So, I got an Oculus Rift dev kit...

Killa|3yte

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 22, 2002
Messages
2,266
Just curious if anyone on the forums has one?

I'm kinda bummed to report that my first 3-4 hours with the unit have not just been a letdown, it's been a very uncomfortable experience.

The motion tracking works well, and it's pretty uncanny to strap it on for the first time and look around. After that though, things went downhill pretty quickly.

The resolution is completely unusable. Not only is it half of 720p (one half for each eye), but the distortion shader makes it so that only a portion of those few pixels are being used for the image. The consumer version will likely be 1080p, so twice as many pixels will help, but after trying it, I think either 2x screens or at least 1x1440p screen will be needed.

My wife and I both had similar experiences with the motion sickness (using this term broadly). While you're wearing it, the experience may be mildly uncomfortable, but once you take the unit off, that's when the nausea and migraine hit. I haven't been wearing them for about an hour and I'm still feeling extremely unwell from trying to play Half-Life 2 for 30 minutes. This was surprising to me as I've been using nVidia 3D Vision with high depth settings for a long time now. I think the discomfort stems from the motion, not the 3D effect.

Anyway, I'm still wanting to believe in this technology, but I'm feeling a little more pessimistic as to whether or not their latest iteration will turn it into a usable product, at least for me.
 

sharknice

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 12, 2012
Messages
2,669
Just curious if anyone on the forums has one?

I'm kinda bummed to report that my first 3-4 hours with the unit have not just been a letdown, it's been a very uncomfortable experience.

The motion tracking works well, and it's pretty uncanny to strap it on for the first time and look around. After that though, things went downhill pretty quickly.

The resolution is completely unusable. Not only is it half of 720p (one half for each eye), but the distortion shader makes it so that only a portion of those few pixels are being used for the image. The consumer version will likely be 1080p, so twice as many pixels will help, but after trying it, I think either 2x screens or at least 1x1440p screen will be needed.

My wife and I both had similar experiences with the motion sickness (using this term broadly). While you're wearing it, the experience may be mildly uncomfortable, but once you take the unit off, that's when the nausea and migraine hit. I haven't been wearing them for about an hour and I'm still feeling extremely unwell from trying to play Half-Life 2 for 30 minutes. This was surprising to me as I've been using nVidia 3D Vision with high depth settings for a long time now. I think the discomfort stems from the motion, not the 3D effect.

Anyway, I'm still wanting to believe in this technology, but I'm feeling a little more pessimistic as to whether or not their latest iteration will turn it into a usable product, at least for me.

The newer dev kits are 1080p which is a lot better, but I think they said they are aiming for even higher resolution. The newest kits are also low persistence so there is way less motion blur, and they also have a lot less latency on the head tracking, so that would probably fix the motion part for you too.

I'm waiting for the retail version because I don't plan on doing any development for it.
 

Spazturtle

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 4, 2013
Messages
1,526
Just curious if anyone on the forums has one?

I'm kinda bummed to report that my first 3-4 hours with the unit have not just been a letdown, it's been a very uncomfortable experience.

The motion tracking works well, and it's pretty uncanny to strap it on for the first time and look around. After that though, things went downhill pretty quickly.

The resolution is completely unusable. Not only is it half of 720p (one half for each eye), but the distortion shader makes it so that only a portion of those few pixels are being used for the image. The consumer version will likely be 1080p, so twice as many pixels will help, but after trying it, I think either 2x screens or at least 1x1440p screen will be needed.

My wife and I both had similar experiences with the motion sickness (using this term broadly). While you're wearing it, the experience may be mildly uncomfortable, but once you take the unit off, that's when the nausea and migraine hit. I haven't been wearing them for about an hour and I'm still feeling extremely unwell from trying to play Half-Life 2 for 30 minutes. This was surprising to me as I've been using nVidia 3D Vision with high depth settings for a long time now. I think the discomfort stems from the motion, not the 3D effect.

Anyway, I'm still wanting to believe in this technology, but I'm feeling a little more pessimistic as to whether or not their latest iteration will turn it into a usable product, at least for me.

This is a dev unit. It is for developing games. It is not meant to be any where need good enough for general use.

The current version Crystal Cove that is not yet public is 1080p and has lots of new anti-motion sickness features.

But for the dev unit motion sickness doesn't matter as it is meant to be used for games development and not general use.

Sorry but is a bleeding edge tech development unit not a consumer product.

In fact you have to tick a box that says "I understand this hardware is intended for developers and it is not a consumer product." on the order page.
 

