Oculus Oct. Announcements.

[harsaphes]

I don't own one but I was pretty impressed with everything that was spoken about yesterday. They seem to be moving forward here in their plans.

https://www.vrheads.com/oculus-connect-4

 

[bobzdar]

In short:

Standalone Oculus Go for $199 (basically a GearVR without needing a separate phone and with a 2560x1440 low persistence screen)
Santa Cruz shipping to devs next year (inside out tracking with touch and no wires at all)
Oculus Rift with touch permanently dropped to $399

New Oculus 'home' called Rift Core 2.0 giving full PC access/custom virtual monitors etc. coming in Dec. (presumably using the Carmack developed "Cylindrical TimeWarp Layers” to increase perceived resolution)

 

[BecauseScience]

Mobile / standalone crap for the kiddos.

No news of a rift replacement.

Triple A title to launch in 2019. Yep, 2019!

Disappointing.

Let's hope PS VR and Windows VR light a fire under their asses.

 

[harsaphes]

Santa Cruz is the replacement for Rift.

 

[aliaskary77]

Santa Cruz is the replacement for Rift.

Nope. Basically it's an Oculus Go with controllers. Stand alone unit. Rift replacement still not announced or given a code name (at least i have not seen a code name)

 

[harsaphes]

Nope. Basically it's an Oculus Go with controllers. Stand alone unit. Rift replacement still not announced or given a code name (at least i have not seen a code name)

That's not my take on it at all.

Edit: Reading more I see what your saying.

 

[bobzdar]

I'd expect a Rift 2 with upgraded screen (they're already putting it in the Go and Santa Cruz) and maybe wireless tether to the PC end of next year, but not much else in terms of pushing things forward hardware wise. The big push needs to be on the software side, not hardware imo. Yeah there will be incremental screen/optics/fov improvements but the big limitation is software side, not hardware. Maybe the next big hardware jump will be full body/peripheral tracking ala Kinect, but it hasn't really even been teased other than by LeapMotion for hands and the Vive trackers (which I haven't seen actually used for anything yet).

 

[BecauseScience]

That's not my take on it at all.

Edit: Reading more I see what your saying.

Yep, Santa Cruz = GearVR with Touch controllers and positional tracking (and no phone). The whole keynote was about PC-less VR, getting 1 billion people into VR, and "social" garbage. They threw crumbs to PC VR but overall it's a disappointing keynote. They would have done a teaser, at the least, if there's a new PC headset on the way. They teased a game that doesn't launch until 2019 for god's sake. It's not entirely unreasonable to assume we won't see a new Rift until 2019 or later.

I don't regret my Rift purchase. I've already had $500 worth of fun but I'll jump ship the second there's a better option.

 

[BecauseScience]

The big push needs to be on the software side, not hardware imo. Yeah there will be incremental screen/optics/fov improvements but the big limitation is software side, not hardware.

I disagree. In the short term, VR desperately needs more pixels, wider FOV, better lenses (to eliminate god rays), and wireless. In the longer term, we need 4k or greater per eye along with eye tracking and foveated rendering. All of that requires major hardware improvements.

There are easy "quality of life" hardware improvements that don't require much technical effort, like flip-up screens and built-in prescription lens holders. Instead, Oculus is focusing on a race against Google Daydream for the low end. Oculus thinks people care more about dressing up their avatars and "safe" social interactions LOL.

 

[bobzdar]

I disagree. In the short term, VR desperately needs more pixels, wider FOV, better lenses (to eliminate god rays), and wireless. In the longer term, we need 4k or greater per eye along with eye tracking and foveated rendering. All of that requires major hardware improvements.

There are easy "quality of life" hardware improvements that don't require much technical effort, like flip-up screens and built-in prescription lens holders. Instead, Oculus is focusing on a race against Google Daydream for the low end. Oculus thinks people care more about dressing up their avatars and "safe" social interactions LOL.

