Wrestlemania
Banned
Those two being quite dark games helps a lot in hiding SDE. Job Simulator is very bright and colourful so SDE stayed quite visible, although quickly forgotten about since you're moving around and doing things a lot.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
The High-end VR Discussion Thread (HTC Vive, Oculus Rift, Playstation VR)
- Thread starter Cartman86
- Start date
From what I've seen of the headset, you can actually keep the headphones away from your ears if you so desire. It's an open ear design, so you can still get a good amount of sound from it.
With that said, I love my IEMs... so maybe we have very different ears and thus different mechanics of comfort.
I just had an idea which might be relevant for everyone else who needs to get cables through a wall in order to get them from their PC to their intended VR space. Basically, I'll use a displayport -> mini-displayport and USB -> micro-USB cable, and reverse adapters on the other side. This would mean only having to pull the tiny connectors through a hole.
(Of course, the "correct" way to do it would be to simply pull the cable through and mount a new connector on the other side, but ain't nobody got time - or the tools - for that)
(Of course, the "correct" way to do it would be to simply pull the cable through and mount a new connector on the other side, but ain't nobody got time - or the tools - for that)
Yes but the vive does seated just as well. Why not get the headset that can do both. I am sure most people can set aside a few square metres you really dont need that much room. Really isnt anything that oculus does that vive cant do but there seems to be a bit the rift cant do that the vive can. I just dont have much confidence in them after the direction they have taken since facebook bought them. I honestly doubt they will get 360 working near as well.
functionally yes - the vive can do everything a rift can, and more. But if you expect to play the majority of your games seated - if you're really into racing games or elite for instance - then the motion part might not be super important to you now, and the increased comfort and lower SDE might be more useful to you.
Plus oculus touch will at least partly close that gap by the end of the year
DOT DASH DOT
Member
I was thinking about doing that, but personally for me I'm gonna have a set of PC cables in the lounge, and a set in my VR area, so literally pick up the PC and put it in the room it's needed with minimum hassle.
Wrestlemania
Banned
What change in direction has there been since Facebook bought them, out of interest?
Thinking about the comments on minecraft poisoning the well with a bad VR implementation - does it support third person mode? A poster yesterday was wondering if that would help with motion sickness when walking along (popping into 3rd person for movement and back into first person for standing activities), and I think that could work well with minecraft.
Wrestlemania
Banned
Yeah, it does, although I don't know how well it works. It switches back to first person if you become confined, although in that scenario you wouldn't be moving much to it shouldn't cause anything issues with motion sickness.
artsi
Member
I don't like on-ears either, but I think the OR ones might me more comfortable because they don't push against your ear to stay in their place, but are supported by the HMD itself and just "hang there".
Can't say without trying though.
Rift gets bonus points simply for having them built in. One less cable to tidy and easier to put on and off.
With earlier devkits, did anyone ever mod in an ambilight style surround for the displays to help alleviate the narrow field of view?
Wondering if that would be effective, as I don't see the actual active doc increasing dramatically until the resolution per eye gets really high - even 4K per eye you wouldn't want to stretch it much more than you do now.
But a lower res Lcd panel around the edges could be an alternative
Wondering if that would be effective, as I don't see the actual active doc increasing dramatically until the resolution per eye gets really high - even 4K per eye you wouldn't want to stretch it much more than you do now.
But a lower res Lcd panel around the edges could be an alternative
DOT DASH DOT
Member
Oh man, just read that info dump on the headsets, gutted that a bloody Gear VR's SDE is comparable to Vive's. Feels like blow after blow in regards to the image quality. Shame he didn't take pictures of the Vive's screen. Even on the Rift you can see the SDE pattern.
having used both gearVR and the vive, I disagree with him. The Vive is much better.
Nightengale
Member
Krej, I tried S7 GearVR yesterday, and while it wasn't bad, the SDE and blurriness were still noticable to experience detriment.
How much better would you say a Rift and a PSVR's SDE is compared to a GearVR?
DOT DASH DOT
Member
Surely it has to be, reading about Gear VR impressions is a depressing read, people absolutely hate the screen quality! It's very annoying that he's put the Vive's screen in that ballpark.
I haven't tried CV1 or PSVR.
I'm not saying the Vive's optics are perfect, however. When I tried the vive, i got a significant halo effect from the fresnel lenses. To me, that was worse than dealing with SDE. In fact, I talked about it on reddit:
https://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comments/421de1/the_fresnel_lenses_on_the_htc_vive_are_very/
But if we're talking solely about SDE, I felt the vive had less of a SDE than my gear VR.
Dreams-Visions
Member
Twit VR offers their thoughts on PSVR, Vive and Rift.