DarkStryke

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 19, 2001
Messages
1,391
You have the first general release devkit, it's old tech with many flaws that was put out strictly for people to develop with.
 

Killa|3yte

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 22, 2002
Messages
2,266
I totally understand. I don't regret buying the unit. I'm just more skeptical now that I've had a hands on with it. That said, I'm hoping they are able to iron out the motion issues.
 
Joined
Mar 15, 2002
Messages
2,482
I totally understand. I don't regret buying the unit. I'm just more skeptical now that I've had a hands on with it. That said, I'm hoping they are able to iron out the motion issues.

have you not kept up with it then? I can understand people expressing their opinions, but all the things you listed are pretty well known and they even warned people about this stuff.

It's a dev kit for development... period. This was never meant to be a consumer product at the point it was released.

It's like a game in alpha, that someone made just so other people could help develop the game. All the while telling people this is nothing like what the beta will be, and not even on the same engine.
 

Killa|3yte

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 22, 2002
Messages
2,266
have you not kept up with it then? I can understand people expressing their opinions, but all the things you listed are pretty well known and they even warned people about this stuff.

It's a dev kit for development... period. This was never meant to be a consumer product at the point it was released.

It's like a game in alpha, that someone made just so other people could help develop the game. All the while telling people this is nothing like what the beta will be, and not even on the same engine.

I've been following it very closely! I was well aware of the issues. The purpose of this thread was not to whine about the state of OR. The purpose was to serve as a warning to those who might be thinking about ordering a dev kit thinking it might be "good but not great".
 

DPI

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 20, 2013
Messages
12,053
My experience was just the opposite - I borrowed my friend's first gen dev unit and it was like I was INSIDE of Borderlands, inside of Fyrestone. And I was able to play many hours without discomfort. This was with the VIREio driver - and I found proper calibration was paramount to a good experience. Unfortunately the dev Rift is nowhere near plug'nplay, but understandably so. Left4Dead2, Dishonored, Portal2, Skyrim were all excellent with the Rift as well. I also played a few supported games with the VorpX drivers. I came away from my time with the unit ready to plop down up to $2000 for a finalized consumer version, I felt that strongly about it.

So in the end I suppose prototype hardware is going to remain hit-and-miss, and your experience is one experience. You mentioned nothing about drivers so I wonder if you were running an optimal setup (proper drivers, proper calibration). FWIW, I never played HL2 on the Rift but back in circa 2007 when I played HL2 it was the one game that made me sick playing on just a regular monitor and I never figured out why nor did I finish the game (I know, I know). HL2 is the only game that's even given me motion sickness on a regular monitor.

On the bright side you could always sell your unit and wait out a consumer version - there seems to be perpetual demand for them on ebay. Sorry your experience didn't work out and I wouldn't let it sour you on the technology going forward.
 
Last edited:

Thuleman

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 13, 2004
Messages
5,833
I'm kinda bummed to report that my first 3-4 hours with the unit have not just been a letdown, it's been a very uncomfortable experience.

My experience was just the opposite - I borrowed my friend's first gen dev unit and it was like I was INSIDE of Borderlands, inside of Fyrestone. And I was able to play many hours without discomfort.

This really highlights the issue with the Rift. After 2 years and close to 80 million dollars the thing is not consumer ready and when it will be it will still be very polarizing between the people who will be fine wearing it and those who will put it on and hate it immediately.

I consider myself a hardcore PC gamer and you couldn't pay me to use it, same as I don't ever use headphones.

It's also completely unclear what will happen to one's vision when one has to focus on something that's ~1 inch away from one's eye for hours at a time. And don't give me the whole "you are supposed to take a 15 minute break every hour", no one does that, people play for hours at a time and I simply cannot imagine that it's good for one's eyes to have to keep focusing on something that's so close to the eyes for such a long period of time.
 

King Icewind

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jan 17, 2008
Messages
5,444
I think you need to try something else other than HL2. That game is the pretty much the only one that makes me so sick. Others say the exact same thing too, so it's not just me (Google it). I can't imagine playing it on the rift too.
 
Last edited:

Climber

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 27, 2007
Messages
5,283
I've been following it very closely! I was well aware of the issues. The purpose of this thread was not to whine about the state of OR. The purpose was to serve as a warning to those who might be thinking about ordering a dev kit thinking it might be "good but not great".

Did you buy it for development or thinking you could get a beta unit and play your games before everyone else?
 

shifty68

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 14, 2011
Messages
2,186
IMO the whole motion sickness complaint it kinda moot. if you use the OR long enough you will get used to it.