The only part of that that isn't already in the pipeline is good eye tracking to enable foveated rendering. Higher res panels (and dual panels) are already in the pipeline and shipping in newer headsets, better optics etc. That's all coming but is secondary to there not being any really good software available that will actually sell large quantities of headsets. It's good enough at this point for a good experience, but there's no GLQuake or similar to really push adoption like there was at the start of 3d accelerators. Even the best use cases for VR, cockpit style games, don't make it a must-have. The experience is still good in 2d, maybe not as good, but not killer app, have to buy for most. Without that, you don't move headsets and get widespread adoption, and the best we're getting right now are VR ports of a few AAA titles, so nothing that can't be properly experienced in 2d. If Rockstar had made a full Batman game that had stuff in it that you just couldn't do in 2d, like real hand to hand fighting, flying the batplane and driving the batmobile in realistic way etc. maybe we'd have something, but even that might not be enough to be a hardware mover. The software isn't there to push the hardware, until there is we'll just get incremental upgrades.

 

[BecauseScience]

The only part of that that isn't already in the pipeline is good eye tracking to enable foveated rendering. Higher res panels (and dual panels) are already in the pipeline and shipping in newer headsets, better optics etc. That's all coming

Were do you see any of that coming from Oculus? This thread is about Oculus, not VR in general.

 

[bobzdar]

Were do you see any of that coming from Oculus? This thread is about Oculus, not VR in general.

The Oculus Go (and Santa Cruz) have improved optics and higher res screens, I don't think it's much of a leap to think those will make it to the Rift as well. I wouldn't be surprised if Rift 2 actually is a leap beyond those 2, but we know they already have upgrades in the pipeline. TPCast is announced for Oculus as well, so that hits everything except eye tracking and foveated rendering. At current pace, in 2 years we'll have TitanXp SLI performance in a single card, so I'm not so sure foveated rendering will be too necessary to push higher res panels, at least in high end builds.

Samsung recently announced a 2024x2200 screen, so things are progressing that point, though nobody has announced a headset with it yet. As I said, it'll be incremental, but there isn't software to really move the hardware forward yet. This spoken from the perspective of an owner of a Rift (and GearVR) and long time gamer, I'm a lot more interested in killer software than any hardware improvements. Yeah, less SDE would be nice, wireless would (will) be nice, but not game changing at all, or even worth me getting out my wallet unless there's software to make it worthwhile, which right now there isn't.

 

[BecauseScience]

LA Noire VR, Fallout VR, Payday VR, Skyrim VR, DOOM VFR, and a few other brand-new-for-VR AAA titles have already been announced. AAA titles are on the way!

The limiting factor in my VR usage isn't lack of content. It's the poor ergonomics. We need headsets that are super comfortable to wear for hours. No headset wires. Flip-up displays. Lighter. Better headstraps. Better ventilation. Integrated prescription lens holders. No tracking calibration. 100% wireless trackers or no trackers at all. That kind of stuff.

The FOV and resolution we have today is the absolute bare minimum required. It's a first taste of what's possible. There's so much low hanging fruit to improve the experience. I don't want to see 2-3 year product cycles on the high end this early in the game.

It's disappointing to see all of the focus on low end PC-free VR. I fear that Oculus is prioritizing PC-free because those headsets will be forever tied to the Oculus store. Rift users are free to use Steam and maybe even the Windows VR Store in the future.

It's all about tying people to YOUR ecosystem ASAP. Who'll be the "Steam of VR"? Will it be Steam? Windows Store? Oculus Store? Google Play? That's the battle Facebook is focused on right now. Better PC headsets don't seem to be a means to that end in Facebook's eyes.

There was no mention of PC VR hardware improvement. Not one single thing.

I'm sure we'll see Rift 2.0 some day but I don't want to wait until 2019 or 2020 for it to happen.

 

[USMCGrunt]

I don't want to see 2-3 year product cycles on the high end this early in the game.

Yes, we all want short product cycles actually. At the height of CPU and GPU development, new products were being churned out in 6 and 12 month intervals with noticeable improvements. We want the same thing in VR. Engineers hammering out new technologies free from software modification requirements and being put into consumer hands is the best way to increase market size and get more software devs focused on VR content.

 

[Hagrid]

LA Noire VR, Fallout VR, Payday VR, Skyrim VR, DOOM VFR, and a few other brand-new-for-VR AAA titles have already been announced. AAA titles are on the way!

The limiting factor in my VR usage isn't lack of content. It's the poor ergonomics. We need headsets that are super comfortable to wear for hours. No headset wires. Flip-up displays. Lighter. Better headstraps. Better ventilation. Integrated prescription lens holders. No tracking calibration. 100% wireless trackers or no trackers at all. That kind of stuff.

