Why isn't anyone here talking about virtual reality?

[wonderpug]

Honestly, given the slow-adoption rate, I don't think we'll see all that much discussion on it until it becomes more mainstream.

I'm curious, what makes you think VR is having a slow adoption rate? The Rift is sold out through July, and the Vive through May. Playstation VR doesn't hit until October and it seems like it's already selling well with preorders.

I will say Eve Valkyrie intrigues me (https://www.evevalkyrie.com/). Just makes me wish there was some place I could visit nearby to try it out.

Whereabouts do you live? Demo units for the Vive are starting to show up in stores here and there around the world.

[Grifman]

I'm curious, what makes you think VR is having a slow adoption rate? The Rift is sold out through July, and the Vive through May. Playstation VR doesn't hit until October and it seems like it's already selling well with preorders.

Because in terms of the total market, those numbers are likely to be relatively low:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/ ... alysts-say

Most analysts with estimates for the Rift expect sales in the low hundred-thousands while just a few said sales may top 1 million. The majority declined to estimate, saying the device isn’t a big deal for Facebook.

Oculus “would almost certainly be a rounding error inside of Facebook for now,” said Brian Wieser, an analyst at Pivotal Research, who said he’s not estimating sales yet. Gene Munster, an analyst at Piper Jaffray, called Facebook’s investment in Oculus a “non-event in 2016.” He expects them to sell a few hundred thousand units at a loss.

http://www.roadtovr.com/facebook-oculus ... this-year/

With Facebook’s 2015 revenue sitting at $17.93 billion, it’s tough to say exactly how much money constitutes “material”. As the company’s earnings slides list revenue in thousands of millions, it should be a safe bet to think that anything pushing the needle by a minimum of $1 billion dollars would certainly constitute “material.” Put into perspective, $1 billion in Rift sales would be 1.67 million units at the current $599 pricetag. To be less safe, but perhaps more reasonable, $500 million in revenue (which I suspect shareholders would agree is “material”) would track to 834,724 Rifts at the current price.

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/playst ... 0-6435717/

Sony's PlayStation VR is forecast to sell some 1.6 million units worldwide before the end of the calendar year, according to research from analyst firm IHS Screen Digest.

Given the millions of consoles/PC's out there, an overall projection of two to three million units world wide doesn't indicate widespread adoption.

[wonderpug]

I'm curious, what makes you think VR is having a slow adoption rate? The Rift is sold out through July, and the Vive through May. Playstation VR doesn't hit until October and it seems like it's already selling well with preorders.

Because in terms of the total market, those numbers are likely to be relatively low:

I guess it depends on expectations. In the early days of Oculus, before Facebook got involved, I thought the Rift would get launched as an extremely niche product and that Oculus would be on its own carving out a new market. Now here we are with three top tier products launching in the same year, all selling through production, with Gear VR also doing well in the lower tier market. Big name companies and billions of dollars are getting thrown at this new thing.

For a technology that's so hard to demonstrate and sell people on without having them actually try out the product in person, so far this seems like as good an introductory year as anyone could hope for.

[Toe]

I waited last year to get me a stout machine for VR. Got a nice rig back in Dec. with a 12GB nvida titan x card. I pre-ordered the Rift and Vive, not sure when they will get here yet though. I was quick to order in both cases, but also in both cases I had to back out and relog back in before it completely processed my order, so not in the first wave of either. Once I get them, any OO'ers the Nashville area are welcome to stop by and check it out.

[Grifman]

I guess it depends on expectations. In the early days of Oculus, before Facebook got involved, I thought the Rift would get launched as an extremely niche product and that Oculus would be on its own carving out a new market. Now here we are with three top tier products launching in the same year, all selling through production, with Gear VR also doing well in the lower tier market. Big name companies and billions of dollars are getting thrown at this new thing.

For a technology that's so hard to demonstrate and sell people on without having them actually try out the product in person, so far this seems like as good an introductory year as anyone could hope for.

These will be all the early adopters and can't be used as an indication of how well the VR will penetrate the market. When I start seeing numbers of people here at OO buying/playing games with them, and see many popular games using then, then you have somethings. As for big companies throwing around billions of dollars, big companies through big money around all the time - yet there are market failures all the time. This mean very little.

