Valve's VR Headset is Called the Vive and It's Made by HTC

CommanderFrank

CommanderFrank

Cat Can't Scratch It
Joined
May 9, 2000
Messages
75,399
The question whether or not virtual reality is ready for prime time might just get an answer this year. The Vive, a collaboration between HTC and Valve will be on the shelves in time for the Holidays with the developer’s edition making its appearance this spring. More will be known after GDC goers get the chance to sample the technology. Thanks to Ducman69 for the linkage.
 
Hmm,
Looks like there is going to be some healthy competition in this field.

For those who never liked 3D and VR and said it was just a flash in the pan; stay tuned.
It will revolutionize gaming. The flat panel display will become the least preferred method because it cannot deliver anywhere near the experience.
 
Dr. Righteous said:
It will revolutionize gaming.
Click to expand...
Yes, just like how 3D TV revolutionized movie viewing.

No one wants to strap a pair of goggles to their face to play a video game, just like how no one was willing to wear a pair of glasses to watch a movie. People want to hang out in the living room with friends, relax on the couch with a beer and bowl of snacks, and shoot people/blow things up - not sit in the corner hooked up to a $1,500 PC while looking like a ridiculous cyber insect.

The only people interested in VR are the usual suspects of elite, childless PC gaming nerds with money to burn. VR isn't on the radar of mainstream consumers.
 
It may not be this product, but VR headsets will change the way we do so many things. Gaming is just the start.
 
As much as I hate to say it Microsoft's VR is the most practical for every day use, if they lose the bulk size for a slim design it maybe more accepted than all the oculus rift looking headsets.
(don't get me wrong this is cool and all but it is just a stepping stone to the real VR tech)
 
Dr. Righteous said:
Hmm,
Looks like there is going to be some healthy competition in this field.
Click to expand...
The accuracy they claim for the head tracking is pretty f-balls amazing.

I have to say even though I was a big skeptic because of bad experiences with VR in the 90s, I'm actually quite optimistic.

The only other big problem I see is an inability to see your controls. If you're using a mouse and keyboard for example, and take your hands off either, it might be quite a shuffle to figure out where they even are again.
 
filip said:
As much as I hate to say it Microsoft's VR is the most practical for every day use, if they lose the bulk size for a slim design it maybe more accepted than all the oculus rift looking headsets.
(don't get me wrong this is cool and all but it is just a stepping stone to the real VR tech)
Click to expand...

Microsoft is doing AR not VR. I do see AR as the winner since it won't have the puke factor.
 
crusty_juggler said:
Yes, just like how 3D TV revolutionized movie viewing.

No one wants to strap a pair of goggles to their face to play a video game, just like how no one was willing to wear a pair of glasses to watch a movie. People want to hang out in the living room with friends, relax on the couch with a beer and bowl of snacks, and shoot people/blow things up - not sit in the corner hooked up to a $1,500 PC while looking like a ridiculous cyber insect.

The only people interested in VR are the usual suspects of elite, childless PC gaming nerds with money to burn. VR isn't on the radar of mainstream consumers.
Click to expand...

Don't worry - it's not coming to your XtrdStation in this generation. MS and Sony have to get 1080p 60fps working first, then they can start worrying about implementing the power needed to run VR.
 
Dr. Righteous said:
Hmm,
Looks like there is going to be some healthy competition in this field.

For those who never liked 3D and VR and said it was just a flash in the pan; stay tuned.
It will revolutionize gaming. The flat panel display will become the least preferred method because it cannot deliver anywhere near the experience.
Click to expand...

I think 3D in its current state is a flash in the pan, again current state. VR on the other I find very interesting and think it could be the new way people play certain games.
 
filip said:
As much as I hate to say it Microsoft's VR is the most practical for every day use, if they lose the bulk size for a slim design it maybe more accepted than all the oculus rift looking headsets.
(don't get me wrong this is cool and all but it is just a stepping stone to the real VR tech)
Click to expand...

have you seen Cast-AR? I still think that works a ton better since it gives a natural focal point for your eyes. No issues with screens being too close or eye damage risk.
 
Snowdog said:
Microsoft is doing AR not VR. I do see AR as the winner since it won't have the puke factor.
Click to expand...
Can't be a winner, as its apples and oranges. How can AR really make a big difference playing say Halo? You'll have a HUD with ammo counter, and maybe your talking AI... neat, but how can you compare that to being "inside" the game, looking around and experiencing the game VR?

