Why isn't anyone here talking about virtual reality?

[YellowKing]

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.

Yeah, I'll definitely wait for reviews. And if that means I'm not in on the first wave due to scarcity, I'm fine with that. What I don't want to do is drop $500 on it and then be disappointed when I could have rolled that money into the new PC instead. I also need to be assured there's a good game lineup, and not just a bunch of stupid gimmicky demos.

[Cylus Maxii]

My concerns with VR are that I now need reading glasses and I doubt I can focus on a display that is so close. I don't think it would work for me.

[wonderpug]

My concerns with VR are that I now need reading glasses and I doubt I can focus on a display that is so close. I don't think it would work for me.

The lenses make the screen appear further away, so if it's similar to the DK2 optical distance it would be like looking at a screen 4 feet away.

[Zarathud]

I am perfectly happy lately going retro with Stardew Valley.

[Rumpy]

I could see that, but the quality is going to be way worse than the shipping Oculus or Vive.

I think you have to stop looking at it from a quality standpoint and more to an affordability standpoint. For many of us, it's simply not in our future due to the high cost. For that reason, PSVR is something that many will be perfectly happy with, if they already have the PS4.

[gbasden]

I could see that, but the quality is going to be way worse than the shipping Oculus or Vive.

I think you have to stop looking at it from a quality standpoint and more to an affordability standpoint. For many of us, it's simply not in our future due to the high cost. For that reason, PSVR is something that many will be perfectly happy with, if they already have the PS4.

I think this is true, to a point. I think there are some minimum quality levels where failing to meet them will cause some pretty severe dissatisfaction. I have faith in Sony to meet those, though. I guess as a PC gamer I see the cost of the console plus the cost of the VR plus the cost of the camera plus the cost of the move wands and I don't see it being a lot cheaper than the cost of a new video card and a Rift of Vive. But to each their own. As you say, if they have already invested in the PS4, that cuts a lot of the cost out. I think the killer simulations I'm most excited about are much more likely (and already are) to be developed for the PC rather than the PS4, but I certainly could be wrong.

[wonderpug]

The more powerful 4k PS4 is also due to arrive right about the same time as PSVR. I doubt that's a coincidence.

Even with a regular PS4, everything I've seen makes it look like PSVR will be totally acceptable quality-wise. It might not be able to push graphics as high quality as a Rift or Vive, but that's almost always the case with console vs. PC comparisons. The important thing is that PSVR gets the refresh rate and head tracking and all the other VR comfort solutions right, and from everything I'm reading it's doing just that.

[TiLT]

I should be in the first round of shipments of the Oculus Rift this week, but in the meantime I installed Oculus Home and gave Lucky's Tale a go on the DK2 since it's free to everyone and fully compatible with the developer kit. Forget everything you think you know about this game by looking at videos and screenshots. It's a completely different experience in VR, and the game itself is legit. I can't wait to jump back in, but I'm going to save the rest for the consumer version of the Rift, which I'll hopefully have next week.

My concerns with VR are that I now need reading glasses and I doubt I can focus on a display that is so close. I don't think it would work for me.

That's not how it works. The lenses in the VR headsets bend the light coming from the screens in such a way that your eyes for all effects and purposes see the picture as an infinite distance away. In practical terms, you won't ever feel like you're looking at a screen. You'll be looking at objects that feel like they're just as close or far away as they're supposed to be. The distance to the screen is not a factor.

[Rumpy]

I think this is true, to a point. I think there are some minimum quality levels where failing to meet them will cause some pretty severe dissatisfaction.

Well, yes, obviously quality is going to be an issue, such as the lenses and available processing, but even barring that, the Vive and the Rift are at such a high ceiling, so most are likely going to go with the next best thing which happens to be the PSVR, and if not, they'll likely be happy with the Gear. The Rift and the Vive I could see science centres adopting as a tool to show what's possible with VR. To me, it's all about what's within reach, no pun intended.

[jztemple2]

New article from PCGamesN, How, why, and when VR will fail. Food for thought at least.

Great. The first Oculus Rift consumer model pre-orders arrived at the doorsteps of their excited and devoted recipients on 28th March, and the very next day here's some internet schmo with a hot take on why those people are all wrong and wasted their money. Where do I get off, right?

