Slashdot Mirror
Ask Slashdot: Best Virtual Reality Headsets?
Quantus347 writes: Straightforward question: I held off for a year to let the various manufacturers shake out the bugs, but now it's down to either a virtual-reality system or a new generation console. So I ask you, the Slashdot community, what are your personal experiences with any of the various VR systems out there? What are their strengths and weaknesses? What little things annoy you the most? What features make a given product the best (or worst) option? "Sprinkle us with wisdom from your mighty brain!" For reference, the HTC Vive costs $799.00, while the Oculus Rift with Oculus Touch motion controllers costs $598 (which is the price after the recent markdown from $799). These prices do not include the necessary hardware required to power each headset. The PlayStation VR ($399.99), Samsung Gear VR ($99.99), and Google Daydream View ($79.00) are also available for less moolah.
Which ones don't rape your privacy?
Rift is better visually and comfort wise. Vive can have a larger play area and is easier to get the room scale tracking right on. There are no other real headsets. The rest are novelties.
I have both the Rift and the Vive, and the Rift is collecting dust. Rift may have better ergonomics, but the Vive has a much higher 'just works out of the box' factor with better tracking and software. It is sadly also becoming a choice made on principle. The Rift was supposed to be the open system, but after the Facebook money they have turned into what is by far the most closed system of them all right now.
That's odd If the vast majority of people get motion sick with VR then all of the sever dozen people I have shared my rift with must be outliers, as none have mentioned any motion sickness when playing. It's nice to know that my friends are are as exceptional as I am, I have never experienced motion sickness either. I do mostly play sim racing games but I play on average 30 or so hours a week with my rift.
Well, I'm not well-experienced in the field, but 6-axis motion/attitude sensors are very small and very cheap - almost every smartphone has one. And outfits like Oculus have reportedly spent a lot of effort into learning psychological tricks to ensure that your perception of the image appears to track what the sensor detects.
So I'll defer my sneering until I actually have a chance to try some out. I'm definitely not in the snowflake category. Can't even sit in the front rows of a movie theatre without getting motion sick.
Well one, it *can* be solved, and in fact for experiences that do not move the user at all, almost no one gets sick.
Those that place the user in a cockpit, and move the player around relative to the outside, but not the cockpit, sickness correlates closely with rate of motion sickness in cars and boats and such.
Even those that move around like crazy, sure more people get sick, but in my personal experience, I'm not even sure it's a majority.
The short of it is, if you are interested *demo* it for yourself. Don't just assume you will or will not get sick, because it's your own vestibular system and there's a great deal of variety.
Microsoft is also not really going straight for AR, they did do Hololense, but Windows Holographic is intended to support both VR and AR, and the affordable hardware is going to be VR first. AR still has a big problem of some technology that allows seeing the outside world and seeing the overlay. Problems with how ghosty the content is, and/or more critically ability to project over a wide field of view. In VR, they distort the hell out of the screen to get wide field of view, but in AR that can't be done because it will distort the real world. Also AR can't provide the same total immersion as VR if that's the goal (well it can, but by covering up the whole world, in which case it's really VR).
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
There is no disconnect if there's no artificial acceleration. Anything where the brain doesn't expect to feel movement doesn't trigger simulation sickness (not motion sickness, which is the opposite). Teleportation doesn't cause any sickness at all and other systems like "zooming" have short enough travel times that our perception systems don't seem to register the movement quick enough to cause any sickness.
Typical stick movement causes problems, though there are also more novel systems being created that appear to be more comfortable, usually ones that require other kinds of physical movement such as drags and pulls.
AR and VR are the same thing, really. AR just lets you assign an alpha channel and might have external cameras for virtual/real object interactions and the like. If you put a plastic shutter over a pair of AR glasses though, you'd end up with a VR headset.