[Rumpy]

Honestly, given the slow-adoption rate, I don't think we'll see all that much discussion on it until it becomes more mainstream.

I'm curious, what makes you think VR is having a slow adoption rate? The Rift is sold out through July, and the Vive through May. Playstation VR doesn't hit until October and it seems like it's already selling well with preorders.

I think it's a bit obvious. You see it not only on this very forum, but elsewhere as well, that most people simply can't afford it, and some simply aren't very excited. It's a very niche product. It's got a high-cost barrier to entry. This first gen is early-adopters, and yes, while it's selling very well, and maybe even selling out depending on what people are getting, I don't think we'll see much beyond those current numbers this gen.

I suspect most of those will go to developers and those with a keen interest in seeing where things go with it. I don't see people genuinely getting excited until maybe second gen, where titles will be more in number. Third gen is where I likely see the biggest traction where the manufacturers of the Vive and Rift will likely make a deal with PC manufacturers to bundle them with certain PCs to make them more attractive to the general consumer.

As it stands now, most consumers will get their VR fix using the Samsung Gear or Google Cardboard, but that's a very limited experience. If they're disappointed with that, they won't likely go for the Rift or Vive later down the road.

The general populous just simply doesn't have anything to talk about in regards to VR. Most haven't had a chance to try it, and therefore have no reason to be excited about it and are content to waiting until it's within their grasp, but that will take some time.

[wonderpug]

As for big companies throwing around billions of dollars, big companies through big money around all the time - yet there are market failures all the time. This mean very little.

Oh sure, I didn't mean that the big money being thrown around means VR is a guaranteed success. What I meant was that I got interested in Oculus when it was a noname company raising money on Kickstarter. I thought the launch product I was gearing up to buy would be an enthusiasts-only peripheral and was ready for most of the content to just be experimental garage developer stuff.

Now here we are with Facebook and Sony going head to head, Valve partnering with HTC because it feels like its Steam marketshare is threatened by Oculus, and Samsung bundling VR with some of the most popular cell phone models being sold.

I do agree we're still in an experimental frontier stage of VR -- I mean, they still haven't figured out how to pull off walking in games like Minecraft -- but the quality of products and the level of competition is way higher than I expected to see for this first year of VR.

[jztemple2]

You know, this VR stuff is starting to annoy me. I just was reading this article on Rock, Paper, Shotgun called Earthlight: How Devs Are Working With NASA To Create A Virtual International Space Station. I was starting to get interested since this sounds really cool, till I saw that it was going to be focused on the VR experience. I just hope that they don't forget that there are a lot of folks who might be interested in this that won't be using VR any time soon.

[gbasden]

I expect VR to achieve the same level of popularity and market share as 3D television.

Having used developer versions of the Rift, I'll put $100 on the table that says you are wrong.

[Jaymann]

I learned my lesson when I went with Betamax over VHS. (Though at the time I had what I thought was a solid rationale - technology gets smaller over time and Beta was the smaller footprint of the two).

[Isgrimnur]

I learned my lesson when I went with Betamax over VHS. (Though at the time I had what I thought was a solid rationale - technology gets smaller over time and Beta was the smaller footprint of the two).

No HD-DVD for you, eh?

[Jaymann]

I learned my lesson when I went with Betamax over VHS. (Though at the time I had what I thought was a solid rationale - technology gets smaller over time and Beta was the smaller footprint of the two).

No HD-DVD for you, eh?

Yes, I did bite on that, once they dropped below $100. I have about 4-5 HD DVD's, but it also plays non-HD.

[PLW]

How's ESPN3D working out?

[Rip]

We don't talk about reality, no reason to discuss a virtual one.

[Rumpy]

I was starting to get interested since this sounds really cool, till I saw that it was going to be focused on the VR experience. I just hope that they don't forget that there are a lot of folks who might be interested in this that won't be using VR any time soon.

Actually, It's this kind of thing that VR is bound to be really good for. In a sense, by going the VR route, they're giving people a front-seat experience that can't be quite replicated using a standard screen. Sort of like a more interactive IMAX type of experience.

[AjD]

Echoing the OP, I too would have guessed this community to be the exact niche market for the first generation of VR.

