Oculus Rift launching Q1 2016, Official
Hopefully it will be up to most of our expectations, as opposed to the prototypes when compared to 3D Vision... [url]https://www.oculus.com/blog/first-look-at-the-rift-shipping-q1-2016/[/url]
Hopefully it will be up to most of our expectations, as opposed to the prototypes when compared to 3D Vision...

https://www.oculus.com/blog/first-look-at-the-rift-shipping-q1-2016/

Windows 10 64-bit, Intel 7700K @ 5.1GHz, 16GB 3600MHz CL15 DDR4 RAM, 2x GTX 1080 SLI, Asus Maximus IX Hero, Sound Blaster ZxR, PCIe Quad SSD, Oculus Rift CV1, DLP Link PGD-150 glasses, ViewSonic PJD6531w 3D DLP Projector @ 1280x800 120Hz native / 2560x1600 120Hz DSR 3D Gaming.

#1
Posted 05/06/2015 06:05 PM   
Right after Valve takes everybody's money ... ? :)
Right after Valve takes everybody's money ... ? :)
#2
Posted 05/06/2015 06:14 PM   
Congrats to the Oculus Team! I think its fair to say that Palmer can also give himself a pat on the back when he looks at the positive reviews of the new Rift competitors. One small step for man One annoyingly belated leap for 3D gamers I think good content is the new battlefront. Im a little concerned. I hate to say it, but all the VR-heavy stuff moving your hands around with console sticks looks really really boring. I can see a sword fighting game, where its very complex, like Chivalry: Medieval Warefare, so there is a fun learning curve to try and climb each time you play the game, getting better and better over time. Or a system where you stand up and play battlefield and get exercise playing Battlefield for an hour. Might be hard on the knees though, for me at least. But, my interest certainly don't represent the market's i don't think.
Congrats to the Oculus Team!

I think its fair to say that Palmer can also give himself a pat on the back when he looks at the positive reviews of the new Rift competitors.


One small step for man
One annoyingly belated leap for 3D gamers

I think good content is the new battlefront. Im a little concerned. I hate to say it, but all the VR-heavy stuff moving your hands around with console sticks looks really really boring. I can see a sword fighting game, where its very complex, like Chivalry: Medieval Warefare, so there is a fun learning curve to try and climb each time you play the game, getting better and better over time. Or a system where you stand up and play battlefield and get exercise playing Battlefield for an hour. Might be hard on the knees though, for me at least. But, my interest certainly don't represent the market's i don't think.

46" Samsung ES7500 3DTV (checkerboard, high FOV as desktop monitor, highly recommend!) - Metro 2033 3D PNG screens - Metro LL filter realism mod - Flugan's Deus Ex:HR Depth changers - Nvidia tech support online form - Nvidia support: 1-800-797-6530

#3
Posted 05/06/2015 06:44 PM   
RAGEdemon I'm afraid I don't have good news :( Carmack just said that no VR HMD in this and next year, will have more than 1440p display :( This means nothing significantly better than Crescent Bay prototype until 2017. The res of CB and the consumer versions is not known, but people speculate it's something aroung 1000x1000 per eye. With increased FOV in comparison to 3D Vision single monitor setup, the gap to 3DV pixel density might be significant even for the next few years. I do think we'll get something like 2000x2000 per eye resolution at the end of 2016 (prototypes) and Q1 2017 (consumer versions). For the DK2 prototype though, there was a huge issue with screen door effect, which ruined the perceived resolution. This won't be the case with the consumer version of the Rift. The color saturation, brightness and black levels, might suffer because of those anti-SDE measures though. Overall - you might want to hold up to CV2 in Q1-Q4 2017 (my bet is for Q1) if you expect something of really high quality. Meanwhile - just a week or two until Oculus releases the specs of the CV1 Rift.
RAGEdemon
I'm afraid I don't have good news :(
Carmack just said that no VR HMD in this and next year, will have more than 1440p display :(
This means nothing significantly better than Crescent Bay prototype until 2017.
The res of CB and the consumer versions is not known, but people speculate it's something aroung 1000x1000 per eye. With increased FOV in comparison to 3D Vision single monitor setup, the gap to 3DV pixel density might be significant even for the next few years.
I do think we'll get something like 2000x2000 per eye resolution at the end of 2016 (prototypes) and Q1 2017 (consumer versions).