Seriously, it's too early. You're looking at first generation hardware across the board and not enough software support for any of the platforms to make it a long term compelling experience. If VR is truly getting established this time, a big 'if', then within three years you will have a worthless gadget that can't keep up. Everyone else will be on 3rd or 4th generation hardware with 2x - 4x the resolution and the software won't be compatible with your 1st gen stuff.
If you absolutely want to drop the cash on this stuff now I'd say get a PS4 and a PSVR headset. It's the lowest cost of entry, is the easiest to set up, and you can be certain a game you buy will worth with your hardware. Neither of the PC based solutions are anywhere close to being that turnkey currently.
I forgot to mention that the special snowflakes here of course are not affected by motion sickness. Just non-Slashdot people of course. So don't get mad at me.
So long as we're clear, then, this affliction doesn't correlate to the audience with which you have shared....
Tillerson might as well tout climate science at the next Oval Office gathering?
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
Just wondering, have you tried Minecraft, or any game where you have to "walk" using a controller or keyboard? I don't mean teleporting. Games that make you straffe or move forward/backward without actually moving are the only thing that make me feel queezy. Most games avoid that though since they figured it out in testing. If you have tried those games and don't get sick, mind telling me what graphic card you have? I use a 980 and was thinking that the motion sickness effect could be refresh rate related
Buddy, you are the special snowflake here. They guy so sensitive he can't handle VR without hurling. Maybe the headset should come with a trigger warning for you.
I'm very sensitive to motion sickness from games. Most FPS games make me feel unwell after 10 minutes. Been that way since Doom. But i tried a Rift and it was fine.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Just curious, have you tried the latest gen of VR? Because I've tried the Rift and the Vive on tons of people (basically large swaths of my neighborhood), almost none of which are tech geeks, and not a single person has had any bit of motion sickness. From young kids to people in their 70s, all of them were blown away by the experience, and nobody got sick.
The main reason IMHO, besides the much improved tech, is that very few VR experiences are creating the situation you describe, where there is a disconnect between physical and virtual motion. A lot of work has been done to develop techniques for moving the user in ways that don't violate what the user's body thinks is happening. It's an area of ongoing research, but already some pretty effective techniques have been discovered. So while it's true that a lot of people can't stomach a roller coaster VR experience, there are also tons and tons of VR experiences that work just fine without inducing nausea.
I don't think VR or AR is going to have the exclusive hold on the future because they both have their usefulness. Further, there is so much overlap in the technical needs that ultimately both will probably be delivered to consumes in the same device anyway (e.g. an AR headset with a removable opaque covering over the eyes that you can put on for a VR experience).
(P.S. As to the OP's question: Vive wins this round, but only slightly now that the Rift has finally released hand controllers - the room setup is less convoluted and it deals with user orientation better and allows for other devices to be given tracking sensors - but round 2 could easily go to Rift, we'll see)
Rift is better visually. Vive has much better room scale tracking. Vive accommodates glasses better
Yes...they don't make me motion sick. But the older you get the more susceptible you are. I probably couldn't handle playing Descent now. But VR is much much worse than any video hame.
>AR and VR are the same thing, really.
In terms of technology, they can be, if they just do the camera thing. Things like Hololens go a different route though, with digital imagery overlayed on actual vision.
In terms of functionality, AR is a strict superset - as you say, put blinders over it and it becomes VR. Heck, just have the digital overlay completely cover your field of view and you don't need the blinders. But, take the blinders away, and you've opened a whole world of additional applications.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
Entirely possible.
Correct. Everyone knows Slashdot people don't get motion sick, or get malware, or create bugs when writing software. I'm talking about those OTHER people.
It isn't a psychological problem, it is physiological. Your inner ear has a disconnect between what it is sensing and what you are seeing. You can't solve that problem (unless you interface with the inner ear somehow).
AR has technical problems to solve. VR has physiological problems to solve. You can't solve the latter, unless you interface with the inner ear. Maybe use a babelfish.
