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

On another note that just hit me... 3D + VR?... Could be an experience worth trying.
 
Dekoth-E- said:
VR will revolutionize lots of things, this we agree on.

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

Mainstream gaming isn't one of them and anyone who believes that is delusional. Not going to rehash the argument why as anyone not in denial already understands it. As far as mainstream gaming goes, VR is no different then 3d tv.
Click to expand...

You just wait and see. Nintendo hasn't shown off their Virtua Boy U yet! :D
 
steakman1971 said:
I really want this tech to work and not cause motion sickness. I've tried several of the Oculus Rift dev kits - the effect is incredible. I don't think it's a fair comparison to 3D TV at all.
Click to expand...

Anyone saying "it'll be no different than 3DTV" is really just saying "I've never tried an HMD so I have no clue what I'm talking about".

If you haven’t tried it, you really don’t understand. Even the crappy old DK1 Rift and a demo where you just look around a room (you couldn’t move), I brought it into work, and my co-workers were all floored. It was usually mouth wide open followed by a big smile with a few "holy shit". Some of these people had been very cynical about VR. The feeling that you are someplace else is just…something that you haven't experienced until you've tried.
 
Ducman69 said:
The Gear VR does list that it uses the Note 4 screen, so 2560x1440 @ 60hz... and honestly I think that's as high resolution as you'd even WANT to go since your computer still needs to keep a framerate above 60fps so it feels smooth as you're swinging your head around. Any higher resolution and it'd really narrow down who has a powerful enough machine to get a good experience out of it.

http://www.samsung.com/global/microsite/gearvr/gearvr_specs.html
Click to expand...

Oculus uses AMOLED screens to reduce latency, and Samsung is pretty much the only source for AMOLED. They must have cut a deal to share their software with Samsung in order to have a source for screens.

The problem with resolution is the current 3D implementation with split screen and lenses. I can hold my S5 right up to my face and I see no pixels. In the DK2 (which I think uses the same screen) an image is rendered for each eye on half of the screen, then focused and magnified with lenses to occupy the field of vision. This makes the image pixellated and gives me a mild headache.

The screens need a big leap in resolution or they need to develop a different method of getting the images to each eye, like using 2 physically screens.
 
jfreund said:
Don't worry - it's not coming to your XtrdStation in this generation. MS and Sony have to get 1080p 60fps working first, then they can start worrying about implementing the power needed to run VR.
Click to expand...
How much power does it take to run the latest games on a pair of 1200x1080 displays at 90 Hz? That's a big ask, even for the Master Race crowd.

Like I said, this tech only appeals to those elite nerds with a couple grand to spend on toys and a willingness to don a ridiculous doodad on their dome. It's not within the financial reach of mainstream consumers, nor do any mainstream gamers want to wear junk on their head.

Mainstream gamers want to chill out in the living room and play Madden and FPSes on their 55 inch TV with friends, while enjoying a beer and eating a delicious pizza. Not sit isolated at a desk playing a F2P Valve game, while wearing some strange device on their head that's hooked up to an expensive SLI'd gaming rig.

This device appeals only to Internet dwelling Valve fanboys - just like every other product that company makes. It's made by wealthy Seattle technocrats, for wealthy Seattle technocrats.
 
DPI said:
Serious question, do you immediately get excited when you see a VR thread so you can copy/paste the exact same comment about "herp derp 3DTV failed?"
Click to expand...
Show me where in my post history I've made a similar comment, please.

Bottom line, people aren't going to wear things on their face to play a video game. Just like people refused to wear things on their face to watch a movie.

3DTV panels are affordable, 3D Blu Ray players are affordable, 3D movies are available in droves on Amazon. Yet 3D was a complete failure, as no one wanted to wear glasses

Now you and the rest of the Valve cult are claiming that a bulky head-mounted device that requires an expensive, assuredly multi-GPU based gaming rig to drive it's dual 90 Hz HD displays is going to "revolutionize" gaming? Who on Earth is going to buy such a device? The same people clamoring for a Linux gaming console no doubt. AKA, no one.

