Oculus / Vive / PSVR are all "consoles" in a way, and that as competition becomes more and more fierce, profitability on hardware will go down over time. By staying a closed platform, if Oculus can deliver on their hardware while selling software on their platform. What's different about consoles though is that, at least in Oculus and Vive's case, the software looks to be fairly compatible with one another (hack-bloc…
I think Valve is trying to create an open platform for VR, so at least you could use Vive or some other device (probably not Oculus, though) that works with Steam VR games. It also makes no sense for Valve to allow anyone else that doesn't abide by those standards to use the Steam store (including Oculus).
I have an Oculus CV1, I had the DK2, and I've been making VR side-projects using their SDK for a couple years now. I'm really disillusioned about Oculus as a platform, though. I didn't even consider buying the HTC Vive because I've been riding the Oculus train for a while and had faith in them as the future of VR, but come on. I really wish I could know how Carmack feels about this. Sidenote: for what it's worth, I h…
Ditto, I was one of the DK1 backers so got the CV1 for free. I haven't used it much past the first week - only to demo to friends and such, really. I have some disillusionment about it also - it seems like Valve VR/Vive is getting a lot more dev support. Having tried the Vive also, I think delaying the Oculus motion controllers was a critical error. It turns out the motion controllers really open up a lot of use case…
I don't think I could've put this any better myself; I'm also a DK1 backer that got CV1 for free.
Most of my friends who did the same sold their CV1 when the hype was high for a profit and went on to purchase the Vive. I live in an NYC apartment, so I don't really have the room to spare for the Vive, but prior to the free CV1 announcement, I planned to purchase a Vive.
After experiencing DK1, you really got a good idea of what VR at that price point was capable of. Sure, the resolution and comfort will improve slightly, but it was a good calibration of expectations for the market. I just hope there comes more and more interesting software to actually drive the industry, because currently it's looking like another 90s VR cycle.
Oculus / Vive / PSVR are all "consoles" in a way, and that as competition becomes more and more fierce, profitability on hardware will go down over time. By staying a closed platform, if Oculus can deliver on their hardware while selling software on their platform. What's different about consoles though is that, at least in Oculus and Vive's case, the software looks to be fairly compatible with one another (hack-bloc…
They're more peripherals than consoles. This is what makes it so frustrating to see what's happened to Oculus. Their recent moves are very anti-developer.
That's what I mean -- they're trying to be consoles artificially. Vive has the Steam platform, Oculus has theirs.
I have an Oculus CV1, I had the DK2, and I've been making VR side-projects using their SDK for a couple years now. I'm really disillusioned about Oculus as a platform, though. I didn't even consider buying the HTC Vive because I've been riding the Oculus train for a while and had faith in them as the future of VR, but come on. I really wish I could know how Carmack feels about this. Sidenote: for what it's worth, I h…
Ditto, I was one of the DK1 backers so got the CV1 for free. I haven't used it much past the first week - only to demo to friends and such, really. I have some disillusionment about it also - it seems like Valve VR/Vive is getting a lot more dev support. Having tried the Vive also, I think delaying the Oculus motion controllers was a critical error. It turns out the motion controllers really open up a lot of use case…
I think Eve Valkyrie might actually have a lot more depth, but it's hidden behind a progression system. You can pay cash money to bypass at least some of the pain of the progression system which is kind of insane considering it's a for pay game, but this has been the accepted standard in COD and Battlefield for years. At least those don't mock you by offering a pay to win (or more charitably pay to progress) option.
Certainly they could have done a lot more and given you more systems to interact with both inside and outside your ship.
I agree the software situation is dire. I tried VorpX with Aliens Isolation and there is just no comparison with other VR titles I have tried. I admit that doesn't include Chronos or The Climb which I have trouble spending the coin on for fear they are overrated tech demos instead of true AAA experiences.
I have an Oculus CV1, I had the DK2, and I've been making VR side-projects using their SDK for a couple years now. I'm really disillusioned about Oculus as a platform, though. I didn't even consider buying the HTC Vive because I've been riding the Oculus train for a while and had faith in them as the future of VR, but come on. I really wish I could know how Carmack feels about this. Sidenote: for what it's worth, I h…
Ditto, I was one of the DK1 backers so got the CV1 for free. I haven't used it much past the first week - only to demo to friends and such, really. I have some disillusionment about it also - it seems like Valve VR/Vive is getting a lot more dev support. Having tried the Vive also, I think delaying the Oculus motion controllers was a critical error. It turns out the motion controllers really open up a lot of use case…
I also got CV1 for free from being a Kickstarter. Having a Vive, the Oculus CV1 is just a paperweight right now.
Even when Touch finally comes out, it has been under so much secrecy and so many NDAs that I'm thinking it might have significant issues.
