301–310 of 591 posts
I'm thinking of pre-ordering it for my family. I'm not going to use my personal FB account for this. I'm assuming one can open a new FB account just for this, right? Also, is it worth getting the 256GB for extra $100? Never had a VR device and not sure how many games/apps you can have on 64G.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Rift is a VR head mounted display for a beefy PC. The Quest is an entire computer system powered by battery and tiny in surface area. They're different products for different markets. Anything in a mobile form factor as your VR computer will necessarily be limited for either shorter time periods or significantly less graphical fidelity.
Rift S is being discontinued, if you want a dedicated PC headset now you'll want to look at an Index or an HP Reverb G2. But you can plug the Quest into a PC and use it as a PCVR headset. Oculus sells a 16 ft fiber optic cable for $80, but it works well over any good quality USB 3 cable (and even works over USB 2 now). The downside of this is that it's more front heavy than a PC headset without all the standalone gut…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Rift S is being discontinued, if you want a dedicated PC headset now you'll want to look at an Index or an HP Reverb G2. But you can plug the Quest into a PC and use it as a PCVR headset. Oculus sells a 16 ft fiber optic cable for $80, but it works well over any good quality USB 3 cable (and even works over USB 2 now). The downside of this is that it's more front heavy than a PC headset without all the standalone gut…
Also check out https://www.vrdesktop.net/ for PC streaming, this option works wirelessly and performs very well as long as you have a fast and stable wifi connection. The version on the Oculus Store doesn't do SteamVR streaming though, you have to buy it and then sideload an alternate version (which still checks for a license from the store). There's supposed to be some sort of easier sideloading system coming (curre…
$300 is a pretty big deal for pricing on a VR headset, that feels very different from $400 for wide adoption. Seems like this is also the end of the road for Rift, the Quest 2 is lower cost, more pixels, and they mentioned 90 hz screens for PCVR games over Link. EDIT - review units went out in advance, so 3rd party reviews are already up. Here's one from Tested: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_x6lux6f_6g
The Rift is a VR head mounted display for a beefy PC. The Quest is an entire computer system powered by battery and tiny in surface area. They're different products for different markets. Anything in a mobile form factor as your VR computer will necessarily be limited for either shorter time periods or significantly less graphical fidelity.
It would be great if there was a central VR game hub that kept track of fitness. I know YUR exists, but adoption isn't widespread because it's not built into the platform.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> being part of the competitive game console market You mean being part of the many billion dollar game industry by controlling the highest growth sector in that industry with vendor lock in and rent seeking for any game sold in that new market? Yeah...who would want that...
Sure, but that would also apply to other companies who could have bought Oculus. I think the way it fits into Facebook’s overall company strategy explains why they would bid the most.
I don't _think_ Facebook had a lot of computer vision expertise at the time and it makes sense they'd want to buy into that.
Amazon was a choice I guess?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
are they really though? With the link it does make the quest a PC VR headset no?
You are correct, the parent comment is just misinformed. Oculus is indeed "getting out of PCVR" in a sense that they won't have a device that does only PCVR in the future, yeah. But both Quest and Quest 2 support PCVR functionality that works the exact same way Rift does, natively and very smoothly. With that in mind, it just doesn't make sense for Oculus to release a PCVR-only device, if their standalone-capable dev…
It's really great to see VR coming down in price and becoming more accessible... but it's coming at the cost of quality, and it's bringing the rest of VR down with it. As an example, Onward VR recently added support for Quest in its game. The process of doing so required a significant scale down in the quality of graphics, sound, and all kinds of things that were great about the game. Over night the game took a nose…
Then, developers can apply to those tricks on better hardware and get even more out of it, and this pattern could just continue as everything improves and adoption grows.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If LCD is a downgrade from OLED then why did Valve Index at 3x the price choose LCD? The fact is it's simply better overall. The resolution, brightness, screen door reduction, full subpixel array, and uniformity matter more than the contrast. Really contrasty scenes are problematic anyway because of the fresnel lenses and OLED black smearing. 1 vs 2 screens is only a downgrade for IPD adjustment, which I agree is the…
The Valve Index only went with LCD in order to use a new LCD tech that allowed high refresh rates and low persistence, it was a downgrade in all other ways except refresh rate. The Quest 2 and Quest 1 have the same refresh rate, so it's a side-grade at-best. Contrast matters a lot in VR, too.