I had a similar experience when i started using eyefinity, I got crazy motion sickness and bad headaches, but after a while of toughing it out it went away. (I think that part of my brain died;)) I think its just something we aren't used to so it affects us differently.
 

wonderfield

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 11, 2011
Messages
7,396
It's also completely unclear what will happen to one's vision when one has to focus on something that's ~1 inch away from one's eye for hours at a time.
Nothing at all. The lenses push the focal point to infinity.
 

Killa|3yte

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 22, 2002
Messages
2,266
Did you buy it for development or thinking you could get a beta unit and play your games before everyone else?

Hah! I'm surprised to read this sort of chide on [H]. I did not plan on developing games for it, but consider myself an enthusiast, like many people on these forums.

IMO the whole motion sickness complaint it kinda moot. if you use the OR long enough you will get used to it.

I had a similar experience when i started using eyefinity, I got crazy motion sickness and bad headaches, but after a while of toughing it out it went away. (I think that part of my brain died;)) I think its just something we aren't used to so it affects us differently.

Perhaps! I was just really caught off-guard by the severity of the motion-sickness (again, using this term liberally; it was more head than stomach). Based on past experience, I didn't think I was capable of that kind of motion sickness.
 

wonderfield

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 11, 2011
Messages
7,396
You can be mostly unsusceptible to motion sickness yet very susceptible to simulator sickness and vice versa.
 

zamardii

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 22, 2004
Messages
3,106
Anyway, I'm still wanting to believe in this technology, but I'm feeling a little more pessimistic as to whether or not their latest iteration will turn it into a usable product, at least for me.

...you are basing this on a DEV kit. It is made so developers can make sure their games will work on it. It's not meant to impress you as a end-user agreement.

Why did you even buy one? If it wasn't to develop for it, then you wasted quite a bit of money. The final product will be great and you're gonna feel pretty stupid for buying the dev kit.
 

Spazturtle

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 4, 2013
Messages
1,526
I have spoken to several people who when using the dev unit got motion sickness about the new Crystal Cove unit, they say it eliminates almost all the motion sickness.
 

theNoid

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 23, 2003
Messages
7,441
Devkits have been widely known and documented as sub HD. Newer devkits are higher res and consumer is likely going to be 1080p+. Personally for this reason alone, and to preserve the magic of that first impression I decided to wait.

I didn't want a sub HD, 1.0 devkit to ruin that experience for me.
 

Climber

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 27, 2007
Messages
5,283
Hah! I'm surprised to read this sort of chide on [H]. I did not plan on developing games for it, but consider myself an enthusiast, like many people on these forums.

Not really chiding you, but I find your complaint highly subjective. You bought a piece of beta equipment for a specific purpose, i.e. developers, and expected it to work like the newer consumer release versions then complain about it.
 

BladeVenom

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jun 29, 2005
Messages
7,707
You should have waited for the higher resolution kit, unless you're in the middle of developing a game and needed it now.
 

castun

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 23, 2010
Messages
2,637
I've wondered about the motion sickness thing, I've never experienced it in games except in a few rare instances with older games, and in console-ish games that have a low FOV.

Nothing at all. The lenses push the focal point to infinity.

I think he just hates on it because it came from a Kickstarter project TBH. :D
 

Intel_Hydralisk

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 6, 2005
Messages
4,743
I have the dev kit. My general experience is that it has a lot of potential. The hardware is probably not where it needs to be, but that's understandable for all the reasons other folks have chimed in on.

My main concern is actually on the software side. The tech demos that others have created functionally prove that the 3D effect/immersion is there. What I'm not thrilled with are the actual games. I feel like it's just a big blown up 2D image rather than actual 3D (for example, in L4D2).

There was some slight discomfort for me, but nothing terrible.
 

acerbic

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 13, 2013
Messages
343
I've wondered about the motion sickness thing, I've never experienced it in games except in a few rare instances with older games, and in console-ish games that have a low FOV.



I think he just hates on it because it came from a Kickstarter project TBH. :D

There's a bit of latency, no depth tracking, and of course the lower resolution in the current kits. That's a recipe for motion sickness for some people, especially in really fast games.

Then again, the dev kit isn't retail. It's just a fun toy now. I love it, vastly more impressive than 4k, multiple monitors, or 3d.
 

wonderfield

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 11, 2011
Messages
7,396
What I'm not thrilled with are the actual games. I feel like it's just a big blown up 2D image rather than actual 3D (for example, in L4D2).
I can't quite relate. Are you referring to how it looks or to the general lack of world interactivity? 'Cause I feel like the actual visual depiction of 3D on the Rift is as good as it gets.
 

