Oculus Rift Consumer unit 1 on schedule ( Announced on Twitter )

Discussion in 'Hardware Building/Buying/Usage Advice' started by Adrianstealth, Dec 22, 2015.

  1. gkz

    gkz Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2013
    Messages:
    219
    Likes Received:
    0
    man there to many...but here 2 links: https://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comments/3zsa69/i_just_tried_the_ces_rift_cv1_demos/ and https://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comments/3ynsim/i_got_to_try_the_consumer_beta_ecv7_and_here_is/

    U go in the complete rong direction... The key in vr is not the resolution it is the screen and the lense. Means gear vr has a much higher res than cv 1 but every body says gear vr is worst from the visuals. If u go only for more pixel ofcourse it
    would not be enough compared to dk 2. CV1 has 2 seperate screens with costums optik and higher res. dk 2 = 1 note 3 handy screen.
     
  2. vittorio

    vittorio Registered

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2012
    Messages:
    1,118
    Likes Received:
    540
    thats right, i dont need a high end racing wheel, i don't need motion simulator, i don't need even a wheel, pedals not even a color monitor and computer. and i don't need a simulation. there's not much one really need. ;)
     
  3. PaulG

    PaulG Registered

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2013
    Messages:
    216
    Likes Received:
    30
    http://time.com/4172998/virtual-reality-oculus-rift-htc-vive-ces/

    Really good article from one of Time's technology writers. He'd never tried VR before CES this year and was a huge cynic/skeptic. Needless to say, his opinion has changed:)

    It's a pretty cool article. He even shares how he cried at one demo after suddenly having empathy for how his 18-month must view the world.
     
  4. DrR1pper

    DrR1pper Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2012
    Messages:
    3,294
    Likes Received:
    36
    Thanks for the links. Checking them out now.


    For clarity, i've not said nor am i saying that resolution is the only important issue but i certainly believe it's up there. For example, if all other issues (e.g. SDE, lens quality, etc) were resolved, would you be happy to remain with dk2/cv1 type resolution? I would not.
     
  5. Old Hat

    Old Hat Registered

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    163
    Likes Received:
    8
    One of the problems with screens is correct perception of speed and distance. And no, there is no "correct" FOV that solves this. The low FOV's most of us "serious" sim racers probably use that looks naturalistic and aids detecting rotation, is very misleading at low speeds. You must have noticed this! And apparently, these problems are well researched and known about in military simulators.

    VR should solve this. So it seems odd someone would choose not to avail themselves of an opportunity to see what a racing driver should see (budget allowing). Personally, I've never needed to take my eyes off the screen. But then I favour older cars and technology. ;)
     
  6. gkz

    gkz Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2013
    Messages:
    219
    Likes Received:
    0

    Now after i understand that a higher res is not possible in q1 2016 im happy. U have to get stable 90 fps on 2 screens this is impossible on next gen games even with high end pcs if u have a higher res. But as i know the screen is better than dk 2 and i prefer dk 2 over monitor im fine with it.
     
  7. DrR1pper

    DrR1pper Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2012
    Messages:
    3,294
    Likes Received:
    36
    High end SLI (e.g. 980Ti's) should be able to give you stable 90 fps per eye in any game with something like 1280x1440 (if not more) per eye. You may have to lower the graphics settings a bit in some games coming out in the future but it should still be perfectly doable with currently available hardware (provided the game is not unoptimised).


    And that's fair enough. You're happy with dk2 quality to replace your monitor use, others on the other hand may not.
     
  8. PaulG

    PaulG Registered

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2013
    Messages:
    216
    Likes Received:
    30
  9. metalnwood

    metalnwood Registered

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2011
    Messages:
    164
    Likes Received:
    4
    I would want the resolution to get better, absolutely but the resolution isnt low enough to make me go back to triples. The nice thing is that the resolution will get better.

    Touching on something someone else said that I have noticed.. The sensation of speed is certainly better in VR. We are used to things as they are, racing on screens and it does take time to adapt. The sensation of speed is not really there, not like real life and we have to learn what the speed is in the sim. I have personally noticed people are much better as first time racers when they get a demo in my rift, they have a proper sensation of the speed and dont think they are only doing 50 when they are in fact doing 120. In VR that sensation of speed is much more natural than a learned thing that we have with screens.
     
  10. DrR1pper

    DrR1pper Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2012
    Messages:
    3,294
    Likes Received:
    36
  11. WhiteShadow

    WhiteShadow Registered

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2015
    Messages:
    681
    Likes Received:
    3
    Voice attack. Tell your sim what you want :)
     
  12. Woodee

    Woodee Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2010
    Messages:
    4,004
    Likes Received:
    1,058
    I find it amusing that many are dismissing VR even before it has reached consumers hands.

    It's like saying the next new phone to come out is rubbish, when you haven't even tried it.

    Maybe some of you need more of an open mind just to see what happens?

    It's an intriguing technology.
     
  13. Guimengo

    Guimengo Guest

    I am curious to try it, I love the idea of being immersed in the cockpit with the same view I have in a vehicle in the real world. Certainly a tech store nearby will have a demo display setup, but even if it functions perfectly I will wait for ophthalmologist studies about the tech... and the salty price is unwelcome. Button positioning wouldn't be an issue as I only have the ones on my wheel, easily memorized. Having a cozy home with a room with a nice 2 projector setup would absolutely kick butt, maybe way more than VR headset.
     
