HTC RE Vive - SteamVR headset

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015/03/htc-partners-with-valve-for-virtual-reality-headset/

BARCELONA, Spain—Surprise! HTC just announced a partnership with Valve to make a virtual reality headset. The device is called the HTC Re Vive, and it combines HTC's hardware design with Valve's Steam VR technology.

The device looks unlike any other VR headset. It's covered in sensors—there are over 70—allowing for full 3D room tracking. HTC calls this a "Full Room Scale 360 Degree Solution with Tracked Controllers," though hopefully the final name is a little catchier. You can explore objects from all angles and look up and down.

The Vive appears to be a standalone VR headset for a PC. We don't know many details about how it works, but HTC says it "features high-quality graphics, 90-frames-per-second video, and incredible audio fidelity." The headset uses two 1200×1080 displays, one for each eye, and the relatively high resolution should help cut down on the "screen door effect" you got with the original Oculus Rift developer kit. HTC will also be producing "wireless VR controllers" along with the headset. These will be sold in pairs and will be less complex than typical gamepads, according to HTC. The company said it was partnering with Google, HBO, and others to make content for the device

A Developer Edition will be available in the spring, with a Consumer Edition coming "by the end of 2015." More information will be on HTCvr.com.
 
sofDXIN.jpg
 
I still have the feeling VR will continue to be another stupid gimmick, even with the latest technology.
 
I still have the feeling VR will continue to be another stupid gimmick, even with the latest technology.

It will remain that way until we have full neural interfaces. That doesn't mean it can't be fun though. I guess they really just need to tailor the experiences to things that suit the current technology. Some of the little flight rigs I've seen people building with the fans blowing in your face and such could be a lot of fun. Pop in some flight controls, and you're set. I think where these current headsets will shine will be where the player is in more or less a static environment. (for example, a cockpit, driver's seat, etc.) Once you start using it is mobile physical (human body) situations, it's going to have some disconnect. (since you can't really run, jump, etc. freely.) And those little slip pad things that people use in their socks to run on look absolutely stupid.

Another thing that I could see being cool is this used in more of an AR situation with a mobile device. That way you could actually go out into a wide space like a park, have the entire area overlaid with CG, and play in an altered environment, but where you can still physically move through the terrain, and interact with objects and people.

Simply sitting and playing an FPS with a headset could still be fun, but it's not going to fully achieve "virtual reality". Still though, I can see a lot to gain from these devices.
 
I still have the feeling VR will continue to be another stupid gimmick, even with the latest technology.

The best part is that we only really need to wait 7-9 months or so to find out for ourselves, assuming the Vive actually launches this year as they proclaimed.

Any time Oculus (or VR in general) gets mentioned anywhere there's always big posts with purely-speculative arguments as to why it will or won't succeed, why people will or won't buy, why individuals do or don't need to try it to state why they love/hate it :rolleyes: , etc., but the only real way to tell for sure is to launch the thing and get it into the hands of the public, so it's exciting that that is what Valve will be doing later this year.

Free Source2 and UE4 dev kits should ensure we don't lack content for anything, including Oculus/RE Vive.
 
Hands-on with SteamVR and HTC Vive

There's also the question that lingers around all PC VR experiences - just how much horsepower you need to get the level of flawless consistency we experienced at Valve's booth...On that count, we do have some answers: the test rig used for the GDC demo utilises a Nvidia GeForce GTX 980, but it is a single card set-up, so the PC powering the experience isn't the multi-thousand dollar monstrosity we thought it would be...Valve is also keen to point out that the GTX 980 shouldn't be seen as an entry-level requirement to VR - it says that its aim is to make VR as accessible as possible

What we saw today was hugely impressive, but the play space concept will challenge game-makers to an even greater degree than the already daunting challenge 'standard' VR already represents...But in the here and now, the technology is simply stunning, and we can't wait to see if the final SteamVR software manages to match or even exceed the quality and consistency of the experience seen here at GDC 2015...

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2015-hands-on-with-steam-vr-htc-vive
 
Like I said before, Oculus is taking too long to come to market. Now we have a definite competitor that might beat them to the punch.
 