Here's the thing, though: I get it. I used to be excited about VR, too. I've sought out strange and inventive new experiences from across the internet to test out on my Oculus Rift DK2. I've tinkered with third-party software and .ini files to patch in quasi-support for old games, in the name of curiosity. I climbed Everest, toured virtual real estate and broke Aperture Science property thanks to the Vive. I swam with sharks and hacked apart suits of armour with PlayStation VR. I used to be all about virtual reality.

Until I spent a lot of time with it.

After a while, I started wondering why all the VR coverage I was reading - and crikey there's been a lot of VR coverage in the last year, hasn't there? - was so unilaterally positive. Why none of it seemed to chime with my own experiences of it...

[Rumpy]

That's a fascinating article, and it touches on most of my points of concern, most of which I've voiced in this thread. Namely on the average consumer being able to try it before purchase, which I figure science centres and museums will showcase. It's a good showpiece, and it certainly gets people talking, and would certainly get people into their doors.

But then, if one wants one, there's the high cost of not only the device itself, but of getting a PC up to spec, which frankly the general consumers won't give a shit about. And then there's the room needed to be able to use it. Personally, the only room suitable for it would be my living room, and even then I don't think it's quite large enough to be able to use it safely in.

[wonderpug]

But then, if one wants one, there's the high cost of not only the device itself, but of getting a PC up to spec, which frankly the general consumers won't give a shit about. And then there's the room needed to be able to use it. Personally, the only room suitable for it would be my living room, and even then I don't think it's quite large enough to be able to use it safely in.

PlayStation VR is the one that's addressing those issues. Like you said, most consumers don't need or want a beefy $1000 desktop PC these days. Just about everyone is using laptops or phones/tablets for tasks a PC would do, so a $1000+ investment just for VR is a lot to ask.

But a PS4? There are already 36 million of them in households. Even if for someone who doesn't one yet, that's just a $350 device that has a lot more everyday uses for the general population. People who might want VR probably already have at least some interest in owning a modern console.

So after that, it's just ("just") a $400-500 buy-in to get VR, and the VR setups would be in living rooms where, like you, people generally have the most free space ready to go. Even though the Rift/Vive will be technically superior, the PSVR will still be high quality VR.

[TiLT]

It's impossible for VR to fail. Even if the current generation of VR headsets fail to gain traction (hah! They're all sold out for months in advance), VR will still trundle forwards. It's got too much significant corporation backing at this point, and nobody can seriously claim that total sensory immersion isn't the way things will go in the end, no matter what happens.

I can't take any articles about how VR is a fad seriously. Their writers are worryingly short-sighted.

[Rumpy]

But a PS4? There are already 36 million of them in households. Even if for someone who doesn't one yet, that's just a $350 device that has a lot more everyday uses for the general population. People who might want VR probably already have at least some interest in owning a modern console.

Yeah, don't have a PS4 yet, but if I did, that's likely the VR version I'd be happy with. The thing about everyday use is a good point too, as that's added value. In comparison, the Rift or Vive is rather steep when you consider all it really does for that price is VR. Will be interesting to hear what everyone says a few months down the road when the hype has settled down.

[Grifman]

It's got too much significant corporation backing at this point

Irrelevant. If the demand isn't there, no amount of corporate backing will create it.

[TiLT]

It's got too much significant corporation backing at this point

Irrelevant. If the demand isn't there, no amount of corporate backing will create it.

Doesn't matter to my overall argument. VR is inevitable, even if the current generation flops completely. It would quite frankly be naive to think otherwise at this point, even if you have no faith in this first version of consumer-level VR.

And demand is there. There's no need for us to talk about hypotheticals when all the headsets are available for sale and all sold out for several months mere minutes after they were put up for preorder. This for 1st generation hardware. VR enthusiasm among consumers is exceptional, so there's no need to discuss a hypothetical scenario where it isn't.

[Sepiche]

Just got my DK2 updated with the release drivers last night and, despite my computer being a hair under recommended settings, it seems to work pretty well... at least with Elite: Dangerous. Nice and smooth tracking, Elite detects and loads easily, and it's much easier to tweak settings than it used to be.

I originally figured I'd buy a new Oculus once it released, but since my DK2 works tolerably well, and given the expense and wait time for a commercial Oculus, I think I'll just stick with the DK2 for the foreseeable future. At least I'm getting much more of my moneys worth out of the DK2 than I thought I would.