You are completely delusional.
 
Youn said:
Are people lying when they say they enjoy the experience?
Click to expand...
We're not talking about VR being enjoyable. We're talking about it's viability in a mainstream consumer environment.

Again, and this is the entire crux of my argument - no one beyond the most elite of basement dwelling nerd is going to want to wear something on their head.
 
Youn said:
Are people lying when they say they enjoy the experience?
Click to expand...

I've actually done the VR demo at Valve.

That immersion and "presence" you always read about in VR articles is the real deal. The most jarring thing with the demo is that I couldn't see my arms when I reached out in front of me, that's how immediately convincing the experience was.

Like any platform, good software is what will determine whether or not the hardware takes off. We'll see the applications people figure out, but I know that the demos and experiments Valve had were cool as all hell.
 
Until the pixel density is 500 or more and the resolution is 4K I just don't find it appealing. I tried the most current Oculus available to the public and it has some ways to go before its ready.

At the very least let everyone else be the test monkey's for the first generation for public release. However this will get Oculus going in a big way , no longer waiting another 2 years for public release. We're going to get enough VR to choke a horse but hopefully just one will be good enough.

I think the Holo lens stuff is more impressive and much less invasive then strapping a glorified monitor with tracking onto your head.
 
crusty_juggler said:
The only people interested in VR are the usual suspects of elite, childless PC gaming nerds with money to burn. VR isn't on the radar of mainstream consumers.
Click to expand...

Somehow you've been here over a year without realizing you're on a site mostly targeted at and populated by "elite, childless PC gaming nerds with money to burn."
 
Youn said:
Not sure what you mean. All content in VR is inherently 3D.

Also:



HL3 confirmed, by Al?
Click to expand...

this will blow your mind then... Valves GDC conference is at... 3:00pm on 3/3/15
 
GaryJohnson said:
Somehow you've been here over a year without realizing you're on a site mostly targeted at and populated by "elite, childless PC gaming nerds with money to burn."
Click to expand...
I am an elite, childless PC gaming nerd. Although I do not have money to burn.

You seem to be conflating my comment about the mainstream market viability of a VR headset with confusion as to [H]'s user base.
 
Laugh. Only problem is work with someone has both eyes working. I only have one eye to see from so have no effect for me like 3d movies. VR is great technology but rather not have to wear it on my forehead.
 
Night_Hawk-19 said:
Laugh. Only problem is work with someone has both eyes working. I only have one eye to see from so have no effect for me like 3d movies. VR is great technology but rather not have to wear it on my forehead.
Click to expand...

been told this looks 3D to people that only have vision out of one eye

Afkkhrx.gif
 
Dam, with one eye closed, those guns really do look like its popping out of the screen.
 
That is why I never worried about 3d or VR. Myopic Amblyopia, my vision is 20-20 in one eye, 20-2500 in the other. Drives me nuts that all the movies I want to see on the big Imax screen here are all 3d, and I cant watch it. That Bad Boys pic did look truly 3d to me though.
 
in terms of the market for VR, it is going to initially be focused around gamers since that is the market most receptive to this VR at the moment

expanding beyond that is up to Valve, Facebook, and whoever else attempts to break into the market to figure out, but that is not my concern since my primary interest with Valve & Oculus is VR for gaming

assuming the hardware is up to snuff, then the next thing that needs to happen are killer apps instead of demos or hacks to get existing games to work with VR
 
This stuff is going to be like Google Glass it will last for a while but never take off then stop development due to lack of interest.
 
crusty_juggler said:
We're not talking about VR being enjoyable. We're talking about it's viability in a mainstream consumer environment.

Again, and this is the entire crux of my argument - no one beyond the most elite of basement dwelling nerd is going to want to wear something on their head.
Click to expand...

People that are that hung up on their appearance won't do it anyway. They won't do it until it is the cool and "in" thing to do.

