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

First Look at the Rift, Shipping Q1 2016

oculus.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 142 posts

Re: First Look at the Rift, Shipping Q1 2016

#91

Post by Raphmedia »

sadface wrote: post #83
Raphmedia wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are a gamer, you should already have that to play current gen games at max settings. I'm on $1000 worth of GPU right now for 4k, and the 4k screen itself was about $500. Don't make it sound like Oculus is more expensive than what gamer already have to pay to get the best experience.

You're not wrong re: best experience, but your $1000 of GPU + $500 screen puts you in like the top 1% of gamers. Most ppl are gaming on cheap rigs, laptops, etc. It's possible that FB/Oculus are trying to make something that will only appeal to the big spending "prestige-rig" gamer set, but I'd think that they would be trying to make a product that will be compelling to a bigger audience.

You can't really expect to run two 4k screen along with head tracking and all the other VR magic on a laptop or on a $100 graphic card.

That being said, I'm sure you could play games on the lowest setting without the need for $1000 worth of GPU.

Re: First Look at the Rift, Shipping Q1 2016

#92

Post by soylentcola »

Symmetry wrote: post #71

Everybody talks about VR in terms of games but I wonder if it might be possible to create a productive desktop using a VR helmet. Surely it would be easy to emulate having N monitors but I bet you could do better.

There's currently a Virtual Desktop for Windows and it's pretty damn cool. Not quite ready to sell it for $60 or whatnot but it puts your desktop on a virtual curved display in front of you and gives the option of some nice backgrounds (starfields and stuff like that).

The only real issue is that until you've got some sort of passthrough, even a good touch-typist will find themselves peeking out under the HMD every so often. It's really best for messing with programs that are more GUI/mouse driven.

I mostly just use it as an easy way to watch 3D movies in the Rift but it's got potential.

And on the topic of games vs. everything else, I really do think that while games will be the initial focus, they won't be the final say. I'm more looking forward to VR "movies" where you feel like you're in the room with the action or VR telepresence where a few webcam-sized depth cameras are set up around the room at each end so a live, 3d reconstruction of an environment can be sent over networks and allow you to visit other locations or have "VR Skype" calls. That stuff will appeal to a much more general audience than the games which are the logical first avenue to explore.

Re: First Look at the Rift, Shipping Q1 2016

#93

Post by jamespacileo »

Tepix wrote: post #79
jamespacileo wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would obviously be an upscaled resolution in games. 4k is for the screen door effect. 4k is necessary for readable text, ability to watch HD movies and using virtual monitors. Currently the resolution is too low for any of these, as in it works but not good enough for being practical.

There is no correlation between the screen door effect and resolution. Source: Palmer Luckey https://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comments/2rayri/hint_that_cr...

I think the general consensus is that it helps, but also other ticks help like the diamond shaped pixels in the HTC Vive.

Current resolution still not works well with viewing virtual screens e.g. movies, virtual desktops and text. I think this is much more important as it increases practicality of the device.

Re: First Look at the Rift, Shipping Q1 2016

#94

Post by soylentcola »

adam12 wrote: post #35
monk_e_boy wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ultra-low latency Agreed. Wonder what they'll suggest? Prob one with tons of fast memory. I read that most devs are using the new Nvidia 980s because the latency is less.

A $550 video card on top of the price of the device itself? If that is the case, I'm going to have to wait for a device to come out like Hololens that can stand on its own.

As someone mentioned earlier, today's $550 video card is tomorrow's $250 video card. Either way, there's gonna be some expense if you want to be an early adopter. This will be easiest to swing for people who already have a decent desktop computer (recent-ish i5 or better, 8GB RAM or better). Then you either buy a $500 GPU and a HMD or you buy a $400 PS4 and a Morpheus. Lots more early content and tools will be available for Win/Lin/OSX but if you already own a PS4 it will be a lot less additional expense.

Then again, if you already have a decent GPU you can still do quite a bit. When I got my DK2 it ran many things just fine on an older GPU. I only upgraded to a GTX980 because I hadn't splurged on anything in a while and it helped a lot with un-optimized, demanding programs like Elite: Dangerous. I could have kept using my existing card if I just wanted to mess with less demanding content or make stuff in UE4.

Re: First Look at the Rift, Shipping Q1 2016

#95

Post by soylentcola »

mrspeaker wrote: post #11
monk_e_boy wrote: post #2

Time to upgrade my PC. What is minimum spec graphics card needed?

Good question, I say... I have the DK2 and I don't have the nvidia card in my macbook. It runs... ok, but is really an issue with heavier games/demos. Dropping frames with VR is a huge problem if you get dizzy at all - it makes it a lot worse.