We are mostly:

1) Male
2) Big-time video gamers
3) Very tech literate
4) Sci-fi fans (Star Trek/holodeck, The Matrix, etc.)
5) Humans of a (ahem) certain age -- which typically translates into disposal income (compared to say, all those 15-year-old VR fan boys)

So I'm surprised. The wait-and-see sentiment here does not boad well for the success of first gen VR. But come to think of it, I'm also all of the above. And I'm going to wait too -- at least until the 3rd gen of this tech before adopting.

P.S. I do have cardboard, and also one of the cheap Gear VR knock-offs (to use with a cell phone). Pretty cool, but resolution is too low and -- especially -- the field-of-view is not wide enough to be truly immersive. It feels like I'm looking through binoculars at the holodeck, rather than being on the holodeck.

[Butterknife]

I've been obsessing over virtual reality for a couple of years now. The only reason I haven't ordered one of the headsets is price. I just can't justify paying more than a new console for it, although if I were single with no kids I would have bought one of the rift development kits already.

This thing is going to be so very very big. I really think we are witnessing the beginning of the next "big thing" right now. Maybe not internet big, but definitely TV or radio big.

[Giles Habibula]

Then there's the thing where I've always been perfectly satisfied, and fully immersed in a VR world, with my 2D screens. I've just never longed for anything more than that. Imagination still has to count for something, right? It's as if nobody wants to put any mental effort at all into helping to create their VR space.

Edit: I see the flaw in my argument: By that standard, text adventures should still be just fine.

I still think I'm right though! I mean, people do still play text adventures, after all.

Example: The original "Thief: The Dark Project" (non-gold version even!) to this day remains THE most immersed I've ever been in any game to this very day. Nothing since has even come close. And I cannot imagine that a VR setup could possibly have enhanced what I felt then, had it been available. It just couldn't have possibly been any better than it already was.

[coopasonic]

Echoing the OP, I too would have guessed this community to be the exact niche market for the first generation of VR.

We are mostly:

1) Male
2) Big-time video gamers
3) Very tech literate
4) Sci-fi fans (Star Trek/holodeck, The Matrix, etc.)
5) Humans of a (ahem) certain age -- which typically translates into disposal income (compared to say, all those 15-year-old VR fan boys)

So I'm surprised. The wait-and-see sentiment here does not boad well for the success of first gen VR. But come to think of it, I'm also all of the above. And I'm going to wait too -- at least until the 3rd gen of this tech before adopting.

10 years ago we were those guys. Now we mostly have families to support, houses to maintain and college to save for.

[Daehawk]

Lets just slip VR back into the oven and check it again 20+ years. Even with all the rest of the stuff I think it needs its the graphics that are so bad to me. Most look like flat non textured games from 20 years ago.

[jztemple2]

10 years ago we were those guys. Now we mostly have families to support, houses to maintain and college to save for.

And retirement! Don't forget about retirement

[Rumpy]

The only reason I haven't ordered one of the headsets is price.

Yes, that's the big thing for so many people. We got excited until we saw the price, and then suddenly, it was like a big brick wall. I can't even begin to be excited at this point.

[AjD]

10 years ago we were those guys. Now we mostly have families to support, houses to maintain and college to save for.

And retirement! Don't forget about retirement

Oh geez, now that you mention it - you guys are probably right.

Virtual or otherwise, there's way too much reality in this thread.

[Toe]

Echoing the OP, I too would have guessed this community to be the exact niche market for the first generation of VR.

We are mostly:

1) Male
2) Big-time video gamers
3) Very tech literate
4) Sci-fi fans (Star Trek/holodeck, The Matrix, etc.)
5) Humans of a (ahem) certain age -- which typically translates into disposal income (compared to say, all those 15-year-old VR fan boys)

So I'm surprised. The wait-and-see sentiment here does not boad well for the success of first gen VR. But come to think of it, I'm also all of the above. And I'm going to wait too -- at least until the 3rd gen of this tech before adopting.

10 years ago we were those guys. Now we mostly have families to support, houses to maintain and college to save for.

No kids, mortgage paid off, wife working full time also, so VR is calling me.