You can make the same argument against headphones.
No idea why people walk around with huge gauky 70s style headphones that weight 5 lbs; but they do.
Do they sound better than lightweight ear buds? Definitely. So in this case the pursuit for fidelity outweighs the inconvenience.
Really the same here; it is worth the experience.
Nobody is going to walking around in public with VR goggles on. Likely the primary adopters will be gamer who want the immersion of the experience. And this will be a hell of a lot of people.

Lets just take one example. World of Warcraft. In 2010 they had 12 million registered users. That number has dropped to around 7.4 million because there are dozens of other like gaming experiences and many gamers have moved on.

Just consider the people that play this game regularly. This is a large part of their life. Who WOULDN'T want to take it to the next level and have the feel of actually being IN THE GAME not just a long for the ride.

Keep in mind what is hitting the market this year is just the first iteration of modern VR.
These are the first ones that provide a real convincing experience; not just a hack as previous ones. Later generations of this tech will raise the bar. Higher resolutions, more accurate position tracking, etc. I really think in conjunction with VR will be MS connectx type tek that will locate your body, hand, head, arms, etc in real time.
I think a popular accessory will be a guns, weapons, used in team based games, so you can be the person and feel you have a real M14 in your hand. Look down and see the gun, position it and look down the iron sights. In reality this will be pink or orange plastic but your hands and muscles get the feed back of holding the real weapon just like the VR is telling your brain. Say a broadsword is your weapon of choice in the dungeons you are in. Have the model scaled and 3D printed so you can hold the exact one in your hands as you play. You run your fingers over the embedded runes in the blade and feel the impressions of the letters.
Hmm, quite a thought.


I mentioned this before but I really see a revolution in home video. If you had a camera that could shoot high resolution stereo video with a wide field if view; playing it back on your VR gear puts you THERE. What old man wouldn't want to relive watching his kids play in the sprinkler in the front yard on a summer day long past. And then to hear his wife voice, and see her young and beautiful again.
The promise of this tech is not to passively view it; but to put you in the same Adirondack chair you sat in decades before and relive the experience again and again.
This may sound fantastic and improbable but if you consider what we take for granted now was really fantastic and improbable a few years ago.
 
Megalith said:
Can someone tell me how any of these things are going to be comfortable to wear. Has anyone who has designed or reported on them actually looked at the fucking things.
Click to expand...

GMcDougal said:
Just because they look big and bulky doesnt mean it cant be comfortable to wear.
Click to expand...

They're not comfortable at all, but it's like wearing ski goggles: you don't really notice when you're skiing.

ManofGod said:
No thanks, I do not prefer motion sickness and headaches. (Motion blur is a major cause of that.)
Click to expand...

Blanked OLED displays like that in the Oculus Rift and presumably this one don't have motion blur.
 
The #1 thing that made me sick with the Rift was mind/body disconnect. When I would play HL2 and turn around while sitting in my chair I'd instantly get woozy. Resolution simply gave you some eyestrain and the latency was non-existent since Oculus hit it out of the park on the 1st try. But man anything that involved running around was a vomit fest. The only games I could play sitting down were sims, racing and simple stuff.

However when I stood out of my chair and used my whole body to turn around things got interesting. The sickness immediately ceased and it also felt much more immersive. Getting caught up in the cables and not being able to really walk very far weren't deal breakers but need to be addressed. The new Rift is covered in MoCap dots so that should really lock in that feeling when standing since now you can duck and roll your head around. Every subtle movement your hade makes in elevation will translate perfectly.

I still think a battery operated device is the only true option, aka the Samsung VR thing with a Note 4. Havent tried one yet and I'd be shocked if the gyro's in that thing are as sensitive as the rift to remove every shred of latency but whatever, if it works it works. Being disconnect and able to move around in an empty room, or use the camera to augment reality (think complete 3d world overlay) so you dont run into tree's and trashcans in an empty park is the way to go. Sitting at your desk or standing while confined in a 3 foot radius are the antithesis of what VR is all about.
 
crusty_juggler said:
Yes, just like how 3D TV revolutionized movie viewing.