They were very impressed with the value proposition of the PSVR.
Oh and they ranked them based on their experiences, the fit, the tech, and the perceived value. For those who like ranking orders. I won't spoil it for you other than to say that it seemed fair given the criteria they based their reasoning on.
They were very impressed with the value proposition of the PSVR.
Oh and they ranked them based on their experiences, the fit, the tech, and the perceived value. For those who like ranking orders. I won't spoil it for you other than to say that it seemed fair given the criteria they based their reasoning on.
DOT DASH DOT
Member
Is there any hope the consumer version will have any optic improvements? I mean no one has reviewed the CV Vive.....
I wouldn't count on CV Vive being radically different than Vive-Pre.
But there is a chance my demo was miscalibrated. However, I tried the vive again a month later and noticed the halos yet again. It's possible both demos were miscalibrated, to be fair.
Ultimately, the IQ in none of these HMDs is going to blow Gear VR away. Gear VR uses a 1440p screen. Of course, the PC HMDs will be able to make somewhat better use of their resolution with better optics and because they don't lose as many pixels (due to separate screens), and PSVR, though it's even lower resolution on a single screen, at least has a RGB layout.
But ultimately, I think people should get used to the idea that in terms of spatial resolution, none of the first generation consumer headsets will be particularly good. In fact, they will be a lot worse than whatever monitor or TV you are used to. The sooner you make your peace with that the better.
At least there are some aspects in which the IQ will shine compared to your existing displays, like contrast ratio (unless you are using an OLED TV).
But ultimately, I think people should get used to the idea that in terms of spatial resolution, none of the first generation consumer headsets will be particularly good. In fact, they will be a lot worse than whatever monitor or TV you are used to. The sooner you make your peace with that the better.
At least there are some aspects in which the IQ will shine compared to your existing displays, like contrast ratio (unless you are using an OLED TV).
ashecitism
Member
Tested hands-on with Eagle Flight: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bUNVDm3Bkxg
Nightengale
Member
Felix Lighter
Member
I'm so torn on the Vive vs Rift thing, I'll probably end up having both at least for some short time. It's just impossible for me to justify owning both though but cannot sit back and wait for the Vive at this point. Hopefully, when I do finally decide, I won't lose much when I sell one of the headsets.
there's a lot of room between blowing away the competition and simply being better. I wouldn't say the Vive blew Gear VR away, but I would say it was better.
EDIT: Speaking about fresnel lenses, I suddenly just remembered that my wearality sky glasses were supposed to be here like a month ago. Gotta shoot some emails off...
Sure. I agree.
I just wanted to reiterate that from a comparison with traditional screen technology PoV, the spatial resolution and quality of all first gen VR HMDs is by necessity going to suck. (And that people should be aware of that before jumping in)
Felix Lighter
Member
"But comparing the technology, I would place the PSVR above the oculus rift"
what? Their comparison doesn't make sense. You can prefer the comfort, you can prefer the all-in-one package, you can prefer the price. But the technology? No, that's not a subjective comparison. They are objectively wrong. The Oculus rift is technogically superior to the PSVR, and Sony readily admits it.
DOT DASH DOT
Member
It makes it more frustrating that you get all these different opinions on how good the Vive's screen is. On a Tribal Instincts video, he says you'll get a shock when you put the headset on in regards to how low the res is.
But on other reviews, they say "wow it's so sharp" totally opposing statements.
I'm not very good with compromise, I game in 4K, so it doesn't help my cause. But I understand it won't be amazingly high res, I just don't want it to be shit quite honestly.
Felix Lighter
Member
I'm also considering getting some disposable contacts simply for VR. I hate wearing contacts but I don't want to compromise with glasses.
I would compare VR screen quality to that of an SD CRT. Things are similarly blurry, but not enough to ruin the experience.
Dreams-Visions
Member
I suppose they felt that the technology advantage didn't add up enough on screen to justify its price. One group and one opinion. You can always disagree with their opinion. When you get a chance to try the PSVR we'll certainly look forward to adding your opinion to the pile along with everyone else's.
But that's not what they said, and in fact they clarified and talked about that just a few sentences later. They were talking about the quality of the technology itself, not the value proposition. And they are objectively wrong.
I don't need to try the PSVR to be certain that the technology in it is not superior to the technology in the Oculus Rift CV1. Looking at the specs alone tell me that it is not.
DOT DASH DOT
Member
This is the best example I can find, Aperature demo 4 min 23 secs in, does it actually look like that?
http://youtu.be/JHIiatyuJFI
Dreams-Visions
Member
I thought they spent damn near half their discussion talking about the price and how competitive that makes it, along with the comfort, performance, etc. But maybe I'm misremembering. I think you should send them a strongly worded letter to let them know how wrong they are.
