Oculus Rift: Available for pre-order • Hacker News Board

Re: Oculus Rift: Available for pre-order

#161

Post by ambiate » Wed, Jan 06, 2016, 5:17 PM UTC

Cyphus wrote: post #152

ambiate wrote: post #85

If you're not an early adopter enthusiast: it may not be a great idea to purchase this right now. You will probably need a PC upgrade to match your new $675 toy. The new generation of Intel/Nvidia is right around the corner. Don't dig yourself into a hole where you buy current flagship and need to upgrade it 9 months down the road from now for Q4's toy.

They released minimum system requirements specifically so that you wouldn't have to upgrade 9 months down the road.

2016 Q3/Q4's new fancy toy may not be a RiftV2 and may have a minimum requirement of a Pascal GPU or Skylake/Broadwell-e CPU. Its just a really horrible time to buy computer hardware right now.

Re: Oculus Rift: Available for pre-order

#162

Post by wlesieutre » Wed, Jan 06, 2016, 5:19 PM UTC

moron4hire wrote: post #140

Someone1234 wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The experience is software + hardware, so I don't see what distinction you're trying to make.

The parts are swappable. Going to a different headset isn't going to make you less prone to nausea if the software is no good. And if the software is good, you'd not get nausea even on a lesser headset. The headset is not the determining factor of nausea. Even the DK2 did its job and did it well enough. It's like blaming the plate for overeating.

> It's like blaming the plate for overeating.

I don't know if "blame" is the right word, but eating off a large plate does make you more prone to overeating.

Re: Oculus Rift: Available for pre-order

#163

Post by ljk » Wed, Jan 06, 2016, 5:20 PM UTC

vocatus_gate wrote: post #157

I think the biggest risk to adoption is real-world interest. I get that VR is a fun tech, and has some potentially cool possibilities. But to me and seemingly many other people, it's just not that interesting. I don't know why, maybe I'm not geek enough, but I just have zero interest. And frankly it feels kind of like a gimmick. I'm especially averse to the idea of strapping on a clumsy headset every time I want to u…

Agreed. To look at a monitor, only the eyes have to move; with VR goggles, something needs to be attached to your head AND you'd have to move your whole head to see the environment.

Also, is it good to have your eyes focusing on something that close to your face for a long period of time?

(not a doctor)

Re: Oculus Rift: Available for pre-order

#164

Post by tallanvor » Wed, Jan 06, 2016, 5:21 PM UTC

Has anyone with vision issues been able to try out the hardware? I suppose it's more of a software issue, but I'm blind in one eye, and if applications assume you have vision in both eyes, you could end up with usability issues when controls are only displayed on one screen or the other.

Re: Oculus Rift: Available for pre-order

#165

Post by ethbro » Wed, Jan 06, 2016, 5:21 PM UTC

AYBABTME wrote: post #143

scubasteve wrote: post #81

Interesting tweet from Palmer ( https://twitter.com/PalmerLuckey/status/684772857625231360 ) on high load and fraud. Always interesting to see large launches not considering load/security on the web app. Out of curiosity, why is www.oculus.com not using a CDN (direct to AWS), and shop.oculus.com not using a CDN with rate control capabilities.

I don't understand why product launches like that aren't done using Shopify or something alike. They're already solving the VR problem, why try to solve e-commerce at scale on top of it.

Because "Occulus webpage crashes with pre-order demand!" isn't such a terrible news item to get out there?

Re: Oculus Rift: Available for pre-order

#166

Post by moron4hire » Wed, Jan 06, 2016, 5:21 PM UTC

Someone1234 wrote: post #153

moron4hire wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The parts are swappable. Going to a different headset isn't going to make you less prone to nausea if the software is no good. And if the software is good, you'd not get nausea even on a lesser headset. The headset is not the determining factor of nausea. Even the DK2 did its job and did it well enough. It's like blaming the plate for overeating.