For the DK2 prototype though, there was a huge issue with screen door effect, which ruined the perceived resolution. This won't be the case with the consumer version of the Rift. The color saturation, brightness and black levels, might suffer because of those anti-SDE measures though.
Overall - you might want to hold up to CV2 in Q1-Q4 2017 (my bet is for Q1) if you expect something of really high quality.
Meanwhile - just a week or two until Oculus releases the specs of the CV1 Rift.

#4
Posted 05/06/2015 07:04 PM   
[quote="Libertine"]Congrats to the Oculus Team! I think its fair to say that Palmer can also give himself a pat on the back when he looks at the positive reviews of the new Rift competitors. One small step for man One annoyingly belated leap for 3D gamers I think good content is the new battlefront. Im a little concerned. I hate to say it, but all the VR-heavy stuff moving your hands around with console sticks looks really really boring. I can see a sword fighting game, where its very complex, like Chivalry: Medieval Warefare, so there is a fun learning curve to try and climb each time you play the game, getting better and better over time. Or a system where you stand up and play battlefield and get exercise playing Battlefield for an hour. Might be hard on the knees though, for me at least. But, my interest certainly don't represent the market's i don't think.[/quote] Funny that you should paraphrase that quote from Neil Armstrong. I am genuinely proud to have backed the Kickstarter for the Apollo 11 VR Experience, and I can't wait to see the finished product. I think that VR in education, as well as the potential of gameplay with bonus exercise that you mentioned, will be a real game changer too.
Libertine said:Congrats to the Oculus Team!

I think its fair to say that Palmer can also give himself a pat on the back when he looks at the positive reviews of the new Rift competitors.


One small step for man
One annoyingly belated leap for 3D gamers

I think good content is the new battlefront. Im a little concerned. I hate to say it, but all the VR-heavy stuff moving your hands around with console sticks looks really really boring. I can see a sword fighting game, where its very complex, like Chivalry: Medieval Warefare, so there is a fun learning curve to try and climb each time you play the game, getting better and better over time. Or a system where you stand up and play battlefield and get exercise playing Battlefield for an hour. Might be hard on the knees though, for me at least. But, my interest certainly don't represent the market's i don't think.


Funny that you should paraphrase that quote from Neil Armstrong. I am genuinely proud to have backed the Kickstarter for the Apollo 11 VR Experience, and I can't wait to see the finished product. I think that VR in education, as well as the potential of gameplay with bonus exercise that you mentioned, will be a real game changer too.

Intel Core i7 4770k @ 4.4Ghz, 3x GTX Titan, 16GB Tactical Tracer LED, CPU/GPU Dual-Loop Water-Cooled - Driver 331.82, DX11.0

#5
Posted 05/06/2015 11:12 PM   
Don't buy it for at least a few months, so we can get a sense of which headset is going to be the most supported by devs.
Don't buy it for at least a few months, so we can get a sense of which headset is going to be the most supported by devs.