The FOV and resolution we have today is the absolute bare minimum required. It's a first taste of what's possible. There's so much low hanging fruit to improve the experience. I don't want to see 2-3 year product cycles on the high end this early in the game.

It's disappointing to see all of the focus on low end PC-free VR. I fear that Oculus is prioritizing PC-free because those headsets will be forever tied to the Oculus store. Rift users are free to use Steam and maybe even the Windows VR Store in the future.

It's all about tying people to YOUR ecosystem ASAP. Who'll be the "Steam of VR"? Will it be Steam? Windows Store? Oculus Store? Google Play? That's the battle Facebook is focused on right now. Better PC headsets don't seem to be a means to that end in Facebook's eyes.

There was no mention of PC VR hardware improvement. Not one single thing.

I'm sure we'll see Rift 2.0 some day but I don't want to wait until 2019 or 2020 for it to happen.

I wear mine for hours, but peoples head are shaped different so maybe a Vive might be better for some. I don't mind my wire since I have the slack taken up with a spring. I already have a prescription lense in my rift. Easy to take in and out. Tracking calibration?

 

[BecauseScience]

At the height of CPU and GPU development, new products were being churned out in 6 and 12 month intervals with noticeable improvements. We want the same thing in VR.

Exactly!

I already have a prescription lense in my rift.

Me too but that's due to the ingenuity of 3rd parties. Wearing glasses inside a HMD sucks so much, manufacturers need to have prescription lens holders designed in from the start.

Tracking calibration?

My front cameras get bumped / moved and I need to go through the whole calibration song and dance more often than I'd like.

I want to design 3d printed brackets to attach them to my monitor but haven't had the time.


Valve seems to be forging ahead. They have designs for a new base station, new lenses (up to 120 FOV!), and new controllers on the way. The lenses are already available for licensing.

 

[westrock2000]

Hah, you guys complaining about ergonomics. My 4 year old plays ours daily. She even uses a folded up towel to fill up the extra space for the straps.

That being said, at her age, I could see her using it for normie stuff someday like we use cell phones today for social media.

 

[USMCGrunt]

Hah, you guys complaining about ergonomics. My 4 year old plays ours daily. She even uses a folded up towel to fill up the extra space for the straps.

That being said, at her age, I could see her using it for normie stuff someday like we use cell phones today for social media.

Hope its not for long. With the oddities that are reported in adults after hours of play I'm weary of letting my son do more then 15-20 minutes in a week, and he's nine. A few hours of entertainment for a lifetime of fucked up eyes is too much a risk for me. Though I could just be helicopter parenting and there be nothing wrong with letting kids use them like any other display tech.

 

[Hagrid]

Hope its not for long. With the oddities that are reported in adults after hours of play I'm weary of letting my son do more then 15-20 minutes in a week, and he's nine. A few hours of entertainment for a lifetime of fucked up eyes is too much a risk for me. Though I could just be helicopter parenting and there be nothing wrong with letting kids use them like any other display tech.

What oddities?

 

[Supercharged_Z06]

Hope its not for long. With the oddities that are reported in adults after hours of play I'm weary of letting my son do more then 15-20 minutes in a week, and he's nine. A few hours of entertainment for a lifetime of fucked up eyes is too much a risk for me. Though I could just be helicopter parenting and there be nothing wrong with letting kids use them like any other display tech.

I let both of my kids play (10 and 12), but limit play sessions to roughly an hour and only 3-4 times a week. Basic parenting - treat it just like any other form of screen time and moderation/oversight is probably a good thing. VR isn’t going to mess up your kids eyes. The adult oddities you speak of where folks feeling “weird” after marathon multi-hour VR sessions is just adults being stupid and not taking breaks where they are just getting used to VR’s set focal length displays and having to re-adjust after taking them off. Adults recover a lot slower from crap like that than kids do anyways. Again, relax, VR isn’t going to mess with your kids eyes... but it sure the hell is going to wreck some of your shit up in your room if left unmonitored.

 

[bobzdar]

LA Noire VR, Fallout VR, Payday VR, Skyrim VR, DOOM VFR, and a few other brand-new-for-VR AAA titles have already been announced. AAA titles are on the way!

The limiting factor in my VR usage isn't lack of content. It's the poor ergonomics. We need headsets that are super comfortable to wear for hours. No headset wires. Flip-up displays. Lighter. Better headstraps. Better ventilation. Integrated prescription lens holders. No tracking calibration. 100% wireless trackers or no trackers at all. That kind of stuff.

