The VR thread. U R Not red(e) Oculus Quest announced $399: Vive $599!

Started by Mmm_fish_tacos, Sep 05, 2015, 06:10 PM

previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 6 Guests are viewing this topic.

How sick of Pi's VR hype are you?

Ridiculously
0 (0%)
Very
1 (25%)
Somewhat
0 (0%)
Not at all
0 (0%)
Depends on my mood
3 (75%)

Total Members Voted: 4

Go Down

Mmm_fish_tacos

Yeah pack ins are cheap ways for a company to help justify the cost. Removing them would shave off only like $50 probably.

Palmer Luckey did a reddit AMA on the price and he did come across as genuine that $600 is close to cost. So three things are possible.

1. They didn't like Vive beating them, so they pushed hard to make CV1 as good as possible. Price jump over DK2 might be worth it.
2. They designed the CV1 as a mass produced product unlike the DKs, but a long the way they screwed up and opted for custom parts with minimul gain. CV1 is a bit better than DK2, but it costs a lot more to make.
3. They're lying and spinning the truth, trying to calm the fires. CV1 being sold for a significant profit.

We really need the specs of this thing!
They have talked specs?

Legend

They have talked specs?
Not in detail. Palmer hinted for example that the lenses are a custom made combination of traditional and fresnel for example.

the-pi-guy

Spoiler for Hidden:
<br>To be perfectly clear, we don't make money on the Rift. The Xbox controller costs us almost nothing to bundle, and people can easily resell it for profit. A lot of people wish we would sell a bundle without "useless extras" like high-end audio, a carrying case, the bundled games, etc, but those just don't significantly impact the cost. The core technology in the Rift is the main driver - two built-for-VR OLED displays with very high refresh rate and pixel density, a very precise tracking system, mechanical adjustment systems that must be lightweight, durable, and precise, and cutting-edge optics that are more complex to manufacture than many high end DSLR lenses. It is expensive, but for the $599 you spend, you get a lot more than spending $599 on pretty much any other consumer electronics devices - phones that cost $599 cost a fraction of that to make, same with mid-range TVs that cost $599. There are a lot of mainstream devices in that price-range, so as you have said, our failing was in communication, not just price.<br><br>&quot;In what &#39;ballpark&#39; can we expect Touch&#39;s price to be?&quot;<br>No more ballparks for now. I have learned my lesson.<br>&quot;How many games can we expect to have available to us by years end?&quot;<br>At least 100 - Over 20 Oculus Studios titles, many more 3rd party titles.<br><br><br><br>No, I have thick calluses on my hands from wielding tools in the lab. Real tools, not power tools.<br><br>We announced that we will have retail partners today, more info soon! Demos are important.<br><br>Kickstarter backer shipments will be shipping in March. They will indeed have the same place in line for Touch, along with the other pre-order bonuses.<br>We will not be artificially restricting use of computers. Not my style. Some apps will run on lower spec machines, especially things like movie apps, but we can&#39;t officially support that, especially since many low end cards are physically unable to output the framerate and resolution required for the hardware to operate.<br><br><span class="bbc_bold">We could have shipped something along the lines of DK2, but I really don&#39;t think it would have been good enough to kickstart the consumer VR industry, especially in the long run. It would also cost more than people think - Shipping a real consumer product is more complex than janking out a dev kit, even something nearly identical to DK2 would have ended up costing $400+, and the all-in investment including a PC would still be around $1300, not enough to make the jump from enthusiast to mainstream.(No exact numbers, not done this cost analysis exercise in a long time</span><br><br>We are basically in the XKCD standards comic scenario, at least for now. We have been building our SDK for years, and it is currently the best one out there (IMO) - getting our own product out the door is our current priority, we will look at other headsets if and when they hit the market. There are several efforts to create a standard for VR games, all of which work different, some of which are controlled by a single company.<br><br><img src="https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/standards.png" alt="" class="bbc_img"><br><br>Continue working with GPU and CPU manufacturers to optimize for VR, thus reducing the required hardware cost. Use economies of scale and the passage of time to reduce the cost of good enough PC hardware. For the average person, the PC is by far the biggest cost, not the headset - the end goal is to make sure people can use the PC they already have in most cases.<br><br>I can&#39;t comment on price speculation, but I think the Rift is the best headset with the best content and the best long-term support.<br><br><br>IKindaLikeYouLolSike: <br>Will you have naughtiness with me?<br>palmerluckey<br>Yes.<br><br>palmerluckey<br>I don&#39;t remember writing this.<br><br>

the-pi-guy

I have to wonder how much of an impact the expected sales have on the actual sales.  

If Oculus is expecting 50K, the companies they are working with, are essentially not going to put as much work into a factory.  

If a company is expecting millions upon millions, it is fairly easy to expect millions of dollars to go into setting up factories.  

I have to wonder how much of an impact that has on price.

Legend

We could have shipped something along the lines of DK2, but I really don't think it would have been good enough to kickstart the consumer VR industry, especially in the long run. It would also cost more than people think - Shipping a real consumer product is more complex than janking out a dev kit, even something nearly identical to DK2 would have ended up costing $400+
That doesn't seem accurate...

Like at all...

kitler53

That doesn't seem accurate...

Like at all...
these guys are clearly n00bs to the world of consumer electronics.  sony should be able to do much better and OR will figure things out eventually.
       

the-pi-guy

All from the AMA Luckey.  

That was a bit weird.

Raven

That doesn't seem accurate...