[TiLT]

From what I understand, the drivers included with Oculus Home introduces asynchronous timewarp as a default for all VR experiences. We've only seen synchronous timewarp so far, and that was only in games that specifically added that option. You should see the benefits from this on the DK2 too, which means you'll get a smoother experience than you might remember from earlier drivers. What it ends up doing is handling some frame shifting whenever your framerate drops below the max (which is 75 fps on the DK2 and 90 on the CV, if I remember correctly), keeping the framerate stable even if in-game objects end up stuttering.

So even the DK2 got better this week.

[YellowKing]

I don't personally think VR will fail, but ultimately money drives technology. Without widespread adoption, I don't care how cool your tech is - it ain't happening. Companies aren't going to just throw money away into a bottomless pit no matter how much they believe in the product. History is littered with great technology that the public didn't embrace.

I don't put a whole lot of stock in pre-order numbers - Apple Watch pre-orders were through the roof too, but that didn't make it a runaway success. Wii U pre-orders vastly exceeded Nintendo's estimations, and today it's basically considered a flop. I think it's still too early to know how it's going to go once you take early adopters out of the equation.

From the other side of the argument, I'm not completely sold on cost being a deterrent - Apple has proven that if something is cool enough, people will find a way to pay for it.

I think the most likely scenario is that the big winner in all this will be PS VR. The average consumer doesn't give a shit about whether the resolution is lower on the PS VR than the Rift - the vast majority of people still watch movies on DVD rather than Blu-ray. If it somehow flops, then I think Rift/Vive are in serious trouble. I don't think it will though.

[Grifman]

It's got too much significant corporation backing at this point

Irrelevant. If the demand isn't there, no amount of corporate backing will create it.

Doesn't matter to my overall argument.

I wasn't critiquing your overall argument, just this point.

[Grifman]

And demand is there. There's no need for us to talk about hypotheticals when all the headsets are available for sale and all sold out for several months mere minutes after they were put up for preorder.

Irrelevant as this are most assuredly the early adopters. From what I've read and linked to above, total units across the board for this year are likely to be less than 3 million.

This for 1st generation hardware. VR enthusiasm among consumers is exceptional

You've provided no evidence for this. As noted on this forum, you'd think we would be the perfect audience and yet the vast majority here are wait and see. And we're not the mass consumer audience required for this to become a thing.

[gbasden]

You've provided no evidence for this. As noted on this forum, you'd think we would be the perfect audience and yet the vast majority here are wait and see. And we're not the mass consumer audience required for this to become a thing.

Why does VR have to become an all consuming thing to be a success? It's another peripheral. If "only" 3 million people have VR this year, how is that somehow a flop, and why does it mean it's a failure?

If you look at games where VR is a significant plus, in multiple instances it's already been baked in even with only development hardware available to people. It's not terribly hard to implement. I have a rather expensive hands on throttle and stick for playing flight sims. Lots of flight games have built in templates for it even though it's not a peripheral that even millions own.

I'm with TiLT - given the backing from Facebook, Steam and Sony, and Microsoft for Augmented Reality, I don't see this category coming close to failing. But even if it "only" sells Apple Watch levels of product somehow, I'm pretty sure that games like Elite Dangerous and Project Cars will support the experience because they already do with far fewer units in the wild.

You guys are seriously developing old man levels of curmudgeon.

[TiLT]

And demand is there. There's no need for us to talk about hypotheticals when all the headsets are available for sale and all sold out for several months mere minutes after they were put up for preorder.

Irrelevant as this are most assuredly the early adopters. From what I've read and linked to above, total units across the board for this year are likely to be less than 3 million.

Which is way more than any of them had expected. Palmer Luckey and Mark Zuckerberg in particular have been very open about expectations for VR. They don't expect it to become mainstream for 5+ years, and expect only the most dedicated of VR enthusiasts to throw themselves at this first generation of hardware. They certainly didn't expect to sell millions of units already at the preorder stage. This just doesn't happen with this kind of hardware, not even hugely successful brands like iPhone (launched at a time when Apple didn't have the market appeal they have today).

Most of you in this thread simply aren't the target audience for gen 1 of VR headsets, despite being gamers. They're currently aiming for a very small niche. If you're uncertain about VR or just not feeling it, wait a generation or two. That's when they want and expect you to jump in.