Intel_Hydralisk

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 6, 2005
Messages
4,743
I can't quite relate. Are you referring to how it looks or to the general lack of world interactivity? 'Cause I feel like the actual visual depiction of 3D on the Rift is as good as it gets.

It's not an issue with the Rift, it's an issue with how it integrates with games. the "3D solution" for a lot of games is just plain flat. Like I said in my post, there are tech demos that demonstrate truly how immersive the 3D can be - but simply making the Rift "work" with a game isn't enough to reproduce this. My example was playing L4D2. It was mostly a flat world. I'm not familiar with exactly what's needed to make a game 'truly 3D', I imagine it's the same level of effort as current 3D solutions on 3D monitors etc. Not being an expert in that and only experiencing what current games have to offer on the Rift - I'm frankly not impressed by the games that were simply modded to 'work' with the Rift. That's not sufficient. The tech demos really do demonstrate the potential, and that's the level I'm looking for in games.
 

Youn

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jan 22, 2007
Messages
5,862
I'm now more excited about retinal projection:

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/avegantglyph/a-mobile-personal-theater-with-built-in-premium-au

Pretty clear wins over oculus according to reviews. Aside from less motion tracking and field of view... there seems to be no complaints about resolution, fatigue or screen flicker/refresh-rate. Also, no need for glasses if you normally would need them. Is it just too new/untested or expensive? Anyone know their thoughts on this tech?

Getting rid of screens and shooting beams into the retina has always seemed like the way to go, and it's nearly here NOW. Maybe not in this package (I could do away with the premium headphone thing, and the lack of immersion (which is by design BTW, so you can see a bit of the real world if you look down)) but projection seems like the new thing, better than any display...

...or am I dead wrong? :p
 

wonderfield

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 11, 2011
Messages
7,396
I believe the problem with this technique is that you're very limited in terms of how you can move your eyes. In a conventional HMD, you still want eye-tracking for certain things, but it isn't a major visual problem.
 

acerbic

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 13, 2013
Messages
343
I'm now more excited about retinal projection:

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/avegantglyph/a-mobile-personal-theater-with-built-in-premium-au

Pretty clear wins over oculus according to reviews. Aside from less motion tracking and field of view... there seems to be no complaints about resolution, fatigue or screen flicker/refresh-rate. Also, no need for glasses if you normally would need them. Is it just too new/untested or expensive? Anyone know their thoughts on this tech?

Getting rid of screens and shooting beams into the retina has always seemed like the way to go, and it's nearly here NOW. Maybe not in this package (I could do away with the premium headphone thing, and the lack of immersion (which is by design BTW, so you can see a bit of the real world if you look down)) but projection seems like the new thing, better than any display...

...or am I dead wrong? :p

All the complaints are from the generation 1 dev kit and using it on games that haven't been optimized for it. The reason you see a lot of them is a ton of people (myself included) bought the dev kit to game with and support the project. Up till CES, pretty much everything you heard was on Gen 1.

Resolution, sickness, latency, are all gone on the sets they are showing now. With 4k per eye planned down the line.
 

thekamikazepr

Limp Gawd
Joined
Nov 2, 2013
Messages
152
Crystal cove kit 4 in existence a few weeks back, helps with motion sickness (less lag). And higher res
 

castun

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 23, 2010
Messages
2,637
I believe the problem with this technique is that you're very limited in terms of how you can move your eyes. In a conventional HMD, you still want eye-tracking for certain things, but it isn't a major visual problem.

Yeah, exactly what I was thinking too. That would be like being forced to look at the center of your screen and never being able to look away.
 

Brules

Gawd
Joined
Mar 27, 2000
Messages
734
I'm now more excited about retinal projection:

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/avegantglyph/a-mobile-personal-theater-with-built-in-premium-au

Pretty clear wins over oculus according to reviews. Aside from less motion tracking and field of view... there seems to be no complaints about resolution, fatigue or screen flicker/refresh-rate. Also, no need for glasses if you normally would need them. Is it just too new/untested or expensive? Anyone know their thoughts on this tech?

Getting rid of screens and shooting beams into the retina has always seemed like the way to go, and it's nearly here NOW. Maybe not in this package (I could do away with the premium headphone thing, and the lack of immersion (which is by design BTW, so you can see a bit of the real world if you look down)) but projection seems like the new thing, better than any display...

...or am I dead wrong? :p

The retinal project thing is very "Ready Player One"'ish.

If any of you have NOT read that book yet, do so NOW!!!!!!!!!!
 

