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

141–150 of 272 posts

Re: Oculus Rift S

#141

Post by KallDrexx »

admax88q wrote: post #132
KallDrexx wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Sure but for a 1-2 second grab extrapolation + accelerometers should do the trick.

Re: Oculus Rift S

#142

Post by T-A »

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?

https://www.roadtovr.com/vive-cosmos-hits-fcc-on-its-way-to-...

https://www.vive.com/us/cosmos/

Re: Oculus Rift S

#143

Post by ex3ndr »

gcbw2 wrote: post #109
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…

> 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!

quite opposite, see Mercedes S-Klasse.

Re: Oculus Rift S

#144

Post by superkuh »

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…

> Wider lens sweet spot

... and it's gone. Software IPD means a tiny sweet spot. Even if this is mitigated by slightly better optics it'll be smaller. Plus lack of hardware IPD will cause eye fatigue and headaches; discomfort is still an important part of VR HMD considerations. It didn't go away.

And using LCD means no blacks. So crappy space sims and games that have to be made to not use black.

Re: Oculus Rift S

#145

Post by throwaway34241 »

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…

I think after the Quest it would be a big mistake to make PC headsets a separate product anyway. Any resources for Rift 2 would be better invested on Quest 2 and making it work well with a PC (plugged in, wirelessly, or both).

I can't see any fundamental design differences between a good mobile and PC headset. Sure the PC can drive a higher resolution on most games (for more detail or field-of-view). But even mobile can run certain apps like virtual theaters at high res, and it will benefit from less screen door effect. The weight distribution of the battery needs to be solved in any case, and a wireless PC-only headset would need a battery too. If an ultra-high res screen increases the cost they can always do multiple products but I don't see why they should segment them into PC/mobile. I think most PC users would rather pay an extra $50 for an all-in-one device that works with PC and standalone than $400 each for entirely separate headsets.

Looking forward a little bit, it might make sense for Oculus to make a compact wireless eGPU if they want to be competitive on high end graphics, since it could probably have much better setup, cost, and portability for users that don't already own a gaming PC (in addition to providing a standard performance profile). If the external graphics brick could have a snap on battery and be used on a backpack/vest even better. I've tried some arcade type stuff with multiple users, haptic feedback etc and it's pretty cool although totally non-standardized.

Re: Oculus Rift S

#146

Post by cmsimike »

EpicEng wrote: post #110
Ajedi32 wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think right now Oculus is more focused on bringing VR to a wider market than they are on pushing specs. If you look at it from that perspective, the Rift S is a _massive_ improvement. No need to mess with sensors during setup; just plug and play. And it's not like they've abandoned R&D into higher-end tech. It's just that resolution and FOV improvements are bottlenecked by modern GPUs. To overcome that bottleneck w…

The quest is an even larger step given the fact that it doesn't require an external PC. But still, I would love to see something more gamer oriented.

Didn't the second Vive release provide something more gamer oriented?

Re: Oculus Rift S

#147

Post by xnxn »

Sir_Cmpwn wrote: post #13

They promised Linux support and took money from people on that premise. Then, when they no longer needed us, they discarded us with empty promises of adding Linux support "in the future". Now they're shipping new products and - surprise - no Linux support. Oculus can shove it.

I'm right there with you. I have a DK1 and a Rift and I strongly regret purchasing the latter instead of a Vive.

It's frustrating to hear people just now complaining about Oculus abandoning niche markets.

Re: Oculus Rift S

#148

Post by xnxn »

polishTar wrote: post #24
Sir_Cmpwn wrote: post #13

They promised Linux support and took money from people on that premise. Then, when they no longer needed us, they discarded us with empty promises of adding Linux support "in the future". Now they're shipping new products and - surprise - no Linux support. Oculus can shove it.

Did they actually claim they were going to add Linux support? Do you have a source?

"Linux support is on the roadmap post-launch"

https://twitter.com/PalmerLuckey/status/674311865023918080

Re: Oculus Rift S

#149

Post by Ajedi32 »

jdietrich wrote: post #117

Announced a day after the HP Reverb, which has most of the features of the Rift S but 2160x2160 per eye. https://www.roadtovr.com/hp-rever-hands-on-impressions-pixel...

It's also $200 more than the Rift S and only has 2 tracking cameras instead of 5. Not a bad product by any means, but unless resolution is your main concern I wouldn't consider it superior to the Rift S.

Re: Oculus Rift S

#150

Post by nuclear_eclipse »

butz wrote: post #81

Quick question about Oculus setup: do you need to install some proprietary drivers, register on Facebook, run some additional "launcher" software to play games on Steam?

You need to install the Oculus software to use the Rift, but there is no requirement to have or link to a Facebook account, and afaik, never will be. To run software from outside the Oculus store, you simply go into the Oculus settings and flip a switch enabling external applications.
Post reply on HN