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

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

Yes, just like how playing video games in the home will revolutionize home entertainment.


No one wants to sit at home on the couch with a substandard TV and sound system to play a video game. People want to hang out in the arcade with friends, get out and do stuff, have a bite to eat, meet new people, and enjoy all the glitz and glamour of the arcade experience. Not sit in their underwear with a tiny gamepad in their hand and a headset strapped to them talking trash to 9 year old cheaters online.

The only people interested in a home gaming system are the usual suspects of elite, child-bearing yuppies with money to burn.
 
Valve does everything for a reason. Choosing HTC to make it? Half-Life Three Confirmed.
 
Im confused, the link is broken so i couldn't read it, but i thought that Valve was not going to get into the VR business? Didn't they share ideas with Oculus? Are they competing with Oculus or going for a different market?
 
Oh man, I remember this headset when I was putting it on to play Duke Nukem back in 1998

I wonder if it's gotten any better... or worse???
 
I think this will do better than 3D for TV/movies. For a video game, you're already programmed to deal with peripherals; and many games are played solo, while a big detraction to 3D TV/movies (or VR movies) is the lack of social interaction while doing so. Definitely get that will be an issue as well for video games, but if it's done well I hope the immersion factor overcomes that.

Definitely looking forward to legitimate VR...it'll be an exciting few years with some very legitimate contenders battling it out.
 
From Owlchemy developer: "Oculus has been showing their Crescent Bay prototype since September of last year so they likely have better stuff brewing in house, but comparing my Oculus Connect Crescent Bay experience to the Valve/HTC headset, the Valve/HTC one is more advanced and more visually stunning."
 
crusty_juggler said:
The only people interested in VR are the usual suspects of elite, childless PC gaming nerds with money to burn. VR isn't on the radar of mainstream consumers.
Click to expand...

Wow..

It sounds like you are one bitter individual who hates his kids and REALLY wants a VR head set that only use elite, childless PC gamer nerds with money to burn can afford.
 
crusty_juggler said:
Yes, just like how 3D TV revolutionized movie viewing.

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

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

As much as I think VR tech is cool and cyberpunk and futuristic, I have to say that your post is completely spot-on.
You are right, people just want to sit down and enjoy themselves, not gear-up and lock-in. :D
 
Red Falcon said:
As much as I think VR tech is cool and cyberpunk and futuristic, I have to say that your post is completely spot-on.
You are right, people just want to sit down and enjoy themselves, not gear-up and lock-in. :D
Click to expand...

Let me guess, you've never tried the Rift before right?
 
McFry said:
Let me guess, you've never tried the Rift before right?
Click to expand...

Doesn't invalidate his argument if he hasn't. Honestly this has got to be the most overused and weakest response from the VR supporters. One doesn't have to try something to recognize it's faults. The biggest fault? There is a monumental difference between wanting to be immersed in 1 specific game or wanting to game for extended periods of time. For the Vast majority of games, being that immersed for hours on end doesn't have any appeal. I've used the Rift and I've said repeatedly I think it is amazing. However that doesn't change the reality of how most people play games and that wearing something that isolates them isn't something most people are going to be on board with. Certain niche games are going to do amazingly (flight sims and possibly even some racers). However most just aren't going to benefit from it. Someone used WoW as an example and while I don't play it anymore I can say for a fact that sitting with that on my head for hours of raiding isn't even remotely something I want or something that will appeal to even a noticeable % of that type of player.

Rift and stuff like it is Impressive technology and it is going to have a wealth of uses, but it isn't going to revolutionize gaming any more then 3d Tv did.

Sorry.
 
This is going to revolutionize the porn industry!
Click to expand...

That's all i need, crank up my headphones,throw these on and beat off for an hour.....and then have my family all standing there watching me because I didn't hear them come home.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top