Sure, but you have several things working against you. Integrated graphics aren't gonna be great for even non-VR applications if they're graphically demanding. And you're running 1) a laptop, and 2) a Macbook so you've got something that is much more geared toward lower power usage and (in the case of most Apple notebooks) thinness and lightness so those power tradeoffs may be more pronounced.

Honestly, I'm impressed you've been able to do a whole lot with it at all. I've got a fairly decent laptop (i7, 16GB RAM, and a mediocre nVidia 760m GPU) and it's still been underwhelming when I hooked the Rift up to it.

Desktop will be much more power for the buck this early in the game. Portable will catch up but you sacrifice some bang for the buck when you get something more optimized for portability and battery life.

Re: First Look at the Rift, Shipping Q1 2016

#96

Post by jimrandomh »

longlivegnu wrote: post #52
jimrandomh wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They currently have a Linux SDK on developer.oculus.com, so looks like Linux support now, for the hardware they've already shipped. Third-party games are a different matter, but that's less inside their control.

I think utilizing the SDK is a bit different than a run time (Which both OSX and Windows have)

For the OSX and Windows versions, the SDK package actually includes both development tools (headers, etc) and the runtime; the only reason to offer a package which leaves out the development stuff, is to make the download smaller, which seems unimportant.

You can get a sense of where the Linux support currently stands by looking at share.oculus.com, where third-party developers can submit their games and demos, and you can filter the list by which operating systems they support.

Re: First Look at the Rift, Shipping Q1 2016

#97

Post by drzaiusapelord »

dangerlibrary wrote: post #63
drzaiusapelord wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He had a huge amount of buy-in/ownership when he was brought on board and certainly had some level of executive decision making. I doubt he just gets a 1099 for $market_wage and goes home. He's swimming in stock and other perks. You don't hire him to sit locked in an office all day and not have say in your organization.

You hire him because he's been writing 3d graphics code for longer than literally anyone else on the planet .

His is the CTO. That is not a coder monkey position, yes he probably codes and supervises a lot but he's C-level and that means executive decision making.

Re: First Look at the Rift, Shipping Q1 2016

#98

Post by Pfhreak »

Here's hoping they fix the issue for those of us with wide heads. I've spent a fair amount of time tinkering with my DK2 to get a good experience with my wide IPD of 73mm. I bought some 3D printed lens holders that widen the lenses, and they helped quite a bit. Without them, my view was blurry in one eye which caused a fair amount of discomfort.

I'm wholly onboard for the headset, the DK2 is a fantastic experience (barring the experience of setting it up and launching applications, which is totally fixable.) Can't wait to see the consumer edition.

Re: First Look at the Rift, Shipping Q1 2016

#99

Post by flycaliguy »

Symmetry wrote: post #71

Everybody talks about VR in terms of games but I wonder if it might be possible to create a productive desktop using a VR helmet. Surely it would be easy to emulate having N monitors but I bet you could do better.

In a similar vein, I can't wait until the world of music creation software appears in VR. Imagine a virtual studio in which expensive vintage hardware is emulated along side imaginative new instruments. Control mechanisms like step sequencers could be expanded to fill the space around you.

Audio synthesis itself, with it's raw waveforms and various modulations, filters and distortions could be brought to life in space around the users. Imagine being able to surround yourself with the signal path. To examine the shape of a sound in 3D space and track it's progression from, for example, a raw sine wave into a layered deep bass line.

Considering how much audio professionals already spend for high quality production environments and the IOS's popularization of unique, small team created software synths... I can't wait.

Korg's mock up of their IOS software Gadget as real objects really gets my imagination going. http://macprovid.vo.llnwd.net/o43/hub/media/1087/8774/korgGa...

Re: First Look at the Rift, Shipping Q1 2016

#100

Post by emddudley »

dangerlibrary wrote: post #26

I was able to get a demo of the Crescent Bay prototype (hand-built tech demo of the consumer version) at PAX East this year. I've also tried the DK1 and DK2. If you've been playing with the DK1 or DK2, the consumer version is fundamentally better. Do not assume you know what the state of the art is until you've gotten your hands on a preview. I don't know exactly what the resolution differences are, and I don't care…

> I don't know what they consider their largest hurdle

It seems like there are still plenty of challenges to solve with VR devices. John Carmack recently spoke [1] at the University of Texas at Dallas and mentioned that designing for VR is all about tradeoffs--hardware just isn't powerful enough to reach the ideal combination of resolution, framerate, etc.

He also talked about how to design media to work well with the current generation of VR devices. For example he said to avoid accelerating the user, because this commonly causes users to feel sick (due to mismatch between what your eyes and inner ear are telling your brain). Moving at a constant velocity is fine.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rBtXMtUNpdE

Post reply on HN