Soopy

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 18, 2007
Messages
164
It's not an issue with the Rift, it's an issue with how it integrates with games. the "3D solution" for a lot of games is just plain flat. Like I said in my post, there are tech demos that demonstrate truly how immersive the 3D can be - but simply making the Rift "work" with a game isn't enough to reproduce this. My example was playing L4D2. It was mostly a flat world. I'm not familiar with exactly what's needed to make a game 'truly 3D', I imagine it's the same level of effort as current 3D solutions on 3D monitors etc. Not being an expert in that and only experiencing what current games have to offer on the Rift - I'm frankly not impressed by the games that were simply modded to 'work' with the Rift. That's not sufficient. The tech demos really do demonstrate the potential, and that's the level I'm looking for in games.

I agree. That's why it's going to be extremely important for Oculus to have many "made for VR" games available at launch. That's also why EVE: Valkyrier will be shipped with the Rift. Hopefully we'll be seeing more major publishers announcing their own polished made for VR games this year.
 

Youn

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jan 22, 2007
Messages
5,862
Resolution, sickness, latency, are all gone on the sets they are showing now.
I only hear that it's an improvement, and that retinal projection is still like "omg, this is so easy on the eyes"

I'm really interested to trying both out myself, but it'd be neat to see long-term studies on both solutions. I get that Oculus is cheaper and may be totally fine with most people, but the other tech is interesting too, if only for comparison purposes.
 

acerbic

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 13, 2013
Messages
343
I only hear that it's an improvement, and that retinal projection is still like "omg, this is so easy on the eyes"

I'm really interested to trying both out myself, but it'd be neat to see long-term studies on both solutions. I get that Oculus is cheaper and may be totally fine with most people, but the other tech is interesting too, if only for comparison purposes.

The Oculus is fine for everybody unless you wear glasses. The issues were with the generation one hardware which was more proof of concept than anything else. Nobody has had issues with the new sets, you just can't get your hands on them yet.
 

Soopy

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 18, 2007
Messages
164
The Oculus is fine for everybody unless you wear glasses. The issues were with the generation one hardware which was more proof of concept than anything else. Nobody has had issues with the new sets, you just can't get your hands on them yet.

Even people who wear glasses can receive a pretty good experience. The only downside is it will decrease the FOV a little bit.
 

acerbic

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 13, 2013
Messages
343
Even people who wear glasses can receive a pretty good experience. The only downside is it will decrease the FOV a little bit.

If you have money to be buying VR headsets you can afford a set of contacts ;)
 
Joined
Oct 31, 2001
Messages
2,163
I'm now more excited about retinal projection:

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/avegantglyph/a-mobile-personal-theater-with-built-in-premium-au

Pretty clear wins over oculus according to reviews. Aside from less motion tracking and field of view... there seems to be no complaints about resolution, fatigue or screen flicker/refresh-rate. Also, no need for glasses if you normally would need them. Is it just too new/untested or expensive? Anyone know their thoughts on this tech?

Getting rid of screens and shooting beams into the retina has always seemed like the way to go, and it's nearly here NOW. Maybe not in this package (I could do away with the premium headphone thing, and the lack of immersion (which is by design BTW, so you can see a bit of the real world if you look down)) but projection seems like the new thing, better than any display...

...or am I dead wrong? :p

i'm pretty pumped about both sets of tech. personally, i don't see myself using full VR on a lot of occasions. however, the "natural" personal 3d display from the glyph is very appealing. oculus is aiming for a $300 price tag but i bet it will be more along the lines of $500 since they keep increasing hardware specs. I believe the Glyph goal is $500 so we might see comparable prices. From what i've read the glyph team has finalized their hardware they just need to work on shrinking it and work on aesthetics. I think both teams have a december 2014 goal in mind but i'm not sure either will make it.
 

ServerKing

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 11, 2005
Messages
1,730
If you have money to be buying VR headsets you can afford a set of contacts

Some people dont like shoving there fingers in there eyes hence they wear glasses.
 

Lames.

Gawd
Joined
Nov 17, 2007
Messages
736
Some people dont like shoving there fingers in there eyes hence they wear glasses.

^This

I find it extremely gross when someone touches their eye ball. Wife has contacts and when she takes them out at night when I am brushing my teeth I have to look away. I cannot even stand touching my own eye.

Just a personal thing.
 

acerbic

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 13, 2013
Messages
343
Some people dont like shoving there fingers in there eyes hence they wear glasses.

Well then... no VR for you for a long time. Or, some nice chap will create glasses to fit in them, and because it's a smaller amount of people charge a few hundred a pair and get rich.
 
Top