Interesting claim of ZERO motions sickness.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/05/t...ea-puts-virtual-reality-closer-to-market.html

At least one company, Valve, believes it has solved the discomfort problem with headsets. In an interview at the developer conference, Gabe Newell, the president and co-founder of Valve, said he, too, had reacted badly to most headset demonstrations, describing them as the “world’s best motion sickness inducers

Mr. Newell said the company had worked hard on its virtual reality technology to eliminate the discomfort, saying that “zero percent of people get motion sick” when they try its system. Part of its solution is a motion tracking system that uses lasers to accurately reproduce a person’s real-world movements in the virtual world. Mr. Newell said Valve would offer the tracking system, called Lighthouse, free to hardware manufacturers.

I think for the most part, the latency issues will be solved with the all the coming VR headsets.

But even perfect headset Headsets, with perfect tracking, and zero latency, won't solve the problem.

The reason the Valve demo doesn't make people sick, is because they aren't flying/driving/running. It is just walking around/looking around with your feet on the ground.

For a lot of people once you do most gaming type experiences Fly/driving/running/gunning, it will turn beack itno the "Worlds best motion sickness inducer".
 
The horsepower needed to drive these new VR headsets, and the unwillingness of mainstream gamers to wear weird things on their faces puts these devices out of the range of normal consumers.

The Sony one has a single 1080 screen refreshing at 120 Hz, so that's like what, four PS4s worth of processing power? No clue how Sony is going to make that work.

The Vive? A pair of 1200x1080 displays at 90 Hz. Right off the bat one would need a high end, multi-GPU rig to power this. Don't forget, you need a constant, locked frame rate for VR - you can't have frame rate drops as it spoils the immersion. What single GPU can drive 2400x2060 at a locked 90 Hz while playing Shadow of Mordor or Dying Light maxed out? Never mind the fact that system requirements for "next-gen" games are getting higher with every release.

Occulus? The consumer version is rumored to have a 2560x1440 display. You all know what type of rig you would need to run a display like that at a locked 60 Hz. Again, fluctuations in frame rate are unacceptable using VR.

Keep in mind we're not talking about running old DX9 Valve titles or simple tech demos here. These headsets aren't going to start a "revolution" by being only able to run TF2. They need to be compatible with the newest, most demanding mainstream games. A combination of requiring devs. to code for a gyrometer, accelerometer and laser head-tracking plus relying on GPU manufactures to support each and every new title with multi-GPU profiles/drivers plus actually having a rig with enough GPU power in the first place is a death sentence to mainstream adoption of the Vive and VR in general.

And like I've said before (and was flamed relentlessly by the Cult of Valve for saying) no mainstream gamer wants things on their face. The mainstream is not us. The mainstream gamer wants to play the newest titles on the couch with friends, snacks and beer while using a simple, affordable console. Not sit at a desk hooked up to an expensive multi-GPU rig, playing HL2 through a mask.

These are toys made by and for the highly tech literate Silicon Valley crowd. Mind blowing religious experiences witnessed by celebrity game developers and fawning Twitter praise means nothing. VR devices are as far away from mainstream as you can get. They're in the same niche with Linux-based game consoles and touchpad controllers .
 
And like I've said before (and was flamed relentlessly by the Cult of Valve for saying) no mainstream gamer wants things on their face. The mainstream is not us. The mainstream gamer wants to play the newest titles on the couch with friends, snacks and beer while using a simple, affordable console. Not sit at a desk hooked up to an expensive multi-GPU rig, playing HL2 through a mask.

These are toys made by and for the highly tech literate Silicon Valley crowd. Mind blowing religious experiences witnessed by celebrity game developers and fawning Twitter praise means nothing. VR devices are as far away from mainstream as you can get. They're in the same niche with Linux-based game consoles and touchpad controllers .

