Rift S

W

westrock2000

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 3, 2005
Messages
9,462
  • $399
  • 1280x1440 @ 80Hz per panel (Rift 1 1080×1200 @ 90Hz)
  • Not AMOLED panels
  • 5 on board camera, No external cameras
  • FOV: Undetermined (but not noticable enough in reviews to be different)
  • New Touch controllers
  • the "rings" on the controllers are above the hands instead of below (no hand smashing protectors anymore ^_^ )
  • Co-made by Lenovo
  • Has a twist lock on the back to adjust the head straps instead of velcro strap
  • speakers instead of headphones (but does have 3.5mm jack), so like the Oculus Go I guess
  • Nose bridge part is supposed to seal out light better

One of the more interesting things being added is "passthrough", which it sounds like it will use the on-board cameras and allow you to see the world around you in black and white without taking off the helmet.

EdcVs0z.jpg


Mzbb7au.jpg
 
Zam15 said:
The HP headset seems like a much better option at least per the specs.
Click to expand...

The HP headset uses the standard WMR controllers which feel like garbage, has a smaller tracked area, and costs $200 more.
 
Zam15 said:
The HP headset seems like a much better option at least per the specs.
Click to expand...

I don’t know what the interoperability is of other headsets, but the whole ecosystem of the Rift is a big plus for me. My 6 year old can use the Rift. That’s a plus for me as a parent.

Again I don’t know how it is, my experience with using the Rift on games it wasn’t supposed to be used on was not pleasant (Bethesda’s Fallout).
 
Nice but not radically improved over the CV1. Probably need new prescription inserts so sitting this one out. Don’t get the pricepoint either. Don’t mind paying a bit more for a solid upgrade. Whatever get’s rid of the screendoor effect will get my attention.
 
Bigc208 said:
Nice but not radically improved over the CV1. Probably need new prescription inserts so sitting this one out. Don’t get the pricepoint either. Don’t mind paying a bit more for a solid upgrade. Whatever get’s rid of the screendoor effect will get my attention.
Click to expand...

I agree, I don't see this as a upgrade to the Rift. You can't even use your existing equipment with it.

I plan to jump in on VR once the Valve Knuckles and a Valve tracker compatible higher res (HP Specs+) headset hits the market.
 
This isn't an upgrade for the Rift at all, it's a side-grade at best. They've cut a lot of really good features out of the mix and are trying to pass this off as an improved "better" Rift which it clearly is not.

I can see why Brendan Iribe, co-founder and former CEO of Oculus, saw the writing on the wall and decided to leave the company back in October.

From TechCrunch back in Oct 2018:
"Iribe and the Facebook executive team had “fundamentally different views on the future of Oculus that grew deeper over time,” and Iribe wasn’t interested in a “race to the bottom” in terms of performance, we are told."

So it comes to pass that Facebook has indeed given up on producing a true "Rift 2" PC VR successor with superior tech and decided instead on this hot mess. Quite sad for VR enthusiasts.

I'm really hoping that Valve's new HMD and Knuckles controller are announced soon.
 
Last edited:
Supercharged_Z06 said:
This isn't an upgrade for the Rift at all, it's a side-grade at best. They've cut a lot of really good features out of the mix and are trying to pass this off as "better". I'm really hoping that Valve's HMD and Knuckles arrive soon.
Click to expand...
What have they actually cut out, though?

The resolution is higher and it eliminates the need for the sensors that have to be installed. Those are the two most important things to improve for most users, it seems. It's not really practical to increase the resolution beyond where this is at, because even a 2080 Ti would struggle to deliver enough frames at even higher resolutions. I don't even understand how anyone can delude themselves into thinking they can drive the silly Pimax ones.
 
RazorWind said:
What have they actually cut out, though?

The resolution is higher and it eliminates the need for the sensors that have to be installed. Those are the two most important things to improve for most users, it seems. It's not really practical to increase the resolution beyond where this is at, because even a 2080 Ti would struggle to deliver enough frames at even higher resolutions. I don't even understand how anyone can delude themselves into thinking they can drive the silly Pimax ones.
Click to expand...

Yes, the resolution is a bit higher, but only just. It's 1280x1440 per eye instead of the Rift's 1080x1200. That's not all that dramatic an increase. The new HP Reverb HMD is sporting 2160×2160 resolution per eye in comparison. Now that would have been a nice resolution bump.