[wonderpug]

Lets just slip VR back into the oven and check it again 20+ years. Even with all the rest of the stuff I think it needs its the graphics that are so bad to me. Most look like flat non textured games from 20 years ago.

The VR games with simple graphics are more a symptom of developer budgets than they are of VR capabilities. When there are so few headset owners who can buy your game, it's hard to spend a lot of money on production even though attach rates are expected to be really high. Most of the pretty games at this point are going to be the ones bankrolled by Sony or Oculus, or the ones also doing a traditional 2d release.

But for now, check out screenshots for Project Cars, The Climb, Eve Valkyrie, Edge of Nowhere, Chronos, Elite Dangerous, and Adr1ft.

Alternately, I'm afraid I know you well enough to suggest you check out what the porn industry is doing with VR. I have a feeling that will impress you with VR's capabilities far more than the best game in the pipeline.

[Giles Habibula]

Alternately, I'm afraid I know you well enough to suggest you check out what the porn industry is doing with VR. I have a feeling that will impress you with VR's capabilities far more than the best game in the pipeline.

I am imagining his wife walking into the room while he is totally...immersed, and watching for the entire 12 seconds.

[YellowKing]

I'll probably go with PlayStation VR this holiday season due to the lower entry cost. My PC will be (over)due for an upgrade in 2017 or 2018, so that's probably the point where I'll buy a new system and jump into the Rift.

[Cortilian]

My primary concern right now is that I wear glasses and can hopefully try out the Rift and Vive in order to determine exactly how they are going to work with my glasses. I would think that since the screen is only a couple of inches away from my eyes I should be able to focus but I do not know that for sure.

[wonderpug]

My primary concern right now is that I wear glasses and can hopefully try out the Rift and Vive in order to determine exactly how they are going to work with my glasses. I would think that since the screen is only a couple of inches away from my eyes I should be able to focus but I do not know that for sure.

The lenses in the headsets make it so the apparent distance of the screen is much further than its physical distance. I haven't found a satisfactory answer as to what the apparent distance will be for the consumer releases. I think the DK2 was at 1.2m, but for the Vive and the CV1 Rift I've heard people throw out "same as DK2", "about 20 feet", and "infinity".

Wearing glasses will give you a bit smaller field of view, but I imagine it'd still be more than satisfactory.

Oculus has said that glasses will fit if they have a width of 142mm or less, and a height of 50mm or less. I believe they said the rift will come with a separate 'interface' (the insert that rests against your face) for glasses. I'm just guessing, but I imagine it'd have cutouts on the sides for the temple ear bar thingies, and hopefully it also puts the headset a bit further away from your face.

On paper I think the Vive sounds more accommodating for glasses wearers. In addition to a slider to adjust for different distances between your eyes, the Vive also has a slider for you to move the lenses and screens further away from your face.

[coopasonic]

Wearing glasses will give you a bit smaller field of view, but I imagine it'd still be more than satisfactory.

People who wear glasses are well familiar with this limitation. I don't think that in particular will pose an issue.

[Sepiche]

My primary concern right now is that I wear glasses and can hopefully try out the Rift and Vive in order to determine exactly how they are going to work with my glasses. I would think that since the screen is only a couple of inches away from my eyes I should be able to focus but I do not know that for sure.

I wear glasses and have a DK2 and don't have any problems with focus or anything. The OR is setup so you can slide the screen out a bit to give room for glasses. It can push the glasses a little hard into your face at times, but it's nothing more than a minor irritation.

[PLW]

My primary concern right now is that I wear glasses and can hopefully try out the Rift and Vive in order to determine exactly how they are going to work with my glasses. I would think that since the screen is only a couple of inches away from my eyes I should be able to focus but I do not know that for sure.

I wear glasses and have a DK2 and don't have any problems with focus or anything. The OR is setup so you can slide the screen out a bit to give room for glasses. It can push the glasses a little hard into your face at times, but it's nothing more than a minor irritation.

I wonder if it could start out with a little "better or worse" test like at the optometrists, and then actually correct for your vision on the fly. That would be amazing!

[Kraken]

My primary concern right now is that I wear glasses and can hopefully try out the Rift and Vive in order to determine exactly how they are going to work with my glasses. I would think that since the screen is only a couple of inches away from my eyes I should be able to focus but I do not know that for sure.