I agree...as cool as this seems I don't see this ever taking off even amongst tech-savvy gamers...if people are avoiding 3D because of a pair of lightweight glasses I don't see this giant face-hugging device taking off and becoming the next big thing...cool tech but will never be anything close to mainstream

but they are saying that you don't need a multi-GPU setup for VR...a single 980 is apparently more then enough
 
And like I've said before (and was flamed relentlessly by the Cult of Valve for saying) no mainstream gamer wants things on their face. The mainstream is not us. The mainstream gamer wants to play the newest titles on the couch with friends, snacks and beer while using a simple, affordable console. Not sit at a desk hooked up to an expensive multi-GPU rig, playing HL2 through a mask.

These are toys made by and for the highly tech literate Silicon Valley crowd. Mind blowing religious experiences witnessed by celebrity game developers and fawning Twitter praise means nothing. VR devices are as far away from mainstream as you can get. They're in the same niche with Linux-based game consoles and touchpad controllers .

All of that remains to be seen: we've never had a real VR helmet capable of delivering the kind of experience everyone fantasized about decades ago. Comparing this tech with the glasses required for 3D TVs doesn't really work because the payoff is totally different (3D movie effects to look at versus a VR experience controlled by the user). I was never interested in 3D at all and I'm hyped for VR.

I think the major factor for acceptance will simply be how good the experience is. If it turns out it's some undeniably fun, undeniably cool experience that is well supported (tech-wise and game-wise) then it could become the next gotta-have item. If it's a marginal experience or only marginally supported then yeah, it could just be a fad, but it remains to be seen.
 

do people really think wearing something like that will be the next big thing in home theater or gaming?...no chance...looks cool in Star Trek or Blade Runner but not for practical use in our near future...wouldn't mind wearing that in a movie theater for 2 hours to see the next Avatar or Mad Max movie but hard core gamers play for long periods of time and that device will be annoying...plus even when you're gaming you're not always looking at the screen...with VR it seems like you always have to be 'in' the game
 
Vuzix's new VR headset adds earphones and supports multiple devices
http://www.engadget.com/2015/03/06/vuzixs-new-vr-headset-adds-earphones-and-supports-multiple-devi/
You'll think this might beat the Valve one at least on looks? It at least looks like you can survive a motorcycle accident with it.

YjNZyXq.jpg

That one looks like a joke from the 90s...and the specs aren't much better than stuff that's already been out for years:

The IWear 720 has dual HD displays (720p, hence the name) that can emulate a 130-inch screen experience from 10 feet away, has motion tracking and supports Unity 3D and Unreal engine games. If you want some augmented reality action to go along with all those features, you can ask Vuzix to add optional AR cameras... when the IWear 720 hits the market, anyway.
 
And like I've said before (and was flamed relentlessly by the Cult of Valve for saying) no mainstream gamer wants things on their face. The mainstream is not us. The mainstream gamer wants to play the newest titles on the couch with friends, snacks and beer while using a simple, affordable console. Not sit at a desk hooked up to an expensive multi-GPU rig, playing HL2 through a mask.

Mainstream gamers will do whatever expensive marketing tells them to. Whether or not VR takes off with the casual crowd has nothing to do with practicality or how dumb you look with the headset on, it's down to what's trending on twitter that day. All it'll take is an "iVR" headset and there will be mile-long queues of trendy mainstream twats outside every Apple store.
 
VR has a chance, now that graphics have caught up and gaming is a more lucrative business I foresee it doing well but slowly
 
No. You just turn the details down a bit. A mid-range card will probably work.

Along these lines, (sorta) I think it would be cool for someone to make a silky smooth flat-shaded game with really nice mechanics for something like this. Kinda Tron-esque. wouldn't require a ton of GPU power, but if it was fast, smooth, well lit, it could be quite fun.
 
Along these lines, (sorta) I think it would be cool for someone to make a silky smooth flat-shaded game with really nice mechanics for something like this. Kinda Tron-esque. wouldn't require a ton of GPU power, but if it was fast, smooth, well lit, it could be quite fun.