The FOV and resolution we have today is the absolute bare minimum required. It's a first taste of what's possible. There's so much low hanging fruit to improve the experience. I don't want to see 2-3 year product cycles on the high end this early in the game.

It's disappointing to see all of the focus on low end PC-free VR. I fear that Oculus is prioritizing PC-free because those headsets will be forever tied to the Oculus store. Rift users are free to use Steam and maybe even the Windows VR Store in the future.

It's all about tying people to YOUR ecosystem ASAP. Who'll be the "Steam of VR"? Will it be Steam? Windows Store? Oculus Store? Google Play? That's the battle Facebook is focused on right now. Better PC headsets don't seem to be a means to that end in Facebook's eyes.

There was no mention of PC VR hardware improvement. Not one single thing.

I'm sure we'll see Rift 2.0 some day but I don't want to wait until 2019 or 2020 for it to happen.

Those aren't VR titles, they're AAA titles ported to VR so I don't see any of them being the VR killer app. Good, sure, but not really what I meant when I said we need software to move the hardware forward. I meant we need some new software breakthroughs, especially in terms of locomotion, to push the hardware forward. Otherwise it's the same as regular PC. Incremental display increases, occasional peripheral changes and nothing really groundbreaking. Everything is there to give a good experience now, we have 6dof with mm accurate hand and even pretty good finger tracking. Yeah it'll be nice when we have 'retina' displays but it won't change the experience without software to go with it. Maybe full body tracking will make a difference - or the ability to map controllers to real objects (kind of like how rock band worked - attach the controller to it and it becomes an in-game object but on a much wider scale). So there could be some hardware breakthroughs, but I just don't think it's the display/headset that's what's limiting things. It's everything else.

 

[Youn]

Official version of this video without the crappy pauses/skips and background music:

 

[Vega]

Ugg I hate this watering down of VR. Crap about cell phones and what not.

We need a Rift with higher resolution screens.

 

[GNUse_the_force]

Ugg I hate this watering down of VR. Crap about cell phones and what not.
We need a Rift with higher resolution screens.

Agree. But before that we need GPU vendors to stop milking their customers with incremental 30% yearly improvements ( or 18 months in AMD's case ).

What makes the situation worse is that the days of time consuming optimization has mostly gone from game development. Luckily there are API's like Vulkan to help with driver overhead and it seems Houses such as Unity are focused on performance.
As an aside i can't also help but think that having massive 100gb+ uncompressed games is going to hurt VR too as the hardware requirements become needlessly more demanding and thus more expensive to the consumer.

Actually that reminded me of this utility where people are not seeing a performance decrease but a massive decrease in folder sized. If nothing else it shows just how AAA studios are pushing un-optimized games out of the door.

https://github.com/ImminentFate/CompactGUI/

 

[Youn]

Yes, I tend to agree with Carmack that optimization will be getting more and more attention, because CPU/GPUs just can't be expected to improve as much and as fast ("end of Moore's law") so all that work being done on watered down VR is important as it forces you to think in that super optimization mindset and those lessons learned are definitely making their way up to the higher end of things.

 

[Youn]

We need a Rift with higher resolution screens.

I'd be happy if they offered a much higher-end HMD (2x resolution, 120+ fov) at the same price point as Vive or even a bit higher (I might pay 1000 bucks for that), for hardcore gamers... I'm sure they've considered doing this and they probably feel it won't sell enough to be worthy of their time. The focus to get VR cheap and easy is so that more money and devs will be working towards improving VR overall. Get your PiMax or whatever if you wanna dabble in the more bleeding edge

 

[GNUse_the_force]

I'd be happy if they offered a much higher-end HMD (2x resolution, 120+ fov) at the same price point as Vive or even a bit higher (I might pay 1000 bucks for that), for hardcore gamers

As a first time PCVR buyer Id be happy if a company came along and offered a cheap native 4k/120hz as opposed to upscaled 1440p/60hz like the '4k' Pimax. On top of that simple positional tracking ( lean forward/back L/R and being able to look behind yourself and perhaps a small amount of ducking/height ) without the need for lighthouses nailing to the wall and the threat of tripping over many wires. Either just something simple like a small wireless capable usb-charged infrared box that sits on the monitor or even better some rudimentary built in positional on the headset itself. Im more than happy to use VR as an evening desktop replacement for sit down experiences with as little hassle but as higher fidelity as possible. Perhaps even a 12mpixel 5k screen would be possible ?

