VR Only?

[Black5Lion]

To start off, I've never tried a VR headset before, not even the "not really VR" HMD from Sony.
I've liked the concept of the HMD from Sony back in 2012 (was it?), but I could never afford it (~3k in my country's currency).
Then when I first saw the Oculus Rift on Kickstarter, I almost ordered the first development kit. Money was short though, and I decided to just buy a monitor (HP 23xi).
Now with Oculus, HTC, Razer, and others making VR headsets set for launch at the end of the year.
I was wondering about something...

I saw Virtual Desktop, and how it works with the Oculus, kind of making it like the Sony HMD so you could use the desktop.
One thing I noticed is that you need another display besides the Oculus. I would like to eliminate this.
I'm thinking of getting a "VR" headset, but only using the "VR" in games. 90% of the time I'd be using it as an HMD, replacing my monitor.
Is that possible? What are the problems I might run into? and how bad is the pixelation or "sub-pixealtion (I'd like more clarification on this matter)" with VR headsets?

Thanks,
Xifar.

 

[jamhamm]

i have a dk2, i've used the virtual desktop mode - while it's quite novel, i couldn't use it as a replacement for a monitor - it's very exciting that vr is almost ready for human consumption but between the optics and the chromatic aberration and the judder... it's just not a great idea for anything long term

not to mention not being able to see your keyboard and mouse, the weight of the headset, comfort - the list really goes on and on

strapping on the dk2 for some elite or a few demos is fun, but i'm going to say no to full time vr desktop use - the resolution isn't there yet, nor are the optics, nor is the passthrough, nor is the... you get the point...

 

[Black5Lion]

i have a dk2, i've used the virtual desktop mode - while it's quite novel, i couldn't use it as a replacement for a monitor - it's very exciting that vr is almost ready for human consumption but between the optics and the chromatic aberration and the judder... it's just not a great idea for anything long term

not to mention not being able to see your keyboard and mouse, the weight of the headset, comfort - the list really goes on and on

strapping on the dk2 for some elite or a few demos is fun, but i'm going to say no to full time vr desktop use - the resolution isn't there yet, nor are the optics, nor is the passthrough, nor is the... you get the point...

Man... That's pretty disappointing.
Thanks for the reply though.
Who knows maybe in the future when 80k is standard it'll be viable -

 

[Sancus]

I feel like headset comfort is one of the biggest issues with long term VR use. I don't even like to wear most headphones longer than 4 or 5 hours, and VR headsets are much less comfortable than that. (I have a DK2 also)

The optics and chromatic aberration issues are greatly improved in Oculus' next gen headset, but it's still not exactly a comfortable thing to stick on your head for long periods of time.

 

[Black5Lion]

I feel like headset comfort is one of the biggest issues with long term VR use. I don't even like to wear most headphones longer than 4 or 5 hours, and VR headsets are much less comfortable than that. (I have a DK2 also)

The optics and chromatic aberration issues are greatly improved in Oculus' next gen headset, but it's still not exactly a comfortable thing to stick on your head for long periods of time.

What if I used a headrest or a pillow?
Or If I were lying down?

 

[EdZ]

Short answer: No.
Long answer:

From anecdotal reports of hololens: no. It's got a fairly narrow FoV (reportedly somewhere between 20° and 45°), and a fairly low resoltution ('DD', which often gets massaged to mean "anything with at least 720 vertical pixels").
Hololems, spec-wise, is very similar to past AR devices (20°-30° FoV, 960x540 per-eye image view-through HMDs can be had from numerous OEMs).

If you expand to VR devices (with the only environment passthrough option being sticking cameras on the front) things aren't much better at the moment. The HTC Vive, the current highest resolution HMD with confirmed specifications you could attach to a PC, has a resolution of 1080x1200 per eye. Over a 90° horizontal FoV, that's 12 pixels per degree, or 5 arcminutes per pixel.
A desktop monitor at comfortable viewing distance, say a 24" 1920x1080 panel at 70cm away , covers an horizontal angle of about 40°. That's 48 pixels/degree, or 1.25 arcminutes per pixel.

As you can see, we need display panels of significantly higher resolution in order to produce HMDs that can display 'virtual' 24" desktop monitors. Ideally, we'd want panels with 16x the current resolution (4x in both axes). If you think that having a 1920x1080 50" monitor at the same distance from your face as a 24" is acceptable, than a hypothetical HMd using '4K'-class panels would work.


From personal testing with a DK2 and Guygodin's Virtual Desktop, if you can tolerate going for a much lower resolution (and much larger fonts, and therefore lower information density) than is common with modern displays, the coming generation of HMDs might be just good enough for mobile use (i.e. it'd be acceptable compared to a single notebook display), but not comparable to current desktop monitor use. For the near future, you;d be better served with multiple monitors, or a large UHD monitor, unless you are incredibly space-constrained.

 

[KashunatoR]

They did promise that OR CV1 will be way lighter and more compact. I also hope it'll have ~120 degrees FOV.

 

[Black5Lion]

Short answer: No.
Long answer:

Ok, so it "might" work in the future if I were ok with a lower resolution (which I am. I've been using a 1024x600 netbook for years before getting my desktop).
However, wouldn't the prolem of low information density be solved by having 3+ virtual monitors? I mean in a way that you can't see all three at the same time, but with head tracking looking right/left/up/down would change the monitor you're observing thus giving you more information density.