#6
Posted 05/06/2015 11:31 PM   
[quote="ToThePoint"][quote="Libertine"]Congrats to the Oculus Team! I think its fair to say that Palmer can also give himself a pat on the back when he looks at the positive reviews of the new Rift competitors. One small step for man One annoyingly belated leap for 3D gamers I think good content is the new battlefront. Im a little concerned. I hate to say it, but all the VR-heavy stuff moving your hands around with console sticks looks really really boring. I can see a sword fighting game, where its very complex, like Chivalry: Medieval Warefare, so there is a fun learning curve to try and climb each time you play the game, getting better and better over time. Or a system where you stand up and play battlefield and get exercise playing Battlefield for an hour. Might be hard on the knees though, for me at least. But, my interest certainly don't represent the market's i don't think.[/quote] Funny that you should paraphrase that quote from Neil Armstrong. I am genuinely proud to have backed the Kickstarter for the Apollo 11 VR Experience, and I can't wait to see the finished product. I think that VR in education, as well as the potential of gameplay with bonus exercise that you mentioned, will be a real game changer too.[/quote] Yeah. The Apollo 11 Experience literally gave me goose bumps. I don't know how VR fails to revolutionize education. I just don't see how it fails. I'm a lot more interested in Vive (unless Oculus can bring something interesting to the control game). Once you get past the cockpit genre, the Oculus is seriously lacking. I think the locomotion issues make the FPS genre horrible. And everything else suffers without bringing the hands (and tactile feedback) into the equation. I can see tons of gameplay possibilities with the Vive controllers and IMO this type of control scheme is not a luxury if you want interactive gaming experiences. The mouse/keyboard combo and traditional console controller are severely lacking as a solution. [quote="Pirateguybrush"]Don't buy it for at least a few months, so we can get a sense of which headset is going to be the most supported by devs.[/quote] I actually bought a DK2 mostly for sim racing, but owning it inspired me to actually start making some games. Personally, I've got one idea that I absolutely adore (and can only work with the Vive controllers). I suspect Oculus is going to have the exclusives they bought (back when people thought Oculus was the only publisher in town), but after that, it'll tilt heavily towards OpenVR (Valve's SDK). Oculus better have a serious control solution or else the larger developers are just going to cross-develop for Vive/PS4 (with the Move).
ToThePoint said:
Libertine said:Congrats to the Oculus Team!

I think its fair to say that Palmer can also give himself a pat on the back when he looks at the positive reviews of the new Rift competitors.


One small step for man
One annoyingly belated leap for 3D gamers

I think good content is the new battlefront. Im a little concerned. I hate to say it, but all the VR-heavy stuff moving your hands around with console sticks looks really really boring. I can see a sword fighting game, where its very complex, like Chivalry: Medieval Warefare, so there is a fun learning curve to try and climb each time you play the game, getting better and better over time. Or a system where you stand up and play battlefield and get exercise playing Battlefield for an hour. Might be hard on the knees though, for me at least. But, my interest certainly don't represent the market's i don't think.


Funny that you should paraphrase that quote from Neil Armstrong. I am genuinely proud to have backed the Kickstarter for the Apollo 11 VR Experience, and I can't wait to see the finished product. I think that VR in education, as well as the potential of gameplay with bonus exercise that you mentioned, will be a real game changer too.


Yeah. The Apollo 11 Experience literally gave me goose bumps. I don't know how VR fails to revolutionize education. I just don't see how it fails.

I'm a lot more interested in Vive (unless Oculus can bring something interesting to the control game). Once you get past the cockpit genre, the Oculus is seriously lacking. I think the locomotion issues make the FPS genre horrible. And everything else suffers without bringing the hands (and tactile feedback) into the equation. I can see tons of gameplay possibilities with the Vive controllers and IMO this type of control scheme is not a luxury if you want interactive gaming experiences. The mouse/keyboard combo and traditional console controller are severely lacking as a solution.

Pirateguybrush said:Don't buy it for at least a few months, so we can get a sense of which headset is going to be the most supported by devs.


I actually bought a DK2 mostly for sim racing, but owning it inspired me to actually start making some games. Personally, I've got one idea that I absolutely adore (and can only work with the Vive controllers). I suspect Oculus is going to have the exclusives they bought (back when people thought Oculus was the only publisher in town), but after that, it'll tilt heavily towards OpenVR (Valve's SDK). Oculus better have a serious control solution or else the larger developers are just going to cross-develop for Vive/PS4 (with the Move).