Sure for someone that doesn't own a Rift, this isn't all that bad, but for Rift owners that are true VR enthusiasts and have the needed GPU power to drive VR well, this is definitely NOT an upgrade.

Here are some of the cons as to what they have "cut" from the Rift:

- They are using one LCD panel (instead of 2 OLED displays), so forget having nice, inky blacks. It will provide shades of gray instead.
- No FOV improvements (not a cut, but certainly no gains here)
- 80Hz refresh (The Rift was 90Hz for a reason... 80Hz may not be a big drop, but it is a step backwards)
- No physical IPD adjustment - doing this digitally will be sub-par at best and have far less range - won't be usable by some.
- Won't utilize any of the Rift CV1's hardware tracking controllers or sensors - no backward compatibility as to Touch controllers for those that want to upgrade
- Wholly inferior WMR tracking system - not as accurate, requires a well lit area for use. Rift CV1 worked fine in the dark or when dimly lit.
- No back side tracking - You can move your arms/hands in sweeps behind you that this system simply can't follow - you will lose tracking. Most Rift owners that wanted room scale have/use 3 sensors.
- No high quality headphones included - you have to provide your own and plug them in. So more weight and more fumbling with cables.
- Bulkier/heavier Lenovo WMR based design.

And it costs the same as a Rift all while requiring far less hardware to produce. (No external cameras, stands, sensor cables)
They should have priced this at $299 instead of $399 for what you are getting. The HP Reverb is looking like a much more desirable upgrade choice over the Rift S.

I'll be waiting to see if Valve's HMD does this right and upgrade to that instead.
 
I think you need to wait and see before passing judgment. Something that VR has taught me is that more on paper is not always more in terms of the user experience.

And I defy you to show me a graphics card that can reliably drive a 2160 by 2160 display at 90Hz with enough supersampling to not look pixellated and horrible. At 200% supersampling, you're looking at ~19 megapixels per frame. My 1080 Ti struggles to keep up with my Vive Pro, which at 200% SS is roughly 9.2 megapixels. Less than half. It's not a matter of just being a "true VR enthusiast" and buying a more powerful graphics card. There isn't one fast enough to do that. At any price.
 
RazorWind said:
I think you need to wait and see before passing judgment. Something that VR has taught me is that more on paper is not always more in terms of the user experience.

And I defy you to show me a graphics card that can reliably drive a 2160 by 2160 display at 90Hz with enough supersampling to not look pixellated and horrible. At 200% supersampling, you're looking at ~19 megapixels per frame. My 1080 Ti struggles to keep up with my Vive Pro, which at 200% SS is roughly 9.2 megapixels. Less than half. It's not a matter of just being a "true VR enthusiast" and buying a more powerful graphics card. There isn't one fast enough to do that. At any price.
Click to expand...

Supersampling provides spatial anti-aliasing that just helps make low res VR look a lot better - and if you need 200% SS on your Vive Pro, then you are doing it wrong. I've found 1.6x to 1.7x is more than enough SS on both my Rift and Vive. Going to 2X simply doesn't do anything for me other than to burn up GPU cycles... all with very little if anything to show for it.

As resolution goes up, the need for and the perceived impact of SS really start to go down. With 2160x2160 per eye resolution in an HMD, you simply won't need that level of supersampling to look good. It's comparable to AA use with 2D screens. AA on a 1080 image would be far more impactful/useful than the same AA applied to a 4K image.

I simply reject your statement that 200% supersampling is needed in a high resolution VR display in order to "not look pixellated and horrible." I defy you to show me that this is not the case. :D

Granted I agree with you that the HP Reverb is going to need a much higher-end card to drive it properly, but I doubt if anything even remotely like 200% supersampling will be needed. For those of us that have already invested in very high end GPU hardware, I'm thinking it would drive it just fine, even with some SS applied if desired. (I've got an overclocked/watercooled 2080Ti that I think is up to the task.)

I'd much rather have a HMD with specs like the HP Reverb over the very minor resolution bump offered by the Rift S. Hell with the Rift S, they didn't even bother trying to match resolution specs with the Vive Pro or the Odyssey+.