I don't think consumers will care who is really to blame, they'll only come away with a bad experience, word will spread, and demand will drop. To use a food analogy: You sell pizza, it is the best pizza in town, but the delivery driver sucks and food is constantly arriving cold or smashed. Your patrons aren't going to care that you always blame the delivery driver for the problems, or that the pizza COULD be good if…

Except in this shitty analogy, I hire the driver, so if the pizza is bad because of the driver, it is my fault. Oculus doesn't hire most of the VR game developers in the world.

I absolutely would not blame the restaurant if my GrubHub delivery guy ruined the order.

And regardless, what the mythical "average consumer" does or doesn't do is immaterial. You should know better.

Re: Oculus Rift: Available for pre-order

#167

Post by rboyd » Wed, Jan 06, 2016, 5:22 PM UTC

vocatus_gate wrote: post #157

I think the biggest risk to adoption is real-world interest. I get that VR is a fun tech, and has some potentially cool possibilities. But to me and seemingly many other people, it's just not that interesting. I don't know why, maybe I'm not geek enough, but I just have zero interest. And frankly it feels kind of like a gimmick. I'm especially averse to the idea of strapping on a clumsy headset every time I want to u…

Where this is heading is augmentation that shrinks until it's unnoticeable that you're equipped with anything. Virtual and augmented reality merge, and the display components of traditional products disappear. Everything will get a virtual interface.

Gaming will be about as important to mixed reality as gaming is to all of computing today.

It's shaping up to be one of the most revolutionary technologies of our generation.

Re: Oculus Rift: Available for pre-order

#168

Post by MagnumOpus » Wed, Jan 06, 2016, 5:22 PM UTC

Strom wrote: post #149

errnoh wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems to be €699 in Europe ($750) (edit: This price does not include shipping.)

That price includes VAT. According to google 599 USD is 557 EUR. Add VAT to that, e.g. Finnish 24%, and you get 691 EUR. Not that far from the 699 EUR listed price.

You don't add Finnish 24% VAT but the VAT of the country where the EU branch of the company is based - most likely Luxembourg with its 15% VAT rate. (All Amazon deliveries to the Eurozone come from Amazon EU SARL in Luxembourg, for instance).

Which means the fair price would be EUR 640, almost 10% lower.

Re: Oculus Rift: Available for pre-order

#169

Post by thetmkay » Wed, Jan 06, 2016, 5:23 PM UTC

vocatus_gate wrote: post #157

I think the biggest risk to adoption is real-world interest. I get that VR is a fun tech, and has some potentially cool possibilities. But to me and seemingly many other people, it's just not that interesting. I don't know why, maybe I'm not geek enough, but I just have zero interest. And frankly it feels kind of like a gimmick. I'm especially averse to the idea of strapping on a clumsy headset every time I want to u…

One of the reasons why it may lack real-world interest is lack of content.

People need to believe in the medium and pioneer content in spite of lack of interest, in hope to generate that interest, or it will remain an unsolved chicken-and-egg problem.

I believe Newell and Carmack do want to make high quality "games" in the sense of interactive experiences, and they see VR as an opportunity for that. What's required is patience and dedicated resources, fuelled by early adopters/aspirers.

Re: Oculus Rift: Available for pre-order

#170

Post by CarVac » Wed, Jan 06, 2016, 5:25 PM UTC

ljk wrote: post #163

vocatus_gate wrote: post #157

I think the biggest risk to adoption is real-world interest. I get that VR is a fun tech, and has some potentially cool possibilities. But to me and seemingly many other people, it's just not that interesting. I don't know why, maybe I'm not geek enough, but I just have zero interest. And frankly it feels kind of like a gimmick. I'm especially averse to the idea of strapping on a clumsy headset every time I want to u…

Agreed. To look at a monitor, only the eyes have to move; with VR goggles, something needs to be attached to your head AND you'd have to move your whole head to see the environment. Also, is it good to have your eyes focusing on something that close to your face for a long period of time? (not a doctor)

There are lenses; the image is around 1.5 meters away.