[Grifman]

Why does VR have to become an all consuming thing to be a success?

I'm not the one defining success here. That's TILT who seems to believe this will be the next "big thing".

It's another peripheral. If "only" 3 million people have VR this year, how is that somehow a flop, and why does it mean it's a failure?

Again, putting words in my mouth. I never said that meant it was a "failure". Three million is great but if it doesn't move past that, then all this talk of it being the next "big thing", whatever that is, won't come true.

I'm with TiLT - given the backing from Facebook, Steam and Sony, and Microsoft for Augmented Reality, I don't see this category coming close to failing.

That's not logical. If demand isn't there, it doesn't matter. If consumers don't want a product, you're not going to make them buy it, no matter who's behind it.

[Grifman]

Which is way more than any of them had expected. Palmer Luckey and Mark Zuckerberg in particular have been very open about expectations for VR.

Uh, no, these are their forecasted numbers based upon the work of analysts, hence it is what they expected. You can't take their forecasted numbers and then say they were more than the expected

Until the actual results are reported we just won't know. From what I've read, once they got past the initial wave of the first few days (again, early adopters) and the hype surrounding that, orders have dropped dramatically.

[TiLT]

Which is way more than any of them had expected. Palmer Luckey and Mark Zuckerberg in particular have been very open about expectations for VR.

Uh, no, these are their forecasted numbers based upon the work of analysts, hence it is what they expected. You can't take their forecasted numbers and then say they were more than the expected

Now you are putting words in my mouth. I don't even know what you're talking about at this point. They've outright said that the preorders were way more numerous than they had estimated. Preorders. Actual preorders. Not numbers they've made up or forecasted.

There's this weird thing going on in the VR debate recently where a lot of people who don't believe in VR's success somehow have convinced themselves, en masse, that VR must be a hit with the mass market right away or it will be dead on arrival. This is nonsense. VR is a long-term investment right now, and nobody expects to earn any money on it for several years (Facebook has talked about a 5-year perspective before their investment begins to make sense). There is no attempt by these companies to win over the mass market right now (how many marketing campaigns have you seen for the Rift? How many review units out in the wild? The answer is zero for both those questions). Even Sony isn't expecting things to really take off for quite a while, but is laying the groundwork for word of mouth and later developments, as well as potential price reductions. VR right now is for people with more money than sense, and that is intentional.

This is a niche technology right now and will be for several years. According to all those who've been willing to talk about sales so far, they've been tremendous. You may disbelieve that all you want, but if you're going to assume that Oculus, Valve and Sony are deliberately lying to us for some obscure reason, then this discussion has no value.

[YellowKing]

Honestly if "the next big thing" is going to take 5 years to become "the next big thing," I'd just as soon check back on it in 2021.

[Grifman]

Honestly if "the next big thing" is going to take 5 years to become "the next big thing," I'd just as soon check back on it in 2021.

This.

[TiLT]

At least we can agree that's fair. It's going to take time for this to appeal to the mass market, both in terms of actual interest and in terms of costs. Like it or not, but most gamers are just not the intended market. It's probably the first time this has happened for a major gaming product, and I suspect this is part of the reason some people feel alienated from the whole thing.

Me, I'm going to enjoy playing around with my Rift when it arrives. Whenever that may be. Oculus has been annoyingly quiet, despite the promised shipping date having passed this Monday.

[Kraken]

Most of you in this thread simply aren't the target audience for gen 1 of VR headsets, despite being gamers. They're currently aiming for a very small niche. If you're uncertain about VR or just not feeling it, wait a generation or two. That's when they want and expect you to jump in.

In the meantime I, for one, miss the halcyon days when no one here was talking about virtual reality.

[Daehawk]

Here is a Computer Chronicles episode from 1992 talking about VR then.

https://archive.org/details/virtualreali

[TiLT]

Lots and lots of new VR software is being released this week to coincide with the Oculus Rift launch (staggered as it may be). Most importantly, version 1.3 of the Oculus SDK was released this Monday, which means every developer out there can now target the final version of the Rift with their software. For example, I'm writing this while in virtual reality on my DK2, using Virtual Desktop. The Chrome window I'm typing into is a large, domed screen hovering about 5 meters in front of me while I'm floating in space (all of this is customizable). By using a dropdown menu on this hovering screen, I can just as easily jump into a different environment, such as a virtual theater in case I want to pretend like I'm sitting in a cinema while watching a movie. I can run anything from this application, including games. I'm going to give Netflix a try after I'm done writing this.