Valve's HMD is supposedly going to have a per eye resolution which will be a lot higher than the measly 1280x1440 the Rift S is offering. I'm going to wait and see what develops on that front. As I stated in another thread on this topic, the Rift S is a hard pass for me, especially since I am considering upgrading from an existing Rift/Vive setup.
 
I agree with Supercharged_Z06. I have an odyssey plus and with my 1080ti. I run a SS that is higher than the native resolution of the HP Reverb. With them running at the same effective resolution the screen with more physical pixels should look better.
 
I don't think this is aimed at enthusiasts. At the same time, the quest is aimed for the mainstream. This "might" be an entry level enthusiast machine and if it goes down to $299 I would consider getting one. I had the DK2 and have used a vive but I currently don't have an HMD anymore (Dk2 bit the dust). Personally, I might end up with a quest as I can take it with me when we make trips to my parent's house ( they love seeing their grandson!)
 
The Rift S has no business being above $299 and $399 makes zero sense. The Quest is the same price and has higher res OLED and has all the built in hardware to be standalone.

That said I am thinking about getting it just because I hate the 3 sensor setup with cables everywhere and hogging up all the USB. I already have boxed up my Rift that I hardly ever used and put it on craigslist.

1216180241.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: MaZa
like this
That resolution is a major disappointment. The massive shortcoming of the user experience on the CV1 has always been resolution. I'm bummed.
 
I've been waiting for almost 3 years for an upgrade to my CV1. I've spent a fair chunk of money at the Oculus store, when they had good sales. I really, really like my Rift and wanted to get the next iteration of it. I don't mind my 3 sensor setup, as the tracking is fantastic. I play a lot of archery games, and I've read horror stories about WMR headsets not being able to track when you draw your bow. All I wanted was like 20-30 degrees more FOV, and at least a 50% bump in resolution. I would gladly have paid $500 for just a headset from Oculus. Grrrrr!
 
Ugh, another cheap side-grade. Where is the next gen hardware for us enthusiasts? I'm tired of seeing individual pixels.
 
Supercharged_Z06 said:
Yes, the resolution is a bit higher, but only just. It's 1280x1440 per eye instead of the Rift's 1080x1200. That's not all that dramatic an increase. The new HP Reverb HMD is sporting 2160×2160 resolution per eye in comparison. Now that would have been a nice resolution bump.

Sure for someone that doesn't own a Rift, this isn't all that bad, but for Rift owners that are true VR enthusiasts and have the needed GPU power to drive VR well, this is definitely NOT an upgrade.

Here are some of the cons as to what they have "cut" from the Rift:

- They are using one LCD panel (instead of 2 OLED displays), so forget having nice, inky blacks. It will provide shades of gray instead.
- No FOV improvements (not a cut, but certainly no gains here)
- 80Hz refresh (The Rift was 90Hz for a reason... 80Hz may not be a big drop, but it is a step backwards)
- No physical IPD adjustment - doing this digitally will be sub-par at best and have far less range - won't be usable by some.
- Won't utilize any of the Rift CV1's hardware tracking controllers or sensors - no backward compatibility as to Touch controllers for those that want to upgrade
- Wholly inferior WMR tracking system - not as accurate, requires a well lit area for use. Rift CV1 worked fine in the dark or when dimly lit.
- No back side tracking - You can move your arms/hands in sweeps behind you that this system simply can't follow - you will lose tracking. Most Rift owners that wanted room scale have/use 3 sensors.
- No high quality headphones included - you have to provide your own and plug them in. So more weight and more fumbling with cables.
- Bulkier/heavier Lenovo WMR based design.

And it costs the same as a Rift all while requiring far less hardware to produce. (No external cameras, stands, sensor cables)
They should have priced this at $299 instead of $399 for what you are getting. The HP Reverb is looking like a much more desirable upgrade choice over the Rift S.

I'll be waiting to see if Valve's HMD does this right and upgrade to that instead.
Click to expand...

The rift doesn't have inky blanks, they keep the pixels lightly lit to improve response time and reduce mura. The odyssey+ doesn't do that and has nice inky blacks but also has smearing. I don't expect the rgb stripe to be materially different in terms of contrast and black levels to the cv1, but probably not at the level of some of the other amoled headsets. Both are a tradeoff and they're getting better pixel fill and no smearing in exchange for less contrast which is the right move imo.