#7
Posted 05/07/2015 12:11 AM   
grr
grr

#8
Posted 05/07/2015 12:15 AM   
Do you guys think VR headsets will revitalize 3d support in games? I think when these headsets come out there is going to be an extreme lack of exclusive VR games, but people are still going to want to use the headsets. So maybe there will be a renewed developer interest in providing 3d support for their games. Basically people will want content and head tracking doesn't work in every game genre, so I think a lot of VR headset users are just going to end up playing conventional 3d games or watching 3d movies exactly like people are already doing with 3d vision.
Do you guys think VR headsets will revitalize 3d support in games? I think when these headsets come out there is going to be an extreme lack of exclusive VR games, but people are still going to want to use the headsets. So maybe there will be a renewed developer interest in providing 3d support for their games.

Basically people will want content and head tracking doesn't work in every game genre, so I think a lot of VR headset users are just going to end up playing conventional 3d games or watching 3d movies exactly like people are already doing with 3d vision.

#9
Posted 05/07/2015 10:31 AM   
[quote="carlrogers"]Do you guys think VR headsets will revitalize 3d support in games? I think when these headsets come out there is going to be an extreme lack of exclusive VR games, but people are still going to want to use the headsets. So maybe there will be a renewed developer interest in providing 3d support for their games. Basically people will want content and head tracking doesn't work in every game genre, so I think a lot of VR headset users are just going to end up playing conventional 3d games or watching 3d movies exactly like people are already doing with 3d vision. [/quote] I really think so. For example in the latest Vorpx version they have added a virtual room, you basically get a 3d vision setup, that is , you're in a virtual couch with a big TV to play 3d games like Trine and others that simply don't play well in VR, and people loved it. I can imagine Oculus and Valve adding these kind of virtual rooms of their own where you can play these games on a virtual TV, and with a stereoscopic device on your head, it feels natural to add 3d support from the devs, something like "optimized for VR rooms". Personally I'm really interested in Vive, but the premium price they talked about is what I'm the most concerned. The same way that Vive has forced the hand of Oculus to finally make a move for a release date, I hope Oculus will force Vive to keep its price honest, it will only be 3-4 months between releases, and I doubt their hardware will be much better, so being a lot more expensive will make most people to wait for Oculus.
carlrogers said:Do you guys think VR headsets will revitalize 3d support in games? I think when these headsets come out there is going to be an extreme lack of exclusive VR games, but people are still going to want to use the headsets. So maybe there will be a renewed developer interest in providing 3d support for their games.

Basically people will want content and head tracking doesn't work in every game genre, so I think a lot of VR headset users are just going to end up playing conventional 3d games or watching 3d movies exactly like people are already doing with 3d vision.


I really think so. For example in the latest Vorpx version they have added a virtual room, you basically get a 3d vision setup, that is , you're in a virtual couch with a big TV to play 3d games like Trine and others that simply don't play well in VR, and people loved it.

I can imagine Oculus and Valve adding these kind of virtual rooms of their own where you can play these games on a virtual TV, and with a stereoscopic device on your head, it feels natural to add 3d support from the devs, something like "optimized for VR rooms".

Personally I'm really interested in Vive, but the premium price they talked about is what I'm the most concerned. The same way that Vive has forced the hand of Oculus to finally make a move for a release date, I hope Oculus will force Vive to keep its price honest, it will only be 3-4 months between releases, and I doubt their hardware will be much better, so being a lot more expensive will make most people to wait for Oculus.

All hail 3d modders DHR, MasterOtaku, Losti, Necropants, Helifax, bo3b, mike_ar69, Flugan, DarkStarSword, 4everAwake, 3d4dd and so many more helping to keep the 3d dream alive, find their 3d fixes at http://helixmod.blogspot.com/ Also check my site for spanish VR and mobile gaming news: www.gamermovil.com

#10
Posted 05/07/2015 10:47 AM   
Oculus is also taking pre-orders this fall. I'm really hoping that will help keep HTC in-line a little on the pricing. Agree about the 3D on a big screen simulation. I'm very interested in Nvidia actually implementing this. I've head some decent things about the VorpX(?) solution, but apparently some find it too laggy. I've adapted enough to the lower resolution that I'd prefer to play on a consumer VR set. Having the FOV that large is awesome. And because of the demands of VR, everything is about prioritizing motion-to-photon latency. So it should, in theory, knock the socks off of any projector when it comes to input lag. EDIT: Also love it for the great contrast and motion resolution. I'm finding it hilarious to read 4K TV reviews where the motion resolution is still 300 lines of resolution. If motion resolution is 300 lines, WTF do I care about 4K vs 1080p? Let's hit full motion resolution on 1080p before we start discussing 4K. Hmmkay?
Oculus is also taking pre-orders this fall. I'm really hoping that will help keep HTC in-line a little on the pricing.