I wear glasses and have a DK2 and don't have any problems with focus or anything. The OR is setup so you can slide the screen out a bit to give room for glasses. It can push the glasses a little hard into your face at times, but it's nothing more than a minor irritation.

I wonder if it could start out with a little "better or worse" test like at the optometrists, and then actually correct for your vision on the fly. That would be amazing!

If one could enter one's prescription and have the headset adjust focus appropriately, I'd be way more interested. Theoretically it should be able to function as virtual lenses.

[Jaymon]

Here is something that I enjoy. My hands. I like to see where they are. Especially in relation to my drink, or my keyboard. I can't imagine that anything which obscures my vision could be experienced any way except as passive entertainment that prevents you know knowing where your popcorn and soda is.

[Daehawk]

Check my post on holoportation

[wonderpug]

Here is something that I enjoy. My hands. I like to see where they are. Especially in relation to my drink, or my keyboard. I can't imagine that anything which obscures my vision could be experienced any way except as passive entertainment that prevents you know knowing where your popcorn and soda is.

FWIW the Vive has a front facing camera you can switch on to get Tron outlines in your headset showing you where your snacks are.

[Jaymann]

Snack-O-VisionTM!

[blackjack]

Polygon posted its detailed Oculus retail version review:

The Oculus Rift Review
http://www.polygon.com/2016/3/28/113067 ... ift-review

The Rift's head-mounted display features a resolution of 1200 by 1080 per eye, with a 90Hz refresh rate. That means that, for your experience to be comfortable, your games need to be running at 90 frames-per-second or higher. The recommended specs for the Rift, as specified by Oculus, are an Nvidia GTX 970 or AMD 290 GPU or equivalent, and Intel i5-4590 or greater (or equivalent), 8GB of RAM or more, a compatible HDMI 1.3 video output, and two or more USB 3.0 ports. The Rift also requires Windows 7 with Service Pack 1 or higher.

Oculus seems serious about making sure games run on those specs as well. Oculus sent Polygon a minimum spec system to ensure we had an Rift-ready PC in which to test these games. That move almost seems to be making a point: Oculus games won’t just run on a minimum spec system, they’ll run well, and Oculus is fine with the experience being reviewed in that environment.
...
[about eyeglasses]While the headset feels fine over glasses once you get everything situated, the act of putting it on and taking it off while wearing glasses remains a consistently awkward affair. I found my glasses often getting stuck in the hardware when removing it, or getting stuck on the bottom padding when putting it on. It's possible to get everything working by making the entire enclosure very loose before putting it on, but the process is trickier than it needs to be, and it takes a bit of practice. I worry about the long-term prospects of the padding around the eyes as it gets stuck or rubs on my glasses as the unit is removed or put on.

Lots of interesting observations and warnings I never thought of. Like he urges them to add a warning to tell players not to try to physically "wander off" and leave the boundary range of sensor, which could result in an expensive accident (colliding with furniture, a wall, a door frame etc.). I'm reminded of early Wii players slamming their motion controllers through TV screens and windows.

He mentions there's no "Pass through camera," and I guess no easy way to briefly flip the visor away if you just want to "real life" look at controls, a drink, a snack etc.

Very cool to read about it (rating was generally enthusiastic 8.5/10) but it convinces me more than ever I'm not ready for VR, or VR needs much more real-world player usage, updates and adjustments before it'd be ready for a clumsy oaf like me. Eve: Valkyrie does sound like fun, while ADR1FT screams motion sickness all over it.

[gbasden]

I'll probably go with PlayStation VR this holiday season due to the lower entry cost. My PC will be (over)due for an upgrade in 2017 or 2018, so that's probably the point where I'll buy a new system and jump into the Rift.

I could see that, but the quality is going to be way worse than the shipping Oculus or Vive. When you look at the graphics card in the PS4 and what it can push, the Playstation VR headset can't be a lot above the Oculus DK2 in terms of resolution. I hope that doesn't turn off a lot of potential VR consumers when they see it.

[Brian]

Angry Joe (along with Other Joe) reviews the Oculus Rift.