The tracking is not wmr. They have 5 cameras, not 2. The only untracked area is a place your hands never go, and if you've used one of the wmr headsets with integrated bluetooth, you'll know the tracking is not an issue when the controllers are in camera range.

Don't care about the headphones, the strap based sound by all accounts works well and if it's not good enough I have a set of Bose headphones.

Software ipd wil be an issue if you're on the very edge of current headsets, but I'm square in the middle so it won't matter much and most people won't have an issue. This is really the only actual downgrade I see, though.

The halo setup is more comfortable imo, o+ has it and is more comfortable than the cv1.

I'm a little disappointed in it, but it's a definite step up from the cv1. I was hoping for a wider fov and higher res, 120 ish degrees would have been good enough along with another 20-30% more horizontal pixels.


For reference I had a cv1 for 2 years and currently have an odyssey+ and hp wmr (kids use it for minecraft). Wmr tracking with the built in bluetooth in the o+ is on par with cv1 when in range of the cameras, so I'm not worried at all about the tracking. I like the contrast of the odyssey but the smearing is noticeable in games that take place at night so the less deep blacks but no smearing is a wash imo. If the rgb stripe provides similar clarity and sde elimination to the o+, I'll probably get one just for the better touch controllers, however I don't expect the screen to be quite as good. I'll probably get one to try and then get rid of the hp gen 1 headset.

It's pretty telling that I kept the hp wmr headset over the rift because it meant not having to set up cameras in the family area that the kids play it in. It was fine when it was just in my man cave but once it had to be moved to a different room I wasn't ready to go through the hassle of mounting the cameras again. This tells me oculus made the correct choice to move to inside out and I'm betting it will be really difficult to tell the difference.
 
Dont get why they made the quest higher res vs the s when the s is powered by your PC which in term is more powerful then the quest specs.
 
Occulus/Facebook seems to have positioned the Rift S not so much as to appeal to CV1 owners (potential upgraders), but more to build a larger VR market share by simplifying the equipment and its setup while reducing hardware component costs. I'm still disappointed in what they arrived at with the Rift S as to core VR features. They definitely could have gone a little further as to resolution and FOV increases given where other HMDs are at now.

They also could have simply opted to produce a Quest "S" with extra cameras and a tether to a PC instead and called it a day. The Rift S just feels like a halfhearted attempt to make the Rift CV1 cheaper to sell while not really improving much and gutting some things.
 
alphaqforever247 said:
Dont get why they made the quest higher res vs the s when the s is powered by your PC which in term is more powerful then the quest specs.
Click to expand...
Just some advanced Jedi-level 3d chess brought to you by your friendly Business Analysis personnel
 
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this
Supercharged_Z06 said:
Occulus/Facebook seems to have positioned the Rift S not so much as to appeal to CV1 owners (potential upgraders), but more to build a larger VR market share by simplifying the equipment and its setup while reducing hardware component costs. I'm still disappointed in what they arrived at with the Rift S as to core VR features. They definitely could have gone a little further as to resolution and FOV increases given where other HMDs are at now.

They also could have simply opted to produce a Quest "S" with extra cameras and a tether to a PC instead and called it a day. The Rift S just feels like a halfhearted attempt to make the Rift CV1 cheaper to sell while not really improving much and gutting some things.
Click to expand...

During the interview with Tested, I could have sworn Oculus rep said the plan was to release the S and stop producing the normal Rift.

I also wish I could use my own headphones like I could with the Vive. My noise canceling Bose really helped the immersion. Honestly, though, the Rift headphones are better than I thought. As for the Go, I still wear headphones while using it.
 
Hakaba said:
During the interview with Tested, I could have sworn Oculus rep said the plan was to release the S and stop producing the normal Rift.

I also wish I could use my own headphones like I could with the Vive. My noise canceling Bose really helped the immersion. Honestly, though, the Rift headphones are better than I thought. As for the Go, I still wear headphones while using it.
Click to expand...
Probably just a one second Google search would confirm that yes Oculus has already stopped making the rift and it will be fully replaced by the rift s.
 
also fyi you can remove rift headphones and use your own... I guess this is why there is a rift s... s stands for "simplified" or "stupid" (I mean, stupid easy, not stupid users)
 
Youn said:
also fyi you can remove rift headphones and use your own... I guess this is why there is a rift s... s stands for "simplified" or "stupid" (I mean, stupid easy, not stupid users)
Click to expand...
There is no headphone jack on the Rift so that means running an additional wire to the pc...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Youn
like this
I have a 2080ti so I can run VR at beyond max and have no worries....