Like at all...
A lot of back pedaling going on here.

the-pi-guy

Spoiler for Hidden:
Ordered my CV1 in the first 5 mins, but I finally got done trying the Vive and CV1 here are my thoughts as someone who owns DK1, DK2 &amp; GearVR:<br>The CV1 was the best out of the two in terms of VR presence and experience, here are the reasons and what I noticed as differences -<br>1. Optics Quality: I got a chance to view both the Vive and CV1 lens, the CV1 has a superb sweet spot for aberration and distortion free viewing, there is no noticeable chromatic aberration like the DK2. Fellow DK2 owners who hate having to tighten your straps and carefully position the lenses w.r.t to your eyes to avoid a blurry mess will be pleased. I also played around with the physical IPD mechanism which is fan-fudgy-tastic, feels high quality and long lasting and the position adjustment is detailed and stays where you leave it.<br>Another part of the optics that definitely helps is the non-circular shape. If you have the DK2, try looking at your nose or the left and right edges of your visual field when you have the headset on, you will notice that things quickly become blurry and colors seperate a LOT.<br>If you have also played FPS games like Fallout 4 and Battlefront using VorpX w/ the DK2, you will know that unless your eyes are pointing in the same direction of your head/face that clarity is quickly lost which makes tracking targets that come into view and move away from the center of your vision is hard to get used to because you have to move your entire head instead of naturally moving your line of sight in your field of view. The new lenses make this natural and seamless in a bigger area of your FOV.<br>Which brings me to the final point about the lenses, the FOV, oh god dang the FOV, its in that sweet spot. From the DK1 to DK2, the VFOV and HFOV were sacrificed and thus you got this &quot;scuba mask&quot; feeling which at least for me substantially reduced chances of achieving presence for a large continuous amount of time. From my demo, this scuba mask effect is greatly diminished to the point that your peripheral area of vision is sufficiently filled with pixels to give you better feeling of presence.<br>Palmer, you made a good decision splurging for these new lenses, at least for me.<br>Displays: The CV1 also had an advantage here when compared to the Vive IMO but a much smaller margin then the lens, the pixel fill density was noticeable better and the low persistence kept light from bleeding and blur from being a problem, the Vive also does this pretty well but there is more noticeable smearing in the Vive. The other big difference is the noticeability of SDE and pixels. DK2 owners know when playing something like Assetto Corsa, if you focus really hard on an upcoming turn, you often times get pulled out of the immersion because your brain actually notices that what you are seeing is just pixels that are changing color, rather than a cohesive image in a wide field of view. This effect is significantly diminished w/ CV1&#39;s screen as compared to the Vive, in EVE Valkyrie, even when I focused on a ship to lock on, I never fully lost immersion with the &quot;oh this is just a shame heap of aliased pixels I&#39;m looking at&quot; feeling. Because of this, large scale objects in the background also feel more &quot;3D&quot;, the planet I was fighting above in EVE actually felt like a massive body under me as I flew around dog fighting.<br>Weight: The CV1 was margially more comfortable than the Vive, but the most annoying thing was still the cable and how it sometimes pulled on your face when walking around in both the Vive and CV1 (the CV1 was more standing so I noticed the cable less and stepped on it less often).<br>Motion Controls: The Vive does a little bit better here when it works, I found the Vive controllers to be more comfortable and natural to hold than the CV1 Touch, both the Touch Vive sometimes would skip or reset a bit when enough of the controller for a hand was ocluded (when hugging your hands to your chest and hunching for example), but when it worked the Vive and Touch were solidly 1:1 with a slight edge going to the Vive.<br>Audio:CV1 is a clear winner in this regard, I am a bit of an audiophile and have 10+ different headphones including a Bang &amp; Olufsen set, the CV1 was comparable to most high end audiophile headphones I own in terms of sound stage and balance of sound. The usefulness of the uniformity of the CV1 headset&#39;s cans were apparent, directionality and &quot;positioning&quot; of sound in the CV1 demo was noticeably better than the Vive, which felt like the crude circular directionality and distance drop off in magnitude that we are used to in regular games. In the CV1, 360 degree spherical directionality and much better distance differentiation was possible.<br>Conclusion: All in all, in addition to my $2k PC and $5k gaming chair setup, the extra $200 for the CV1 made sense, I am very happy with my future purchase based on my demo experiences.


CES CV1 Impressions vs Vive : oculus

Legend

That sounds great!

Maybe I will get OR over Vive.

Mmm_fish_tacos

That sounds great!

Maybe I will get OR over Vive.
I think you should. That way we can play eve and elite

Legend

I think you should. That way we can play eve and elite
I don't think there will be a large amount of exclusive software per headset, plus Elite already has official vive support.

Mmm_fish_tacos

I don't think there will be a large amount of exclusive software per headset, plus Elite already has official vive support.
Thats true.

Mmm_fish_tacos

Well Oculus says my processor isn't good enough for the rift. Apparently single core speed is more important for the rift. But I really don't understand it. I crush FPS in most games. The only thing that even slows my system to 60 fps is the witcher 3 on ultra. Can anyone think why my cpu wouldn't be okay?  really don't want to upgrade to intel.

the-pi-guy

Jan 08, 2016, 02:26 AM Last Edit: Jan 08, 2016, 02:44 AM by the-pi-guy
I think you should. That way we can play eve and elite
Think even if there are exclusives, there will be ways around it.  

That sounds great!
Maybe I will get OR over Vive.
Sounds like OR made a good headset.  
Dat price though.  :P

Well Oculus says my processor isn't good enough for the rift. Apparently single core speed is more important for the rift. But I really don't understand it. I crush FPS in most games. The only thing that even slows my system to 60 fps is the witcher 3 on ultra. Can anyone think why my cpu wouldn't be okay?  really don't want to upgrade to intel.
What CPU do you have?  

Go Up