I've only dabbled, and not yet tried any "fake motion" games, but from what I've heard the "problem" lies in our brains, not the rendering - your body is fine tuned to get sick if your eyes and inner ear disagree on how you're moving, since that's normally caused because you ate something poisonous and should throw it up as soon as possible.
There are various tricks that can help a lot though - cockpit games for instance offer a reference space that's moving consistent with your inner ear, and reduce nausea considerably. Even just rendering a fake nose can help a lot.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
I bought a Rift and although it is a great VR headset, my biggest disappointment is that for the money I paid, I expected to be able to see all the newest VR content out there. This cannot be any further from the truth. I can't even experience Google Earth (without hacking) on the Rift and there are countless Gear VR experiences I would love to try, but I cannot do so. So PC headsets are a good buy if you are a gamer with specific games in mind, but for experiencing general and free VR content, the Gear VR seems to be where it is at right now.
I hope open standards like WebVR improve the situation, but for now the fragment nature of the VR landscape is a major let down.
-- Marcio
*An* SJW. Jeez, a fuckwit and a retard.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Technically speaking the Rift and Vive headsets are very close. The Rift has a slightly lower FOV resulting a higher pixel density which ends up producing slightly less screen door effect. However, people also complain the Rift has more lens flair issues than the Vive does. So when it comes to which one objectively looks better you can make solid arguments for both headsets and it comes down to which specific flaws stand out more to you.
The Rift (out of the box) is absolutely better when it comes to ergonomics but having integrated headphones is debatable... I personally decided to get rid of the Vive strap and did a variation of the welding mask mod ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?... ) and feel that closed the gap in terms of comfort. There is an official HTC strap coming in the next few months that will resolve Vive comfort issues. It won't be included and sold for another $100 but I suspect with the Rift price cut they're going to rethink that strategy.
Touch vs Vive wands is tricky... It really depends on what game you are playing as both have their advantages and disadvantages. Touch is absolutely better for gesturing and feels closer to actually having your hands in VR. However, when it comes to holding objects like a sword or a gun the Vive wand feels more natural/realistic. HTC has a tracker module coming out in the next few months that will allow all sorts of 3rd party peripherals and Valve has demoed new controller prototypes so any advantages Touch has probably won't be long lived.
When it comes to tracking the lighthouse technology is superior. If you are just playing seated games then Rift is faster/easier to setup but as soon as you're standing and want to move around there is no contest. You can get a good room scale experience with a Rift but it is more complicated to setup and is still officially considered "experimental" by Oculus.
Openness/Compatibility is another obvious win for HTC/Valve over Oculus/Facebook. Oculus wants you to use its store and only with its hardware and has DRM to prevent other hardware from using their software. Revive is software that less you bypass the DRM and play Rift games with the Vive but Oculus could break it anytime they want (they stated they won't anymore...) and have done so in the past. HTC's new tracker module offers tons of flexibility. Valve's lighthouse technology is being used with LG's upcoming ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?... ) VR headset. Even though I don't agree with Oculus business practices I admit i still think it's debatable which is better for VR in the long run as they are throwing tons of money into software development.
I'm a Vive owner since June and would still recommend Vive over Rift in spite of the $200 price difference. However, I still absolutely recommend you check out both in person and see for yourself.
If I was throwing away money I'd get the PSVR because of RE7 and other big budget VR games including racing franchises (and with some extra software like Trinus it can be used with Steam on PC), but these are first generation devices. If I were to be smart with my money I would wait for a new generation of devices that have perfected tracking, have higher definition displays, and are overall less expensive. By then a lot more games would be out as well, it's still slim pickings.
Twinstiq, game news
Pro-tip: to be a really effective troll, and to gain the most enjoyment from trolling, you need to draw out the conversation a bit more, and to do that you can't just completely ignore all the points in a person's reply, otherwise the other person will interpret that as you having no reading comprehension ability (and so they'll walk away because any attempt at conversation is pointless) or they'll know right away that you're a troll (same outcome).