  14. gkz

    gkz Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2013
    Messages:
    219
    Likes Received:
    0
    vr sli must be supported from the publisher and i don t think that isi cares much about this in the near future. i think we can be happy if 2017 will have vr support. But anyway a vr headset which needs two 980 ti is a joke. U can t sell it to the normal consumer. That would not make any sense for oculus or vive.

    Yes the dk 2 is really hard in terms of resolution and u can say its not a finish product so its not for everyone I found a good way to make special tweaks to bring the most out of it. But cv1 is a finish consumer product.
     
  15. DrR1pper

    DrR1pper Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2012
    Messages:
    3,294
    Likes Received:
    36
    True, sli must be supported, though i'm not sure if it's up to the publisher and not nvidia but i digress. Sli scaling performance is supposedly flawless (i.e. nearly 100% scaling) in rf2 in stereoscopic 3d according to people like Spinelli who only plays rf2 in 3d vision, so provided rf2 gets native rift support, VR performance with sli should be double that of a single card from the get go in rf2.

    I simply used the sli 980Ti as an example to demonstrate why i disagreed with your statement that it's impossible to get stable 90hz in vr with higher resolution displays in next gen games. Unrealistic for the masses on the other hand, i absolutely agree.


    Sorry, i'm not sure what you're trying to say here. That the cv1 being a finished consumer product means it will be without fault?
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 16, 2016
  16. WhiteShadow

    WhiteShadow Registered

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2015
    Messages:
    681
    Likes Received:
    3
    rFactor2 is NVidia 3D supported game but it don`t have Nvidia SLI support. SLI performance is not being only based in GPU drivers but the game programming aswell.
    Spinelli`s statement about perfect SLI scaling is from 07-12-15 and it was fine with Nvidia driver 353.30 however there has been windows updates and this driver don`t work anymore with SLI/Nvidia 3D sorround. NVidia profile (rFactor2 Mod Mode.exe, rFactor2.exe) is created 2011-09-22 and when ISI updates gmotor2, additional SLI optimizations etc. in 2015 and never submit the latest build of the rF2 executables to Nvidia so that an updated working SLI profile can be created. It is ISI and their communication with NVIDIA which is the reason to rFactor2 SLI problems. Nvidia has released hole bunch of new drivers after release of 353.30 and none of them gives you, satisfying fps and scaling to achieve normal game experience with Nvidia SLI or SLI/Nvidia 3D surround.

    GeForce GTX GPU’s that meet the performance requirements of VR Ready include GeForce GTX 970, GTX 980, GTX 980 Ti and TITAN X. NVIDIA partners that meet these standards display a “GeForce GTX VR Ready” badge on their systems and graphics cards.
     
  17. wgeuze

    wgeuze Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2012
    Messages:
    1,608
    Likes Received:
    63
    I always wonder why in these sorts threads I hardly see people vouch for the 3d effect the rift does. It's easily the best 3d I've seen, ever. That impressed me more than the fov to be frank, because the perception of depth was so natural.

    But having tried a DK1 for about an afternoon, I thought it was awesome tech as a whole, but not for me :) And, surprise surprise, all of my gripes are the same as Tuttle's.

    edit:
    I agree with the sensation of speed, depth and the bit of peripheral vision adds loads!
     
  18. PaulG

    PaulG Registered

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2013
    Messages:
    216
    Likes Received:
    30
    I'm honestly surprised anyone has anything nice to say about the DK1 ever. DK1 was purely a proof of concept that had way too many flaws to be usable for 99 percent of the people. DK2 has a bunch of flaws, but low persistence alone made it 5X better. Of course, CV1/Vive is a massive jump over that. And Gen 2, with foveated rendering and high resolution panels, will be another massive leap. And so on, and so on.

    Basically CV1/Vive is like the equivalent of the Apple II computer. In the coming years, it'll be rendered an antique and laughable primitive. But if you use it at the time of its release, it's finally ready for mass consumption and will be a revelation for its owners.
     
  19. wgeuze

    wgeuze Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2012
    Messages:
    1,608
    Likes Received:
    63
    It wasn't all bad. However, for me, the use of the product will not change with the advances in its technology and the same core issues I have with it apply. I know image quality sucked, and didn't see what as a disadvantage to discount the entire thing on as I knew that beforehand.

    On the other hand, I'm still surprised nobody is mentioning the sense of depth as a big plus, or people just take it for granted :p
     
  20. PaulG

    PaulG Registered

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2013
    Messages:
    216
    Likes Received:
    30
    Think people take it for granted. Part of simulating reality, is simulating the way we see. Obviously we have 3D depth in real life. So maybe it's overlooked, but obviously it's a part of why it's so convincing (especially when the scale is perfect).

    I know some 3D Vision people (huge supporter myself) complain you can't control convergence with VR, but why would you want to? VR wants natural depth when everything is at lifelike scale. So it's probably just a subtle element that's taken for granted (at this point in time. There was a lot more mention when Carmack unveiled that first kit at its E3 unveiling).
     

Share This Page