Gave Chronos a try too. I'm really looking forward to digging into these games and all this software without feeling like I'm robbing myself of the true experience by using outdated hardware. The final Rift can't get here soon enough.

[Nightwish]

I think TiLT has a point, these things are as expensive as they are for a reason: they just don't expect to sell many yet, so they have to jack up the price a tad.
Since it's way, way out of my price range, and I mostly do strategy and retro-style games, I'm looking forward to 10 years from now. Please keep financing my future hobby, k tks

[wonderpug]

I think TiLT has a point, these things are as expensive as they are for a reason: they just don't expect to sell many yet, so they have to jack up the price a tad.

The headsets are pretty much being sold at cost right now. Oculus also just announced free shipping for all preorders to apologize for this week's delays. That's ~$30 for the US but much, much more internationally. (I think Aussies had ~$200 shipping.) For international preorders, I'd bet they're taking a loss on each unit preordered.

Since it's way, way out of my price range, and I mostly do strategy and retro-style games, I'm looking forward to 10 years from now. Please keep financing my future hobby, k tks

The one VR strategy game out right now is AirMech, and it seems to be getting well received so far. People say playing it is like looking down at a big toy box.

[TiLT]

Yeah, the prices for VR are absolutely not "jacked up" at the moment, but they're also not intended to be sold at a loss. Valve has been relatively quiet about it, but Oculus has said that they're selling the Rift at a price point where they're not earning money on them. They're looking to gain income in other ways, but they're still going to be in the red for several years.

I'm one of the people who haven't received their Rift yet. My order time was 8 minutes after preorders went up. You'd think that was early, but not in this case. Still, I was supposed to be in the first shipment, but something's gone wrong with manufacturing (speculation is that it has something to do with the wireless dongles for the Xbox One controller, but it's just that: speculation). They cut 54 Euros (that's roughly $61.5) off the price I have to pay by removing shipping costs, which is nice.

It's also nice that I can still use my DK2 while waiting. I just tried the pinball game in Oculus Home, and it was fun. Decided to play it standing, which made it feel pretty authentic (though the limited FOV of the DK2 sensor meant I had to keep my head low). They actually change the environments around you too while playing these pinball tables, which I didn't notice until I suddenly saw a shark swimming around next to my feet. It was hard to concentrate, but in a good way, when the sharks came too close while I was playing. The rational part of your brain knows it's not real, but your instincts still kick in.

[wonderpug]

I'm one of the people who haven't received their Rift yet. My order time was 8 minutes after preorders went up. You'd think that was early, but not in this case.

I'm a +:09 minute preorder, so I think you and I are in the same boat. I don't know if you got the "your order should arrive in the next 1-3 weeks" email last week, but I didn't. Oculus has said that email was an accurate estimate for the people who received it, so I'm taking not receiving that email to mean I'm not getting mine until at least 2-3 weeks from today.

[TiLT]

I'm one of the people who haven't received their Rift yet. My order time was 8 minutes after preorders went up. You'd think that was early, but not in this case.

I'm a +:09 minute preorder, so I think you and I are in the same boat. I don't know if you got the "your order should arrive in the next 1-3 weeks" email last week, but I didn't. Oculus has said that email was an accurate estimate for the people who received it, so I'm taking not receiving that email to mean I'm not getting mine until at least 2-3 weeks from today.

Oculus has confirmed that everyone who received the 1-3 weeks email are in the first shipment, so it's the best indication of where we are in the process that we have so far. Keep in mind that I'll likely be receiving my Rift from a different shipping center than you since I'm in Europe, and that may make a difference.

I received both that email and the "you'll get an update to your order by the 12th of April" email, which was their apology email that went out this weekend.

[Nightwish]

Blame it on not being a native English speaker... You're right, jacked up is the absolutely the wrong term, I just meant higher than expected.

[Jaymann]

Jack up the price is a proper use of the idiom.

[wonderpug]

This new video from Valve is the best I've seen yet for showcasing what VR is all about without actually putting a headset on someone's face. I'll be using this any time I want to try and explain to someone what VR can do that a top notch big TV or monitor can't do.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qYfNzhLXYGc

(Start at about 45 seconds in if you want to skip the intro.)