The problem with cost is I can only see a continual rise of minimum specs required for every generation of VR that comes out, which of course is to be expected, but as it is they require a monster PC to run with min specs. Next incarnation and the specs increase further, so even if the headsets come down in price slightly you'll still need a mega PC to play it on, it will eventually even itself out for sure but that is still some years away yet. That and whether VR actually takes hold is another argument entirely, the popular notion amongst my friends that own one is that Cockpit Games are about the only thing worth getting one for. So if the Airplane & Racing Game crowds are large enough then VR will continue to thrive - if not (read Cliché markets!) then it'll become an expensive fad for the cult followers only. What really needs to happen is for other types of games to take VR by the scruff of the neck and big name companies to push it through, VR sales then increase leading to more price drops as Vive/Oculus battle it out with a potential newcomer, then everybody wins
No worries! Wasn't trying to 'attack' you for setting up the poll. I participated as well, so I think it's a fun idea, and interesting to see. Just saying, 'let's keep these things in mind.' Hmm? Not sure I'm following you on this one. Seems like those that would want VR support are actually in the majority according to this poll. Seems like those that have OR/Vive and those that 'plan to buy' would want VR support, and the only ones that wouldn't are those that 'don't plan to buy.' So, even though 'don't plan to buy' was the largest single group, it's still less than 50% of the respondents. Right, so they have to weigh the development costs against how many more users they can expect to bring in as a result of it, not how many people will start using it--which is exactly my whole point. I'm aware that ISI had been experimenting with DX11 some time ago, so there may not be as much work involved for Studio397 as many users here believe. Who knows? I don't really buy into the cost barrier justifications for VR in a product such as rF2, when you have so many users around here that have triple screens, dual video cards, and numerous peripherals and motion rigs...to say nothing of the cockpit setups. Nobody complained about the development costs and number of users and whatnot when they were working on Multiview stuff I know, it's not apples to apples, but I definitely take this argument with a big grain of salt.
I didn't think you were attacking, don't worry While it's no guarantee (not like ac), the isi forum users probably own rf2 already so no new money to come from them. That is unless they pay yearly. New income to support dev costs may have to come from new users. We will have to see whether vr is big enough to draw new users in. On the flip side, many might be waiting until vr arrives until they buy rfactor 2. It is an exciting time to be involved with games and watching this technology grow and mature. Remember, some may do their simracing on a dining room chair on a 15 inch monitor . Vr could be their only big purchase alongside their pc rig. Many need permission from their wife for their toys ha! For me personally, I'm waiting for a huge price cut and vr gloves... Just don't think i could afford any of this right now... Good to watch though.
A big curved screen around me + projector is VR enough for me with the bonus I can see the environment I am and find mouse, keyboard, steering wheel, buttons and my beer can.
Oh, yeah! I totally get this! I just have a single 21" square-screen monitor, myself (Wacom Cintiq), since my gaming rig is the same as my work rig. This is actually another reason that I'm excited about VR for SimRacing; since I don't have the space for triples, let alone projection rig, and I move fairly often for work, it needs to be somewhat portable as well. VR is the answer to all of this, I get the immersion, head-tracking, and perfect FOV. Even my old computer rig (Core2 2.8Ghz proc, GTX760) handled VR just fine, too, for non-graphically-intensive sims, such as iRacing, LFS; even though it didn't meet the "minimum recommended specs" set by Oculus/nVidia/ATI. It even played pCars alright, as long as I turned down the settings (no crowd, no DOF/MotionBlur, etc.). You really don't 'need' a monster PC for VR, despite what the hardware manufacturers like to say
Indeed, that's my barrier to one. Just cannot justify spending that much on such a nicety. Just interested whether it's tech, cost, no interest etc
"nicety": a fine or subtle detail or distinction. "legal niceties are wasted on him" synonyms:fine point, subtlety, nuance, fine distinction, shade, refinement, detail That's really not the right word for this. VR isn't like adding a button box, or an extra couple of screens. It's not a tweak. Driving with VR is a completely different activity. You are in the car, on the track as opposed to watching something over there trying to work out what it all means. I've sim raced for 10 yrs (PC) and a few before on playstation. But now have zero interest in doing it on a monitor again. I'd expect a pro racing driver to adapt very quickly to VR whereas some never seem to manage it with monitors. It's great news but they'll need some graphical improvements including interiors and better frame rates.
Tried it, most immersive Sim racing experience i have ever had. Not coming back to rf2 until it is supported.
For me personally it's the cost coupled with not being sure my eyes will like it because 3d movies give me a headache. Guess I could head to Gamestop to try the Vive and Best Buy to try the Rift but I assume neither will have cockpit view for a driving game in their demo.
3D movies are a real mess. On so many levels. Very few people can be in the proper convergence sweetspot (in a theater). If we're talking active shutters, the flickering can be a real issue (especially since movies are running at lower framerates). Crosstalk can be another issue that causes head-aches. There's a whole list. I always felt anything less than 3D Vision, and you were getting a terrible version of 3D and you shouldn't write off the tech. And even 3D Vision had some issues. Felt like DK2, huge flaws and all, was quite a bit better. But it made a lousy first impression and required you play with an open mind for a couple hours before its benefits really got their hooks into you. Vive just blows me away. 3D Vision is basically dead to me now.
It did for me until I tried vr. I recycled my 100inch curved aluminium screen to make a furniture for the garden and put my beamer in the living room just for movies.
I went to a local retailer that sells the Vive and they said they've got a 30 day return policy so I'll probably consider it once rFactor 2 gets VR.
Everyone is different, that's the reason why every one should try it before buying or buy it from a place with good rerurm policy. I can play for as many hours as I want, usually 2 hour sessions. Also VR can't be described with words it is not like 3D, it's another thing. Only trying you can know if it is for you or not.
Hmm. I like the idea of VR and am not too put off the cost... ...but the inability to see your buttons etc. is probably the biggest potential issue for me. To be fair, I only regularly use the two rotary dials on my Thrustmaster F1 wheel - plus maybe a couple of push buttons that are in easy reach - so it probably wouldn't be all that bad. ...but I already use triple screens and the TrackIR hardware solution for head-tracking - which has been fully supported in rF2 for ages. This obviously won't give the same immersion levels as a true VR headset - but it's a half-way house in terms of being able to look around you in a realistic and intuitive way. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I use VR in the f1 in Iracing The dials move on the virtual wheel matching movements on my mapped disks on my actual steering wheel So I look at the virtual wheel sometimes to check dial position Zero probs fingers finding right buttons & dials -simple memory Works incredibly well. -I'm assuming no rf2 mids at this time have moving dials ??? ( to match user hardware mapped controls)