Agree about the 3D on a big screen simulation. I'm very interested in Nvidia actually implementing this. I've head some decent things about the VorpX(?) solution, but apparently some find it too laggy.

I've adapted enough to the lower resolution that I'd prefer to play on a consumer VR set. Having the FOV that large is awesome. And because of the demands of VR, everything is about prioritizing motion-to-photon latency. So it should, in theory, knock the socks off of any projector when it comes to input lag.

EDIT: Also love it for the great contrast and motion resolution. I'm finding it hilarious to read 4K TV reviews where the motion resolution is still 300 lines of resolution. If motion resolution is 300 lines, WTF do I care about 4K vs 1080p? Let's hit full motion resolution on 1080p before we start discussing 4K. Hmmkay?

#11
Posted 05/07/2015 11:33 AM   
Some day HMDs will take over, and people will stop playing certain genres of games on monitors, but it's not going to happen in 2015 or 2016. If you have 1400x1400 resoluton per eye, and from this you make a room with a virtual screen, then you take about 20-30% of that. On top of that you have performance penalty, for example from having to counteract the distortion (+50% pixel need to be rendered). That makes 1000x1000 resolution in the optimistic scenario and 800x800 in pesimistic. Far below what 3D Vision can offer @Paul33993 That's why I always played on CRT and switched to CRT+LCD setup and after some time, onto 3D Vision 2 monitor (which has low persistence for 1080p res in motion). I prefer 1080p at true and VISIBLE 60fps (or 120fps, but 2D is "meh..." ;) ) than even 30K if it was available. I really hope VR HMDs will switch the industry back to the low persistence. It's going to take a while though, because almost no TV can accept more than 60Hz at the input, but PS4 is going to get firmware update for 120Hz, which is a good sign. Low persistence (clear motion) adds so much in games! But it won't conquer the world if dominant VR experiences will be at 60Hz (mobiles :/ those darn mobiles ) since advantages of clear motion are not as easily spottable as flickering, and below 90Hz flicker is pretty obvious. Fingers crossed the masses of uninformed gamers will finally understand why 60fps>30fps and why sample-and-hold displays are bad for gaming. Fingers even more crossed it won't take decades to reach that point. The more people use HMDs, where LP is a must, the more people realize the difference. If you look back, you can see that when more and more people came into gaming without the knowledge how 60fps on a CRT can look like, more 30fps games showed up. Those new gamers simply don't understand what they're missing, so they accept more and more BS from publishers who prefer 30fps and better screenshots over 60fps and better gameplay and fun from playing.
Some day HMDs will take over, and people will stop playing certain genres of games on monitors, but it's not going to happen in 2015 or 2016.

If you have 1400x1400 resoluton per eye, and from this you make a room with a virtual screen, then you take about 20-30% of that. On top of that you have performance penalty, for example from having to counteract the distortion (+50% pixel need to be rendered).
That makes 1000x1000 resolution in the optimistic scenario and 800x800 in pesimistic. Far below what 3D Vision can offer

@Paul33993
That's why I always played on CRT and switched to CRT+LCD setup and after some time, onto 3D Vision 2 monitor (which has low persistence for 1080p res in motion).
I prefer 1080p at true and VISIBLE 60fps (or 120fps, but 2D is "meh..." ;) ) than even 30K if it was available.