I think some sort of Tron or Tron-inspired VR title with minimalist textures and clean neon lines is inevitable. I think Tron is one of my first movie theater experiences, so it always holds a special place
 
Last edited:
I just want to point out that 2 screens at 1200x1080 is NOT 2400x2160
it is 2400x1080 (or 1200x2160 whatever), exactly 25% more pixels than "standard" 1920x1080.

Yes, maintaining a very very constant 90fps at 25% more pixels than 1080p isn't necessarily easy for next-gen games etc, but keep in mind the advances of mantle/dx12/glnext should help as will the releases of the titan z, 390x, etc.

People claiming that this cannot be run on current hardware have neither [H]ard rigs nor reasonable understanding of how to optimize graphical settings. Since either of those 2 things will get you 90fps @1080p no problem.
 
i'm more interested in the vive for its head tracking and position sensors for how they map out a space. it seems like its further along in that regard than the oculus
 
I just want to point out that 2 screens at 1200x1080 is NOT 2400x2160
it is 2400x1080 (or 1200x2160 whatever), exactly 25% more pixels than "standard" 1920x1080.
I was wrong. My mistake.

Yes, maintaining a very very constant 90fps at 25% more pixels than 1080p isn't necessarily easy for next-gen games etc
Not very constant, locked. VR needs a locked framerate, everyone here is on agreement on this, no?
but keep in mind the advances of mantle/dx12/glnext should help as will the releases of the titan z, 390x, etc.
The success of Vive hinging on widespread adoption of the Titan X, GLnext and people with 15' x 15' spaces clear of furniture to run around in is seriously crippling to it's future. I'm assuming you meant Titan X.

People claiming that this cannot be run on current hardware have neither [H]ard rigs nor reasonable understanding of how to optimize graphical settings. Since either of those 2 things will get you 90fps @1080p no problem.
What percentage of mainstream gamers have [H]ard rigs? Of those who do not have such a rig, how many of them are willing to purchase a spendy headset and run the latest games on low to medium settings with no AA?

Look, I know that on the Internets, any concept the lord Gaben breathes on is viewed as infallible. I also understand that VR is the hot new idea of 2015. But put aside the irrational religious devotion to Valve, the flakey Silicon Valley-style trend chasing, and realize that VR is about as far away from the reach of the mainstream consumer as you can get.

We are not the mainstream. We are the very definition of niche. Expecting this (or any) headset to completely transform the gaming landscape or even gain mainstream success is wishful thinking.
 
I was wrong. My mistake.

Not very constant, locked. VR needs a locked framerate, everyone here is on agreement on this, no?The success of Vive hinging on widespread adoption of the Titan X, GLnext and people with 15' x 15' spaces clear of furniture to run around in is seriously crippling to it's future. I'm assuming you meant Titan X.

What percentage of mainstream gamers have [H]ard rigs? Of those who do not have such a rig, how many of them are willing to purchase a spendy headset and run the latest games on low to medium settings with no AA?

Look, I know that on the Internets, any concept the lord Gaben breathes on is viewed as infallible. I also understand that VR is the hot new idea of 2015. But put aside the irrational religious devotion to Valve, the flakey Silicon Valley-style trend chasing, and realize that VR is about as far away from the reach of the mainstream consumer as you can get.

We are not the mainstream. We are the very definition of niche. Expecting this (or any) headset to completely transform the gaming landscape or even gain mainstream success is wishful thinking.

And yet, it's possible that all it could take is a decent Minecraft mod/implementation and suddenly it's the item that every kid is asking for at Christmas. There are many ways that this could play out that would result in decently widespread adoption of the tech.

You and your ilk might not want to use it, but if they manage to get a new generation of kids using VR tech then it'd be a success. I'll bet that back in the 90's there were plenty of people who thought the idea of sitting around playing COD with a headset on was nothing but a niche activity for nerds at LAN parties, yet now it's completely mainstream. Things can change.
 
I want headgear that I'll be able to use while wearing glasses. None of those, that are either ready or in last phase of construction will let me do it. And no, contact lenses are not solution, as lenses while using computer screen is not good for my eyes.
 
