inside out tracking despite it having worse performance than lighthouse

- Owned by HTC

- Terrible support

- Attempting to roll their own walled garden store

4. Pimax doesn't seem to have the manufacturing or support chops to deliver despite knowing exactly what the hardcore PC gamer wants

5. Valve can't seem to release anything - ever.

What a shit show.

Re: Oculus Rift S

#137

Post by josaka »

andybak wrote: post #72
asciimo wrote: post #59

I would love to trade all these monitors for a virtual workstation. Every time there's new VR tech I hope that it's possible. 1280x1440 is definitely an improvement. I'm patient.

You might be interested in the HP Reverb: https://uploadvr.com/hp-reverb-vr-4k-599/ It's not quite monitor-replacement territory but it's getting close.

When will we be in monitor-replacement territory? I try to edit text in each generation's headset, and it's still not viable. Curious what the threshold spec will be when I can launch a text editor and work in a VR environment.

Re: Oculus Rift S

#138

Post by mikenew »

root_axis wrote: post #16
veryworried wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait for Valve's headset coming out later this year. Direct competitor to the Rift S, with higher resolution, 135 degree vision, and knuckles controllers that let you open and close your hand naturally. You'll be glad you did.

I have word from a personal source that Valve has no plans for a new headset in 2019, but they could be wrong. There has also been rumblings in the media about Valve firing a bunch of their hardware people. Do you have any sources with more details about this 2019 headset?

Other than the leaked photos from last year I don't think there's been any new details. But they're clearly working on a headset; those photos are way too detailed and unique to be faked.

Any sense of what might be going on? A reference design for other manufacturers maybe? Judging by the small iterations between the latest developer versions of the Knuckles controllers you'd have to expect those to be released fairly soon. Seems like putting out a headset along with the controllers would make sense.

https://www.roadtovr.com/report-new-valve-vr-headset-appears...

Re: Oculus Rift S

#139

Post by jsgo »

SebastianKra wrote: post #125
mikenew wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

The gameplay-experience isn't what is holding VR back. VR was good enough 3 years ago. Price, PC-Specs, and ridiculously complicated setups are the reason, why VR hasn't taken off yet. The Rift-S helps with all of those issues. It makes some smart tradeoffs, so that it is accessible to more people.

If that were the case, why didn't Microsoft's WMR partners blow everyone away (pretty sure 100% have used inside out tracking which prevents the station setup of Vive/Rift plus the lower barrier to entry PC specifications)?

I bought the Odyssey+ HMD during the Black Friday sale and I must admit, it is fantastic. But outside of that incredibly low priced sale ($299 I think it was?), I don't think WMR headsets have been really hot sellers while having access to most (all? I don't know) SteamVR titles and the ability to use Oculus ones via ReVive. I personally haven't had any tracking issues, but I haven't played anything where a hand goes behind the view of the visor like Skyrim, apparently.

Oculus Quest/Gear VR/etc seem more like the setups that will make VR "take off" (if it is going to, that is). The tethered experience seems more for the enthusiast but this particular side-upgrade seems to be going for the worst of both worlds (a tethered experience that isn't going to really resonate with enthusiasts as it most likely isn't an upgrade over their current setup and due to that tethering probably not going to appeal to the mass market either).

Re: Oculus Rift S

#140

Post by Ajedi32 »

Judgmentality wrote: post #131
SebastianKra wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The gameplay-experience isn't what is holding VR back. VR was good enough 3 years ago. Price, PC-Specs, and ridiculously complicated setups are the reason, why VR hasn't taken off yet. The Rift-S helps with all of those issues. It makes some smart tradeoffs, so that it is accessible to more people.

> The gameplay-experience isn't what is holding VR back. VR was good enough 3 years ago. This is wrong. All of the other things you mention matter, but at the end of the day I cannot buy a compelling VR experience at any price. VR itself still needs to be improved before all of those other things matter. VR is incredibly underwhelming at this point, regardless of price. I'd say it's still a few years away from being…

Have you tried PC VR recently? It's very compelling.

There are obviously still lots of things that could be improved, but high resolution isn't necessary to make VR "compelling" any more HD screens were necessary to make console gaming compelling.

Post reply on HN