So when is the Rift S actually dropping on the store shelf? I will get it from Bestbuy so I can return it if it is shit.

I am not worried about the lack of IPD adjustment or the 10hz lower refresh as long as they worked their magic enough to make the experience better than the Rift Vanilla model I have downstairs with cables and shit running everywhere and unsightly cameras punching through my drop ceiling. Its exciting to have the prospect of inside out roomscale tracking.
 
I checked my ipd and it's 64 so I'm good to go on the rift s... LOL

But yeah soon as Best Buy has it in stock I'm going to grab one. I would really like to sell my rift on here but the cost of shipping probably kill it. No luck on Craigslist right now.
 
misterbobby said:
I checked my ipd and it's 64 so I'm good to go on the rift s... LOL

But yeah soon as Best Buy has it in stock I'm going to grab one. I would really like to sell my rift on here but the cost of shipping probably kill it. No luck on Craigslist right now.
Click to expand...

Yeah I will sell my regular Rift if I like the S.

At any rate I see that the Rift (the one we have now) was released on March 28th. So that is the date I anticipate for this year. So 3 more days. But im not worried about it. I do like my existing rift, but the things I mentioned above this post are what attracts me to the rift s.
 
I personally dont see myself buying the rift s. My current one does all i need it to do. Although passthrough sounds nice. I may get the quest though just to have a portable way to play with while traveling.
 
Not interrested in this even a little.
My Rift CV1 have amazing colors and I doubt S will come even close and I already have 4 sensor setup.
What bothers me is that most probably CV2 won't even support outside tracking anymore... but maybe S can be used with existing sensors. If yes then tracking should be very good.
Hopefully they didn't screw this up
 
XoR_ said:
Not interrested in this even a little.
My Rift CV1 have amazing colors and I doubt S will come even close and I already have 4 sensor setup.
What bothers me is that most probably CV2 won't even support outside tracking anymore... but maybe S can be used with existing sensors. If yes then tracking should be very good.
Hopefully they didn't screw this up
Click to expand...

If you can use external sensors in addition man that would be some high resolution room scale
 
XoR_ said:
Not interrested in this even a little.
My Rift CV1 have amazing colors and I doubt S will come even close and I already have 4 sensor setup.
What bothers me is that most probably CV2 won't even support outside tracking anymore... but maybe S can be used with existing sensors. If yes then tracking should be very good.
Hopefully they didn't screw this up
Click to expand...
Go to the mrtv YouTube channel and look at the review of the Oculus go. That is the same screen that is in the Oculus Rift s and it looks better than the Rift when shows some direct comparisons in that video. The god Rays alone in the original Rift are a fucking nuisance from hell and they are almost completely eliminated on The Rift s. I think all this imaginary nonsense that the Rift s is going to look worse than the current Rift is ridiculous when we already know that the Oculus go has a fantastic screen.
 
here is Go vs Rift vs Vive... (Go and Rift S are supposedly extremely similar)

Untitled.jpg


 
And here is the link for the video I mentioned earlier showing how good the Go screen is compared to the current Rift. As you can see it is much much better overall so there is no need for people to complain or be worried just because it's an LCD. The original Rift looks like garbage compared to the Go screen when it comes to God rays and the Go screen also has much less screen door effect. So overall I'm happy that they put the Go screen in the Rift S.

I think it's around the 17 minute mark when he starts doing the direct screen comparison.

 
  • Like
Reactions: Youn
like this
misterbobby said:
And here is the link for the video I mentioned earlier showing how good the Go screen is compared to the current Rift. As you can see it is much much better overall so there is no need for people to complain or be worried just because it's an LCD. The original Rift looks like garbage compared to the Go screen when it comes to God rays and the Go screen also has much less screen door effect. So overall I'm happy that they put the Go screen in the Rift S.

I think it's around the 17 minute mark when he starts doing the direct screen comparison.

Click to expand...