Nothing against AR, but its just such a completely different thing, I don't see how they can be compared.
 
Simmonz said:
I wouldn't buy one if the most it does is 1280*800 per eye.
Click to expand...
You're thinking the Oculus (which consumer version is supposed to be higher resolution too). The article I read says 1200 x 1080 per eye.
The Vive Developer Edition uses two 1200 x 1080 displays that refresh at 90 frames per second, "eliminating jitter" and achieving "photorealistic imagery," according to HTC.

The device uses a gyrosensor, accelerometer, and laser position sensor to track your head's movements as precisely as one-tenth of a degree. Most surprisingly, there will be something called the Steam VR base station, which will let you walk around the virtual space instead of using a controller. A pair of the base stations can "track your physical location ... in spaces up to 15 feet by 15 feet."
Click to expand...
Supposedly, the biggest nausea-inducing effect of VR is if you have too low a resolution, too low a framerate, too much lag, or too much of a response delay or inaccuracy of the head tracking to your environment.

It might be pure marketing BS that they won't actually deliver on, but on paper it sounds like a winner.
 
Wow, we will soon have an electronic version of the 1960's view master.

This will go the same way as 3D TV's. People who have to have the latest & greatest will run out and buy, show it to their friends, but then the sales will quickly drop off.
Most people will never pay money to wear a headset like this, just like they don't want to spend money to wear 3d glasses.

Wonder what the next "must have" device that I will never buy will be?
 
Seems to be a red valve handle missing from that guy's head :);)
 
crusty_juggler said:
Yes, just like how 3D TV revolutionized movie viewing.

No one wants to strap a pair of goggles to their face to play a video game, just like how no one was willing to wear a pair of glasses to watch a movie. People want to hang out in the living room with friends, relax on the couch with a beer and bowl of snacks, and shoot people/blow things up - not sit in the corner hooked up to a $1,500 PC while looking like a ridiculous cyber insect.

The only people interested in VR are the usual suspects of elite, childless PC gaming nerds with money to burn. VR isn't on the radar of mainstream consumers.
Click to expand...

Serious question, do you immediately get excited when you see a VR thread so you can copy/paste the exact same comment about "herp derp 3DTV failed?"
 
Ducman69 said:
The only other big problem I see is an inability to see your controls. If you're using a mouse and keyboard for example, and take your hands off either, it might be quite a shuffle to figure out where they even are again.
Click to expand...

Supposedly some new type of wireless controller is going to be shown by Valve exactly for this purpose. I think it may also be made by HTC.
 
Can someone tell me how any of these things are going to be comfortable to wear. Has anyone who has designed or reported on them actually looked at the fucking things.
 
Megalith said:
Can someone tell me how any of these things are going to be comfortable to wear. Has anyone who has designed or reported on them actually looked at the ****** things.
Click to expand...

Just because they look big and bulky doesnt mean it cant be comfortable to wear.
 
nutzo said:
Wow, we will soon have an electronic version of the 1960's view master.

This will go the same way as 3D TV's. People who have to have the latest & greatest will run out and buy, show it to their friends, but then the sales will quickly drop off.
Most people will never pay money to wear a headset like this, just like they don't want to spend money to wear 3d glasses.

Wonder what the next "must have" device that I will never buy will be?
Click to expand...

The 3DTV argument is as short-sighted as it gets, like comparing apples to bicycles.

I remember all the jokes when the iPad was first shown, I was one of those idiots. That it would never work because earlier tablets had already tried and failed, blah blah blah.

Execution is everything. And history has shown that technology just has to improve to a certain convergence point of execution + technology before something can become really viable.
 
Simmonz said:
I wouldn't buy one if the most it does is 1280*800 per eye.
Click to expand...

This one is two displays of 1200x1080 @ 90Hz. But that's the devkit. So its like 2400x1080. What the final consumer version launches with remains to be seen.

FWIW, Rift is a single 2560x1440 display in its latest dev incarnation.

Trying to think of the resolution in these HMD's really isn't analogous to the res of desktop displays or phone/tablet displays -- once you get it strapped on and you're see it through a couple of optic lenses, things are just completely different.
 
This isn't 3d TV because the possible killer apps are too numerous. From schooling (like medical school) to arcades and military simulations.

The screen tech is just now reaching a point of potential. Processing power is almost there for a mass market appeal. Though PCs are probably strong enough, im referring more to the market at large. Like packing in enough power to drive these displays and photo realism in a 3d environment for under a few hundred.