You think that they could make the VR headset special "made to order" where they can take your eye prescription and put it into the lenses within the headset , so you can take your glasses off and the lenses inside are made so you can see.
 
Custom order lenses would suffice, no need for the full headset to be custom. Shouldnt be too hard for them to produce an algorithm where you put in your prescription and it spit out the lens needed.
 
Are you going to need glasses when the screen is a inch in front of your eyes?
 
Are you going to need glasses when the screen is a inch in front of your eyes?

Yes, people will. People are need bifocals, glasses for reading, or who are far-sighted (meaning they can't see close up) will need them. People who are near-sighted might not, though I'm not entirely sure onthat one. Despite being near-sighted I still need glasses to play games on my PC even though I'm sitting at a desk close to the screen.
 
http://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comments/2b5yur/will_nearsighted_people_have_to_wear_glasses/

The Oculus has different sets of lenses you can swap out. There are several near sighted people saying they can use the Oculus without their glasses using the 'B' or 'C' lenses.
Alternatively, people are also saying the DK2 has enough room to wear their glasses inside of the unit.

I'm assuming the Vive will have something similar (either interchangeable lenses or a focal adjustment).
 
The horsepower needed to drive these new VR headsets, and the unwillingness of mainstream gamers to wear weird things on their faces puts these devices out of the range of normal consumers.

Here's my personal experience:

A super geek friend of mine (I am a super geek as well FYI) went and bought an Oculus DK2 right when it came out. He's like "hey, friend, you should come over and try it some time; it's pretty neat." I'm all "yeah ok sure good buddy I'll get right on that." I'm so jaded with my experience with the Wii and 3DS and Virtua Boy etc etc that I pretty much blow it off because I'm sure it'll suck ass.

Flash forward to last month. I'm over at his place with my GF and we try out the DK2. Oh my god, I was soooooo wrong about this new generation of VR equipment. The 1:1 positional tracking is the absolute key here. No amount of screenshots or talking can possibly describe it, because you simply have to try it.

My GF, who takes great pleasure in making fun of my gaming and star wars LEGO collection, gives it a try. She is more blown away than I am, even. It's hard to describe seeing someone who is so anti-gamer just absolutely having a ball and giggling with this ridiculous headset on. The thing about the ridiculous headset is that when you're wearing it, it doesn't fucking matter because you're inside the game. You simply don't give a flying fuck what you look like to outsiders because you're so immersed.

Her first comment after she takes the headset off: "We're getting one of these for Christmas." This is a girl whose total PC gaming experience until now was the Sims about 10 years ago.

Of course the first thing I do is look up the DK2 to buy it, but now I'm going to hold off for the Vive, since it sure as hell seems like Oculus is taking that Samsung and Facebook money and making a phone headset before a proper PC setup.
 
Of course the first thing I do is look up the DK2 to buy it, but now I'm going to hold off for the Vive.
So you have a 15'x15' area clear of furniture in your home in which to set up laser sensors and run around in, completely blind, with goggles strapped to your face? And a PC capable of driving a VR quality display at a locked 90 HZ? Be careful not to trip on the dog and go crashing into your expensive rig.

Every time I make the above argument, people respond with "But VR is sooooo cool and Valve is awesome!". The coolness of VR and the perceived awesomeness of the Valve corporation has no impact on viability of VR in the home. I'm not saying VR isn't fun, I'm saying it's too costly and cumbersome to ever break through to the mainstream.

If people weren't open to wearing a pair of cheap glasses to achieve 3D TV immersion, then there's no way consumers are going to wear expensive headsets attached to even more expensive PC gaming rigs (and I'm not the only one making the comparison between the failure of 3D TV and the future of VR).

Combine the unwillingness to wear things on one's face with the high GPU requirements for VR and the need for a room filled with frickin' laser sensors, and it's obvious that the Vive (or any VR tech) will never gain traction. VR is and will remain, a Silicon Valley flavor of the month technology, whose only audience is elite, childless nerds with money to burn.
 
You don't need 15'x15' and there will be plenty of gpu-friendly apps to enjoy... or so they say
 
Back
Top