I have an Oculus CV1, I had the DK2, and I've been making VR side-projects using their SDK for a couple years now. I'm really disillusioned about Oculus as a platform, though. I didn't even consider buying the HTC Vive because I've been riding the Oculus train for a while and had faith in them as the future of VR, but come on. I really wish I could know how Carmack feels about this. Sidenote: for what it's worth, I h…
> I really wish I could know how Carmack feels about this. My impression is that Carmack is working on GearVR-related stuff in isolation from the rest of the Oculus/Facebook bureaucracy from the comfort of Dallas, TX. Hard to tell, but I'm not convinced he's even aware (or cares) about what's going on with Oculus in general: https://twitter.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/733761224098242560
I'm pretty sure there is a Chinese firewall in place for legal reasons due to the Zenimax lawsuits and him likely having a non-compete that only applied to desktop games and left mobile free.
Oculus / Vive / PSVR are all "consoles" in a way, and that as competition becomes more and more fierce, profitability on hardware will go down over time. By staying a closed platform, if Oculus can deliver on their hardware while selling software on their platform. What's different about consoles though is that, at least in Oculus and Vive's case, the software looks to be fairly compatible with one another (hack-bloc…
I think Valve is trying to create an open platform for VR, so at least you could use Vive or some other device (probably not Oculus, though) that works with Steam VR games. It also makes no sense for Valve to allow anyone else that doesn't abide by those standards to use the Steam store (including Oculus).
Yes, all the stuff the SteamVR overlay is built with are public APIs that competing stores can use to make their own overlay (including notification popups during games, etc.). You can make a competing store in a tab alongside steam, or replace the Steam VR overlay entirely:
The discussion around Vive vs Rift and Valve vs Oculus is getting more and more emotionally clouded and "good guys vs bad guys" with each passing week. People are letting their own frustration around Oculus' poorly managed launch and non-existent PR affect their perspective on the situation. The fact is that although Oculus is adopting somewhat of a walled garden approach, people entirely overlook that Valve maintains a virtual monopoly on PC games distribution. Sure they aren't as powerful as iOS app store or the Google Play store, but Valve wants the same thing as any other player - to be in a position where you can't avoid selling your content through their channel and to take a big cut of all the sales. Those who attack Oculus for trying to be the one who gets the cut are deluding themselves. Apple, Google, Valve, they all already do this. Further, Oculus doesn't make any money on hardware right now, what can a person expect them to do? Just operate without any intention of ever making a profit?
The PC gaming community online can be extremely toxic and idealistic, entirely ignoring business realities.
They're more peripherals than consoles. This is what makes it so frustrating to see what's happened to Oculus. Their recent moves are very anti-developer.
That's what I mean -- they're trying to be consoles artificially. Vive has the Steam platform, Oculus has theirs.
I think it's worth pointing out that Steam might technically be a walled garden, but it's a very open one, and it has full support for both the Vive and the Rift. I don't get the impression at all that the Vive is trying to be a console artificially. There is no content that is exclusive to the Vive only because of business contracts; the Vive is just enjoying temporary and coincidental exclusivity which is a result of Touch not being available and not even having a release date.
I have an Oculus CV1, I had the DK2, and I've been making VR side-projects using their SDK for a couple years now. I'm really disillusioned about Oculus as a platform, though. I didn't even consider buying the HTC Vive because I've been riding the Oculus train for a while and had faith in them as the future of VR, but come on. I really wish I could know how Carmack feels about this. Sidenote: for what it's worth, I h…
Ditto, I was one of the DK1 backers so got the CV1 for free. I haven't used it much past the first week - only to demo to friends and such, really. I have some disillusionment about it also - it seems like Valve VR/Vive is getting a lot more dev support. Having tried the Vive also, I think delaying the Oculus motion controllers was a critical error. It turns out the motion controllers really open up a lot of use case…
I have both. The Vive gets way more use, for one simple reason. Room scale is the future of VR. Some of the Oculus games are fantastic uses of the technology. Lucky's Tale has the camera on a rail based on where your character is, and EVE: Valkyrie has great mechanics for seated VR. But both of them feel like you're playing a game, albeit an immersive one, whereas room-scale vive games feel like I'm interacting with a world. Water Bears VR is adorable, but most importantly, the puzzles make use of the physicality of the experience. Moving objects in 3d space is hard with a gamepad, and intuitive with a motion controller. Sitting down isn't the way to use those controllers, either; It's fine to work with your hands sitting down if you're doing detail work, but the resolution isn't there yet for detail work, so you want to focus on sweeping gestures. That means standing up. That means shifting around, wiggling side to side, taking a step. There's theoretically a standing in place mode, but I've not seen it used, everything makes use of the 2Mx2M play area, and for the better.