I really hope VR HMDs will switch the industry back to the low persistence. It's going to take a while though, because almost no TV can accept more than 60Hz at the input, but PS4 is going to get firmware update for 120Hz, which is a good sign. Low persistence (clear motion) adds so much in games! But it won't conquer the world if dominant VR experiences will be at 60Hz (mobiles :/ those darn mobiles ) since advantages of clear motion are not as easily spottable as flickering, and below 90Hz flicker is pretty obvious.
Fingers crossed the masses of uninformed gamers will finally understand why 60fps>30fps and why sample-and-hold displays are bad for gaming. Fingers even more crossed it won't take decades to reach that point.
The more people use HMDs, where LP is a must, the more people realize the difference. If you look back, you can see that when more and more people came into gaming without the knowledge how 60fps on a CRT can look like, more 30fps games showed up. Those new gamers simply don't understand what they're missing, so they accept more and more BS from publishers who prefer 30fps and better screenshots over 60fps and better gameplay and fun from playing.

#12
Posted 05/07/2015 02:24 PM   
[quote="Paul33993"]Yeah. The Apollo 11 Experience literally gave me goose bumps. I don't know how VR fails to revolutionize education. I just don't see how it fails. I'm a lot more interested in Vive (unless Oculus can bring something interesting to the control game). Once you get past the cockpit genre, the Oculus is seriously lacking. I think the locomotion issues make the FPS genre horrible. And everything else suffers without bringing the hands (and tactile feedback) into the equation. I can see tons of gameplay possibilities with the Vive controllers and IMO this type of control scheme is not a luxury if you want interactive gaming experiences. The mouse/keyboard combo and traditional console controller are severely lacking as a solution.[/quote] The visuals, music and editing all combined very well to really help put the viewer in the moment, and if done well this could be an excellent learning tool that inspires people of all ages to enquire further about whatever subject matter is shown to them. It certainly did with me, as my interest was piqued enough to check out John F. Kennedy's full speech given at Rice University back in '62. By then, he'd grown into a fine orator, and managed to articulate a truly inspirational vision of what could be possible, given the will to want to do it. I've not actually checked out any of the alternatives to Oculus as of yet, but I'll certainly look into what Vive has to offer. Skyrim, via VorpX didn't do a lot for my sense of equilibrium, but to be fair I didn't optimise the settings properly, although it was enough to put me off walking in first person in VR, at least for the time being. I'd also agree that for now Oculus VR is limited purely to cockpit based games, or essentially you're simply sat in a chair being moved around. Also, the best of luck to you, should you decide to do your own VR games as well. :)
Paul33993 said:Yeah. The Apollo 11 Experience literally gave me goose bumps. I don't know how VR fails to revolutionize education. I just don't see how it fails.

I'm a lot more interested in Vive (unless Oculus can bring something interesting to the control game). Once you get past the cockpit genre, the Oculus is seriously lacking. I think the locomotion issues make the FPS genre horrible. And everything else suffers without bringing the hands (and tactile feedback) into the equation. I can see tons of gameplay possibilities with the Vive controllers and IMO this type of control scheme is not a luxury if you want interactive gaming experiences. The mouse/keyboard combo and traditional console controller are severely lacking as a solution.


The visuals, music and editing all combined very well to really help put the viewer in the moment, and if done well this could be an excellent learning tool that inspires people of all ages to enquire further about whatever subject matter is shown to them. It certainly did with me, as my interest was piqued enough to check out John F. Kennedy's full speech given at Rice University back in '62. By then, he'd grown into a fine orator, and managed to articulate a truly inspirational vision of what could be possible, given the will to want to do it.

I've not actually checked out any of the alternatives to Oculus as of yet, but I'll certainly look into what Vive has to offer. Skyrim, via VorpX didn't do a lot for my sense of equilibrium, but to be fair I didn't optimise the settings properly, although it was enough to put me off walking in first person in VR, at least for the time being. I'd also agree that for now Oculus VR is limited purely to cockpit based games, or essentially you're simply sat in a chair being moved around.

Also, the best of luck to you, should you decide to do your own VR games as well. :)

Intel Core i7 4770k @ 4.4Ghz, 3x GTX Titan, 16GB Tactical Tracer LED, CPU/GPU Dual-Loop Water-Cooled - Driver 331.82, DX11.0

#13
Posted 05/07/2015 02:51 PM   
Scroll To Top