They did promise that OR CV1 will be way lighter and more compact. I also hope it'll have ~120 degrees FOV.

I'm sure in the future someone will make a super compact VR (think snow goggles sized) headset. It's all about research and development.


Anyways, I think I'll be sticking with my trusty monitor for now. Maybe when Skylake-E hits the market they're will be better options

 

[EdZ]

However, wouldn't the prolem of low information density be solved by having 3+ virtual monitors? I mean in a way that you can't see all three at the same time, but with head tracking looking right/left/up/down would change the monitor you're observing thus giving you more information density.

You've increased the amount of information available (but not immediately visible), but the information density remains unchanged, no matter how many extra virtual displays you throw up.

I'm sure in the future someone will make a super compact VR (think snow goggles sized) headset. It's all about research and development.

Possible, but not in the near future. Currently, minimum size (at a given FoV) is limited by available optics. To get any smaller than the 'big ski goggles' form-factor will either need metamaterial lenses, or a combination of dense (and heavy) multiple element lenses (probably with Fresnel elements) combined with two-axis-curved displays (not currently possible to manufacture). Microdisplays are a dead end, to get high FoVs requires multiple displays and optical elements (e.g. the Sensics PiSight) which end up VERY heavy, and having undesirable optical artefacts.

 

[Black5Lion]

You've increased the amount of information available (but not immediately visible), but the information density remains unchanged, no matter how many extra virtual displays you throw up.
Possible, but not in the near future. Currently, minimum size (at a given FoV) is limited by available optics. To get any smaller than the 'big ski goggles' form-factor will either need metamaterial lenses, or a combination of dense (and heavy) multiple element lenses (probably with Fresnel elements) combined with two-axis-curved displays (not currently possible to manufacture). Microdisplays are a dead end, to get high FoVs requires multiple displays and optical elements (e.g. the Sensics PiSight) which end up VERY heavy, and having undesirable optical artefacts.

Hmmm.... I guess I'll have to try it out myself and see if I can live with the lower information density. I'll probably skip the first generation of consumer VR though, let them improve a bit first.
Hey maybe it won't be light. Maybe it'll be more like the NerveGear Just strap it on and lay on your bed, let the microwaves handle all the controls

 

[qkslvr221]

Hmmm.... I guess I'll have to try it out myself and see if I can live with the lower information density. I'll probably skip the first generation of consumer VR though, let them improve a bit first.
Hey maybe it won't be light. Maybe it'll be more like the NerveGear Just strap it on and lay on your bed, let the microwaves handle all the controls

I can definitely see someone incorporating that into a VR headset soon! Right now makers are struggling to bring unique selling points to the market, and I don't think walled sandboxes are going to get results like that kind of feature.

Remember the OCZ NIA device? That was a cool toy almost a decade ago, wonder how accurate they could get it now

 

[EdZ]

The NIA was, to be frank, a piece of shit. In almost ever use case it wasn't even acting as an EEG, but an EMG, picking up not your brainwaves but the contractions of the muscles in your forehead.

An ACTUAL EEG is a bit better, but even ignoring all the issues with putting one on and setting one up (not trivial even for a trained user) it's still not great in terms of resolution or precision. You might be able sense gross brain state (e.g. whether someone is passive or active) but you;re not going to be controlling movement with one. This is a fundamental limitation of EEG, and of noninvasive Brain Machine Interfaces in general.

 

[Black5Lion]

Sorry to revive a dead thread.
However, I've recently been debating on whether or not I should get a "Cardboard" to at least try VR with my phone before I spend big bucks on a Vive or Rift.
Should I go for it? Can I even use my phone as a VR headset for my PC? Spend 20$ now to try VR or wait for a VR headset that's actually half decent?

 

[qkslvr221]

Sorry to revive a dead thread.
However, I've recently been debating on whether or not I should get a "Cardboard" to at least try VR with my phone before I spend big bucks on a Vive or Rift.
Should I go for it? Can I even use my phone as a VR headset for my PC? Spend 20$ now to try VR or wait for a VR headset that's actually half decent?

Yes! It's been gradually getting better, and Google is working on a dedicated OS fork just for this purpose.
This will let those of us with OLED panels take advantage of low-level hardware functions to get the experience even closer.

I do recommend paying a couple bucks more for the Colorcross/FIVESUNG plastic holsters.
http://oddsheepgames.com/trinus/?download# is how to play PC games, but be warned, the latency is high unless you have USB3 or well-configured wireless AC.

 

[Black5Lion]

Yes! It's been gradually getting better, and Google is working on a dedicated OS fork just for this purpose.
This will let those of us with OLED panels take advantage of low-level hardware functions to get the experience even closer.

I do recommend paying a couple bucks more for the Colorcross/FIVESUNG plastic holsters.
http://oddsheepgames.com/trinus/?download# is how to play PC games, but be warned, the latency is high unless you have USB3 or well-configured wireless AC.

I should mention my phone is an Evo 3D (960x540) so... will it work? It only has USB 2.0/ wireless n.