You gotta lead them along, feigning that you're considering their viewpoints, and that you're always right there, just on the cusp of agreeing to - or at least appreciating - the alternate point of view... but needing just a little more convincing. Repeat for a few rounds of back-and-forth (or until a more interesting victim comes along), all the while leading the conversation further and further away from the point or from rational thinking. The longer you have them engaged, the zanier you can get without them walking away (because the more they invest in you, the harder it is for them to realize it's been a complete waste of time), but even then to keep it going you need to still maintain the pretense of actual debate.
It's not just a skill, it's also an art. Focus on your subtlety and patience, and with practice you'll master it - I believe in you, you can do it! Have a great day!
My friends and I own both systems, honestly as first generation systems they work damn well.
The Vive was launched with motion tracked controllers from the start, and I feel a lot of the enthusiasts went towards that product. The /Vive Reddit group is particularly vocal about the product and reminds me of console wars played out decades ago.
The Oculus Rift is similar in many ways to an Apple product in terms of higher level of refinement and ease of use. Facebook/Oculus are funding developers to develop quality content on the Rift - quality beyond what you'd expect from a VR market at the current size (examples are RoboRecall, SuperHot VR, Dead and Buried to name a few)
Here are some major categories discussed from my experience that I hope will help you.
Motion tracking performance
As of now both system's VR motion tracking performance are very similar. The Vive's tracking system is an elegant solution relying on scanning lasers that are detected on the HMD and motion tracked controllers. Oculus' camera image tracking system with the latest version of the Oculus runtimes (version 1.12) works very well. My anecdotal experience is that the robustness and performance of Vive vs Rift tracking systems are very similar.
The Oculus Rift motion camera tracking system uses coded LEDs emmitted on the HMD and motion tracked controller. Default is two camera forward facing configuration whcih is optimal for a forward-facing VR experience (cockpit simulations, forward facing shooters etc). The two cameras can be placed at opposite ends of the play area to give 360 degree tracking. For optimal 360 degree configuration, two forward facing and a third rear camera is the recommended configuration. The Oculus camera derive power and send data via USB connection to a computer.
The Vive's motion tracking system consists of two lighthouses on the elevated opposite corners of the room to function. This system require power from a wall plug and optional sync cable to be connected if the Lighhouses are not in visual line of sight.
Both the Vive and Rift have similar drawbacks, if emitter and sensor is blocked (line of sight occlusion), tracking accuracy is reduced.
Ergonomics
The Oculus Rift HMD and tracked motion controllers are significantly lighter (around 85 grams for the HMD alone), and more arguably more ergonomic than the Vive. The Oculus HMD have in-built headphones (optional In Ear Monitors). Audio is very important in VR. The Vive is soon to release an integrated audio strap to address this issue (optional purchase, unsure if this will be included in an updated HTC Vive system).
If you want to be on the bleeding edge, wireless HMD to PC solutions are coming for the Vive and Rift as optional accessories in 2017. The Vive will also likely get additional motion-tracked peripherals (e.g. gun props etc).
Resolution is the same between the Rift and Vive. The Rift's optical lens is sharper towards the edge of FoV. Both systems show visible internal reflections in the lens (god rays).
Ecosystem
The Vive runs software from Valve's Steam store and HTC's Viveport stores. The Vive can also run software outside of either of these stores (titles from independent developers, self-developed Unity and Unreal projects). An unofficial hack will allow Vive to also run some titles from the Oculus Home store (while unofficial, users have reported good experiences).
The Oculus Rift runs software from the Oculus Home store and Valve's Steam store. My own experience is that the same title on either stores (for example Elite Dangerous), tends to run more optimially in the Oculus Home environment for the Rift. The Oculus Rift can also run software outside of either stores (titles from independent developers, self-developed Unity and Unreal projects).