However, it'll probably be there in 5 years, and so now would be the time to get the ball rolling.

This isn't lawnmower man or the virtual boy. This has numerous real world applications and it could be a paradigm shift when it comes to how people interact with tech. Or, it could be another footnote.

Big money is in this arena now, and if bean counters think it's time for it, then it probably is.
 
DPI said:
Serious question, do you immediately get excited when you see a VR thread so you can copy/paste the exact same comment about "herp derp 3DTV failed?"
Click to expand...

He has to be trolling. There's really no comparison between 3d TV and virtual reality. And his comments about watching TV in the living room is a joke. Most people already watch TV alone.

3D TV was just a gimmick. It added nothing to watching TV.

Virtual reality gives you a feeling of presence. You feel you are there. There is really no comparison.
 
BladeVenom said:
He has to be trolling. There's really no comparison between 3d TV and virtual reality. And his comments about watching TV in the living room is a joke. Most people already watch TV alone.

3D TV was just a gimmick. It added nothing to watching TV.

Virtual reality gives you a feeling of presence. You feel you are there. There is really no comparison.
Click to expand...

Not to mention this has the potential to bring a 3d movie experience never seen before. IMAX like where you can look around the screen. If someone comes out with a format that blends on the fly graphic rendering and HD video, you have a completely different platform for story telling.
 
Dr. Righteous said:
Hmm,
Looks like there is going to be some healthy competition in this field.

For those who never liked 3D and VR and said it was just a flash in the pan; stay tuned.
It will revolutionize gaming. The flat panel display will become the least preferred method because it cannot deliver anywhere near the experience.
Click to expand...

Competition isn't always healthy, it often means a bunch of incompatible standards which results in a complete failure of the entire product segment. For somethings that are self contained enough this may not matter but for VR it may mean lack of developer support and content which kills it very much like 3D.
 
I wish people would stop telling me that I don't want one.
I want one, and I'm not alone. So go piss up a rope!
 
Snowdog said:
Microsoft is doing AR not VR. I do see AR as the winner since it won't have the puke factor.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the heads up, they are calling it VR everywhere and that can really confuse.
AR is the future then, for work and everyday life, no one is going to ware VR to work or the bar.
 
DPI said:
The 3DTV argument is as short-sighted as it gets, like comparing apples to bicycles.
Click to expand...

Yes it is totally different.

3DTV had lightweight glasses and often came with spares to share the experience with friends and since they were view through, there was no puke factor.

But VR has big bulky, solo experience in puke inducing virtual environment. All the factors it needs for success? ;)
 
Boats can cause motion sickness, yet people still use boats.

Man up. A little motion sickness is worth it, and can be overcome.
 
BladeVenom said:
Boats can cause motion sickness, yet people still use boats.

Man up. A little motion sickness is worth it, and can be overcome.
Click to expand...

Going on a boat is usually a social activity that gets you out in the real world or enables work, so then it is worth it.

Motion sick to enable more solo nerd activities in the basement, doesn't seem worth it to me.
 
DPI said:
This one is two displays of 1200x1080 @ 90Hz. But that's the devkit. So its like 2400x1080. What the final consumer version launches with remains to be seen.

FWIW, Rift is a single 2560x1440 display in its latest dev incarnation.

Trying to think of the resolution in these HMD's really isn't analogous to the res of desktop displays or phone/tablet displays -- once you get it strapped on and you're see it through a couple of optic lenses, things are just completely different.
Click to expand...

I think Oculus has been using Samsung phone screens. DK2 had the Galaxy S5 screen and the latest revision has the Note 4 screen. I'm sure it would increase cost, but I'd like to see a screen for each eye that can be adjusted for distance and angle. After the image from the DK2 gets through the lenses to split and focus to each eye, the subpixels are clearly visible. I find the head tracking and latency on the DK2 to be very usable, but the image is like putting your nose against an old standard def CRT TV.
 
jfreund said:
I think Oculus has been using Samsung phone screens. DK2 had the Galaxy S5 screen and the latest revision has the Note 4 screen. I'm sure it would increase cost, but I'd like to see a screen for each eye that can be adjusted for distance and angle. After the image from the DK2 gets through the lenses to split and focus to each eye, the subpixels are clearly visible. I find the head tracking and latency on the DK2 to be very usable, but the image is like putting your nose against an old standard def CRT TV.
Click to expand...