 

[bobzdar]

As a first time PCVR buyer Id be happy if a company came along and offered a cheap native 4k/120hz as opposed to upscaled 1440p/60hz like the '4k' Pimax. On top of that simple positional tracking ( lean forward/back L/R and being able to look behind yourself and perhaps a small amount of ducking/height ) without the need for lighthouses nailing to the wall and the threat of tripping over many wires. Either just something simple like a small wireless capable usb-charged infrared box that sits on the monitor or even better some rudimentary built in positional on the headset itself. Im more than happy to use VR as an evening desktop replacement for sit down experiences with as little hassle but as higher fidelity as possible. Perhaps even a 12mpixel 5k screen would be possible ?

That stuff exists or is on the horizon. You can use an old Microsoft Kinect with any of the headsets (Pimax 4k or Oculus DK1/DK2 or any of the android mobile packages) to get 6dof positional tracking and full body tracking. It uses the headset gyros/compass for rotation and the kinect for position, so you get full 6dof. If you want cheap motion controls, you can put a LeapMotion on the front of the headset to get accurate hand tracking, and using the Driver4VR package, you get a steamVR compatible setup that even has full body tracking (for the few games that support that at this point). It's also fairly cheap, a Kinect runs 35-40 bucks, leap motion around 50 bucks and then whatever you can get a pimax for these days. You can also use it with an s8 note/gearVR if you want for 3k res. Pimax has 5k and 8k headsets coming that take 4k input and upscale, or they have a native 8k headset, but you'll need a hell of a gpu to push it. According to Pimax, 4k upscaled to 8k at 90hz is almost indistinguishable from true 8k 90hz and requires almost double the gpu power, so 4k may be the sweet spot...

I have everything (DK1 or GearVR, Leap Motion) except a kinect laying around to do the Driver4VR setup, and I may grab one just to try it out for fun, but it's fairly plug and play with only wires for the headset/Leap and the kinect.

If you have a decent android phone that can run cardboard/gearVR/daydream, you can set up a basic VR system for like $200 that works pretty well with low investment to get a taste for it. If you hunt ebay/craigslist (and have a phone), you can probably do it for $100. That's a pretty low barrier to entry if you have a gaming PC already.

 

[BecauseScience]

Yes, I tend to agree with Carmack that optimization will be getting more and more attention, because CPU/GPUs just can't be expected to improve as much and as fast ("end of Moore's law") so all that work being done on watered down VR is important as it forces you to think in that super optimization mindset and those lessons learned are definitely making their way up to the higher end of things.

I'm not so optimistic about tech transfer. Innovations made in the mobile/standalone platforms won't necessarily be free to migrate to PC VR. The tech can be locked into the walled gardens of Daydream and Oculus. Especially if the technologies are patentable. Google and Facebook won't spend a ton of money on research and then give it away to the competition.

With no new Rift until 2019, I think Oculus is out of the PC game in the long run. There's too much competition emerging the in the space. It'll only get tougher over the next year. By the time Rift 2.0 drops, it'll need crazy specs to be next gen above what's already on the market. Suppose Pimax delivers their 2nd gen sets on time (unlikely in my opinion) there might enough time left for them to produce 3rd gen sets to compete with Rift 2.0. Then there's the LG set which is a big unknown and probably other SteamVR units that have yet to be announced. Where will Windows VR be by that time? It just seems like too much for a 2019 Rift 2.0 to overcome.

I think this is the reason Oculus is trying to lock so much content to their platform via exclusives. They know their competitive advantage won't come from hardware specs in the long run.

 

[Hagrid]

I'm not so optimistic about tech transfer. Innovations made in the mobile/standalone platforms won't necessarily be free to migrate to PC VR. The tech can be locked into the walled gardens of Daydream and Oculus. Especially if the technologies are patentable. Google and Facebook won't spend a ton of money on research and then give it away to the competition.