Eh, that's interesting. Maybe I will give the Rift S a chance then? To be honest I'm also very curious to know how comfy it is - I like doing long sessions when playing fight sims.
 
misterbobby said:
Go to the mrtv YouTube channel and look at the review of the Oculus go. That is the same screen that is in the Oculus Rift s and it looks better than the Rift when shows some direct comparisons in that video. The god Rays alone in the original Rift are a fucking nuisance from hell and they are almost completely eliminated on The Rift s. I think all this imaginary nonsense that the Rift s is going to look worse than the current Rift is ridiculous when we already know that the Oculus go has a fantastic screen.
Click to expand...

Yes, the Go and the Rift S will share the same screen - which is why the Rift S is talked about as being a race to the bottom when it comes to the successor of the original Rift. I wouldn't call the Go a fantastic screen compared to other current HMDs like the Vive Pro or Odyssey Plus, it's just better than what was in the original Rift due to the improved optics and the slightly improved resolution. Hell, even the upcoming Oculus Quest uses a much better screen than the Go/Rift S with its resolution of 2880x1600 compared to the 2560x1440 on the Go/Rift S.

What I don't get is why Oculus decided to go higher end on the upcoming Quest when it comes to the screen/optics, but then decided to do a 180 and drop a lower resolution panel into the Rift S. Why not just use what was In the Quest? My guess is that it's a lot cheaper to produce a single LCD panel and they basically just gave up on trying for the Rift "2" for now, so instead they just outsourced it to Lenovo to produce with the Go's panel/optics slapped into the mix and called it a day.

I have a feeling that the Quest will look a lot better as to screen/optics than the Rift S will as it uses the same improved optics but with a much better/higher resolution panel. It's almost as if they switched the two around and what's in the Quest should have been planned for the the Rift S as well when it comes to screen/optics. We'll just have to wait and see how really different the two will be. Just sucks as the Quest can't be tethered/fed by a PC, so we are stuck with whatever they can pump out graphically from a Snapdragon 835... which isn't a whole lot. I'm still thinking the Rift S will be a side grade. Ever so slightly better resolution/optics, but everything else will pretty much be a downgrade from the Rift if you already own one and have it set up/working.
 
Last edited:
Supercharged_Z06 said:
Yes, the Go and the Rift S will share the same screen - which is why the Rift S is talked about as being a race to the bottom when it comes to the successor of the original Rift. I wouldn't call the Go a fantastic screen compared to other current HMDs like the Vive Pro or Odyssey Plus, it's just better than what was in the original Rift due to the improved optics and the slightly improved resolution. Hell, even the upcoming Oculus Quest uses a much better screen than the Go/Rift S with its resolution of 2880x1600 compared to the 2560x1440 on the Go/Rift S.

What I don't get is why Oculus decided to go higher end on the upcoming Quest when it comes to the screen/optics, but then decided to do a 180 and drop a lower resolution panel into the Rift S. Why not just use what was In the Quest? My guess is that it's a lot cheaper to produce a single LCD panel and they basically just gave up on trying for the Rift "2" for now, so instead they just outsourced it to Lenovo to produce with the Go's panel/optics slapped into the mix and called it a day.

I have a feeling that the Quest will look a lot better as to screen/optics than the Rift S will as it uses the same improved optics but with a much better/higher resolution panel. It's almost as if they switched the two around and what's in the Quest should have been planned for the the Rift S as well when it comes to screen/optics. We'll just have to wait and see how really different the two will be. Just sucks as the Quest can't be tethered/fed by a PC, so we are stuck with whatever they can pump out graphically from a Snapdragon 835... which isn't a whole lot. I'm still thinking the Rift S will be a side grade. Ever so slightly better resolution/optics, but everything else will pretty much be a downgrade from the Rift if you already own one and have it set up/working.
Click to expand...

Carmack has stated (in the last couple of days) that they're working on being able to tether the quest. I'm going to wait for a definitive update on that before purchasing another headset. Right now the new hp headset is looking like the one to get.
 
bobzdar said:
Carmack has stated (in the last couple of days) that they're working on being able to tether the quest. I'm going to wait for a definitive update on that before purchasing another headset. Right now the new hp headset is looking like the one to get.
Click to expand...
If your main concern is gaming then you would be a fool to get the HP Reverb. Focusing on just resolution is ridiculous when it's the tracking and how you interact with the game using the controller that matters. The HP uses the original Windows mixed reality tracking system which is pure garbage compared to what you would have on the Rift S. And after using the Oculus touch controllers there's no way I want to use anything else for gaming in VR on the PC.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top