I had a similar experience with DK2. It'll be all about execution for sure, when it comes to the launch of the consumer units. The silver lining in multiple HMD's entering the market (First Oculus VR, then Valve/HTC and next week Nvidia) is it seems like a common API/framework will nip software fragmentation in the bud and allow developers to focus on development while the HMD companies focus on hardware. At least thats the way it *looks* like its going to play out based on Valve and Oculus VR doing a lot of collaboration, and Valve stating they want to see the Rift "succeed". Only wildcard is Nvidia and whether they're going to "go Microsoft" by introducing some proprietary shit.
 
jfreund said:
I think Oculus has been using Samsung phone screens. DK2 had the Galaxy S5 screen and the latest revision has the Note 4 screen.
Click to expand...
Interesting, I was looking it up and found that Samsung is also going to market their own headset called the Samsung Gear VR, which it says is "powered by Oculus". Is it just a matter of branding then, or is this yet another contender?

The Gear VR does list that it uses the Note 4 screen, so 2560x1440 @ 60hz... and honestly I think that's as high resolution as you'd even WANT to go since your computer still needs to keep a framerate above 60fps so it feels smooth as you're swinging your head around. Any higher resolution and it'd really narrow down who has a powerful enough machine to get a good experience out of it.

http://www.samsung.com/global/microsite/gearvr/gearvr_specs.html
 
No thanks, I do not prefer motion sickness and headaches. (Motion blur is a major cause of that.)
 
DPI said:
Only wildcard is Nvidia and whether they're going to "go Microsoft" by introducing some proprietary shit.
Click to expand...

We'll find out soon enough, but nvidia works very hard at fragmenting their targeted market with proprietary garbage. Their track record on PC and Android is evidence of that so I wouldn't be surprised. Why they would choose to go up against Facebook and Valve is the question.
 
crusty_juggler said:
Yes, just like how 3D TV revolutionized movie viewing.

No one wants to strap a pair of goggles to their face to play a video game, just like how no one was willing to wear a pair of glasses to watch a movie. People want to hang out in the living room with friends, relax on the couch with a beer and bowl of snacks, and shoot people/blow things up - not sit in the corner hooked up to a $1,500 PC while looking like a ridiculous cyber insect.

The only people interested in VR are the usual suspects of elite, childless PC gaming nerds with money to burn. VR isn't on the radar of mainstream consumers.
Click to expand...

"640K is more memory than anyone will ever need on a computer'
Your last statement is equivalent to that, even though Bill Gates probably never actually said that.

Everything you said in your arguments against VR can be resolved simply by further development of the products and advancement of technology. At some point, VR will reach a point where it will be even more mainstream than the entire gaming industry right now. When that happens and with what product(s)? Who knows.

And no, the immediately upcoming products probably will not appeal to me personally for various reasons. But your blanket statement that VR will not be mainstream is ridiculous.
 
I really want this tech to work and not cause motion sickness. I've tried several of the Oculus Rift dev kits - the effect is incredible. I don't think it's a fair comparison to 3D TV at all.
My main gripe is motion sickness. It's not just a "man up" thing - it's a long lasting migraine is you do to much.
Now, sitting back and going to watch the 3D wars!
 
Ducman69 said:
The accuracy they claim for the head tracking is pretty f-balls amazing.

I have to say even though I was a big skeptic because of bad experiences with VR in the 90s, I'm actually quite optimistic.

The only other big problem I see is an inability to see your controls. If you're using a mouse and keyboard for example, and take your hands off either, it might be quite a shuffle to figure out where they even are again.
Click to expand...
I think they've been solving this problem by incorporating the real world at 80% transparency maybe less transparency on the edges, more in the center and therefore you have a sense of your surroundings you can lock onto but the VR world dominates central vision. Or the Variable perspecitve approach where your point of view moves as you move makes it less disorienting, I'd imagine.

Either way there's enough sensors/cameras on that headset, they're doing some tie to the surroundings.
 
VR will revolutionize lots of things, this we agree on.

Medical
Space
Places like Dave and busters
Certain niche game genres like flight Sims.

Mainstream gaming isn't one of them and anyone who believes that is delusional. Not going to rehash the argument why as anyone not in denial already understands it. As far as mainstream gaming goes, VR is no different then 3d tv.
 
Thank God... two companies I still have some trust in are making VR more credible... So far I've disliked all of the other competitors.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top