With no new Rift until 2019, I think Oculus is out of the PC game in the long run. There's too much competition emerging the in the space. It'll only get tougher over the next year. By the time Rift 2.0 drops, it'll need crazy specs to be next gen above what's already on the market. Suppose Pimax delivers their 2nd gen sets on time (unlikely in my opinion) there might enough time left for them to produce 3rd gen sets to compete with Rift 2.0. Then there's the LG set which is a big unknown and probably other SteamVR units that have yet to be announced. Where will Windows VR be by that time? It just seems like too much for a 2019 Rift 2.0 to overcome.

I think this is the reason Oculus is trying to lock so much content to their platform via exclusives. They know their competitive advantage won't come from hardware specs in the long run.

Yeah, 2019 is way too far. I love my Rift, but am ready for the new stuff. I won't get anything until I know it's going to work fully with everything and has good reviews.

 

[GNUse_the_force]

That stuff exists or is on the horizon..

Sounds cool. But as you alluded to yourself there are many 3rd party hardware work arounds, drivers and settings to devices that have to be separately purchased (used). Whilst totally possible ( and Fun to tinker with as you have done ) It would be nice to simply get the 4k/5k-120 headset with one small battery powered wireless charged or wired if preferred cube on your monitor. So when its time to just zone out or have a more contained experience you can just don the headset and be pretty much in your desktop easily swap-able with the desktop monitor experience. The difference being the PPI is much better than current and you still get UP/Down/L/R/Back/Forward motion within the desk width and depth and monitor height (plus a bit extra)

 

[bobzdar]

Sounds cool. But as you alluded to yourself there are many 3rd party hardware work arounds, drivers and settings to devices that have to be separately purchased (used). Whilst totally possible ( and Fun to tinker with as you have done ) It would be nice to simply get the 4k/5k-120 headset with one small battery powered wireless charged or wired if preferred cube on your monitor. So when its time to just zone out or have a more contained experience you can just don the headset and be pretty much in your desktop easily swap-able with the desktop monitor experience. The difference being the PPI is much better than current and you still get UP/Down/L/R/Back/Forward motion within the desk width and depth and monitor height (plus a bit extra)

Yeah, I understand, and that's basically what the new Pimax is. According to them, if you just use the headset you only need a single lighthouse and you can stick that on your computer desk and get full headset tracking. I think it's a really good option if it works out and the displays are what they promise. It'd be a perfect upgrade for Vive owners as they'll already have the lighthouses and controllers.

I'm hoping Oculus doesn't wait too long for the Rift 2, but I can understand why that's a lower priority. They want mass adoption and to get that, you need killer software to go along with the hardware, as opposed to just killer hardware. The hardware just has to be 'good enough' and affordable, which it is on the PC side. Now they need mobile hardware that's 'good enough' and software that will be must-have to move headsets, and that runs both mobile and PC. The niche players don't have those types of goals, so that's where I think you'll see the hardware pushed. That said, I think it'd be a mistake for Oculus to abandon the high end hardware space, they should keep releasing high end hardware at the 800-900 dollar mark every couple of years that gets pushed down to 300-400 and repeat to keep moving things forward.

The more I read about the new Pimax headset, the more I like it. I think it could be a hit if it pans out, which given they were able to bring the 4k headset to market without too much issue, I think the chances are good.

 

[Youn]

Google and Facebook won't spend a ton of money on research and then give it away to the competition.

I was thinking of optimization mostly within game engines and design choices, but of course you're right in regards to hardware and lower-level bits...

 

[GNUse_the_force]

Yeah, I understand, and that's basically what the new Pimax is. According to them, if you just use the headset you only need a single lighthouse and you can stick that on your computer desk and get full headset tracking. I think it's a really good option if it works out and the displays are what they promise.

I can't speak for all PC users, but i suspect that format would be the most widely adopted by PCVR newcomers.

That said, I think it'd be a mistake for Oculus to abandon the high end hardware space, they should keep releasing high end hardware at the 800-900 dollar mark every couple of years that gets pushed down to 300-400 and repeat to keep moving things forward.

Oh i agree, VR needs a Halo product and for the technology trickle down effect to occur.

The more I read about the new Pimax headset, the more I like it. I think it could be a hit if it pans out, which given they were able to bring the 4k headset to market without too much issue, I think the chances are good.

This could be the one that works for the most people .. it's not locked to a store, it offers good resolution, it's cheap enough, it is less hassle than a full room scale setup. I just hope it's ergonomic enough the giant sized '8k' headsets look like something out of lawnmower man.