They experienced all 3 and liked what they liked.
No. No conventional monitor can accurately demonstrate what it looks like in VR. It's entirely unrelatable on a conventional screen.
For example, aliasing exists, but it looks nothing like the aliasing in that screen shot. It (can be) apparent, but it would not be perceived like that. Aliasing manifests in VR as twinkling dots, especially on the periphery of your eyes.
what is the point of this comment?
DOT DASH DOT
Member
That's what I thought, but in that clip I thought it was being captured from the view, as it had loads of aliasing etc, the majority of the screen view clips look clear as hell.
But at the end of the day, I've got no idea, thanks for clearing that up.
TerryLee81
Member
How much harder (if any at all) and more expensive is it to develop a game for VR? I have no idea what it needs compared to traditional games.
My dream would be something like TW3 in VR.
My dream would be something like TW3 in VR.
It is much more difficult. You have many more design considerations without any examples to crib off of, and VR games are by far the most technically demanding of all games. Significant considerations need to be made constantly, and certain types of mappings and lighting models flat out don't work in VR (or if they do, they only work in limited ways).
Technical difficulty is not a linear correlation with cost.
DOT DASH DOT
Member
I think the way I'm gonna have to look at it, is that the overwhelming majority love the Vive and most don't even mention the display clarity, which points to be an experience which adds up to more than the sheer amount of pixels.
I'm sure in 2-3 years I'll get £200-£300 back for the Vive and upgrade anyway.
I'm sure in 2-3 years I'll get £200-£300 back for the Vive and upgrade anyway.
Incase you guys miss this thread:
http://m.neogaf.com/showthread.php?t=1198707
http://youtu.be/zPKUO1yKAqY
It's week 4 of the gun toy range that guy was making and he's made a fully working Rifle, with magazine loading safety switch, loading actions, rails and scopes.
Looking down the scope is wobbly until he holds the rail to settle it down. Just seeing how it works it's clear just how game changing this technology will be. So hyped for my vive!
http://m.neogaf.com/showthread.php?t=1198707
http://youtu.be/zPKUO1yKAqY
It's week 4 of the gun toy range that guy was making and he's made a fully working Rifle, with magazine loading safety switch, loading actions, rails and scopes.
Looking down the scope is wobbly until he holds the rail to settle it down. Just seeing how it works it's clear just how game changing this technology will be. So hyped for my vive!
metareferential
Member
Everyone (without or with little VR experience) keeps talking about image quality comparing resolution only; biggest difference between GearVR (even on a s7) and consumer HMDs is refresh rate.
I think even an s7 still operates at 60hz; that's not high enough to take away added blurriness; while resolution may be higher, the end results may vary.
And supposedly the optics in the final units could be better than what's already available on Gear.
And then there's contrast ratio and other variables at play. And the biggest difference is going to be software: some games could already hide SDE really effectively even on a DK2.
And again, this can't be stressed enough:
I think even an s7 still operates at 60hz; that's not high enough to take away added blurriness; while resolution may be higher, the end results may vary.
And supposedly the optics in the final units could be better than what's already available on Gear.
And then there's contrast ratio and other variables at play. And the biggest difference is going to be software: some games could already hide SDE really effectively even on a DK2.
And again, this can't be stressed enough:
artsi
Member
I think many are still astonished by what VR can do, and we'll see how it is after some months when the novelty wears off. After grinding hundreds of hours in a flight simulator one might start wanting better resolution, better FOV, etc.
But I'm sure we'll still be satisfied until the second generation hits.
backbreaker65
Banned
People often forget or leave out the very important statement Sony made was "with a high end PC" yes you will get a better experience.
TerryLee81
Member
Interesting. I guess it will take some time and a high adoption rate until we see something like TW3 for VR
I am not comparing the platforms they run on. I am comparing the headsets. The technology in the rift is superior to the technology in the PSVR.
Yeah. There are many reasons we won't see anything like TW3 in VR anytime soon. Technical hurdles need to be overcome, the market needs to be there, and entirely new methods of interaction need to be developed.
TW3 is close to what many would probably consider the pinnacle of current 3D-gaming-on-flat-screens in scope and technical sophistication. It builds on decades of collective experience creating that type of game.
Sony has a custom 120Hz curved OLED panel with full RGB stripe, and apparently the panel is designed to cram more pixels in the centre of your vision (but this might be something to do with optics or a combo of both, not sure).
Rift has higher res but less sub pixels cos it's a pentile display and 90Hz max.
So no you can't really say Rift has the better tech outright, Sony has a lot of advantages and only loses out on the panel resolution, and its not a massive disparity on that count either.
And here we go again...