Final thoughts
Right now VR in the consumer market reminds me a lot of the first consumer GPUs that came out in 1995-1999. Initially the industry required exclusive support from third-parties
Yup, there are all kinds of strategies that are being developed to reduce motion sickness. I own a Vive and there are a few games with artificial locomotion that get me sick and some that don't. Developers are still trying figure out exactly why it works in some situations and not others but they already have plenty of best practices like you described.
Smartphone VR is a vastly different experience than using Rift/Vive. It's like watching a big action movie on your phone vs an IMAX theater. Eventually it'll catch up to where it's as good as a decent home theater experience in a few years though.
"Roller coasters will never work."
"Human flight will never work."
"Submarines will never work."
You're just another in a long line of closed-minded fools.
The thing that frustrates those of us who can do VR without issue is people loudly shouting that it makes everyone sick and no one should even try it and scare off people from at least trying it themselves. The chilling effect on the market lessens the chance of the market having good content.
AR without motion sickness would preclude a great deal of experiences (vehicle simulators, any scenario requiring exploring an area bigger than you physically have to explore). If you enable any of these experiences, VR and AR are in the same boat.
AR may have some applications that are interesting, but probably more productivity oriented than entertainment, due to the physical limitations of having a 1:1 mapping of the AR world and the physical world.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
But....but....3DTV, self-driving cars, men on Mars, flying cars, Hyperloops, solar highways...IT'S THE FUTURE PEOPLE!
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
Right...I mentioned that in my follow up reply. You and your friends are special snowflakes of course. My comment doesn't apply to people like you.
Right...I mentioned that in my follow up reply. You and your friends are special snowflakes of course. My comment doesn't apply to people like you.
Right, so, by definition anyone who can disagree with you cannot because they are in the only group of people you have excluded from your blanket claim. Fucking genius debate technique...
We have a product that runs now on Rift, Vive, and PSVR and will soon on Daydream and upcoming mobile and Windows VR. Take my opinion for what it's worth.
Comfortable VR requires low-latency motion sensing, screen displays with pixels on/off for precise periods to avoid blur or flickering, simulation and rendering that is at least 60 fps, and asynchronous reprojection of that output to 90 or 120 hz. All of the above VR systems are capable of comfortable VR running applications that meet that framerate requirement. Many would additionally argue that head-position tracking is a requirement for comfortable VR, because otherwise the world "moves" with your head. We say it's definitely better to have than not, as long as it has the same low-latency as rotation sensing and is reliable.
Applications also need to minimize the difference between acceleration you see with your eyes and feel with your balance. Our research shows people have different trigger thresholds for simulation sickness, and different sensitivities to different types of acceleration (for instance most people can handle differences in forward acceleration than vertical, and both better than turning). Different applications have many ways to address this: low detail backgrounds or background occlusion when turning, "cockpits" that turn with you, shuttering of FOV to reduce peripheral detail when turning, teleporting, acceleration limits, head-synced turning, level design that encourages more or less accelerations and vertigo, room-scale only movement, etc. You will have to jump in yourself and find what you are capable of and what applications do the trick for you.
The rest comes down to features and ecosystem of each VR system. Hardware systems have been evolving very rapidly but here's a brief rundown.
Vive & Rift are very similar from sensing and screen and computing requirements,wide fields of view, high application framerates, They both now require a tether to your PC with I5-4590 & GTX 970 or better performance. Vive came out with full room-scale position sensing and two hand-controllers, which has led to a lot of great room-scale applications. Rift came out with built-in headphones which are key to enjoying the full VR experience, as sounds can be "binaurally" mixed to sound like they are coming from precise locations, and is lighter than Vive. There are a lot of Vive add-ons available now or soon that include face covers, wireless transmission, tracking pucks and alternate head mounts with headphones.
PSVR actually has a higher screen refresh (120 hz) than Vive & Rift (90 hz) which makes looking around (with async reprojection) feel more crisp. But most PSVR applications run at 60 fps rather than 90 fps like most Vive & Rift apps, which makes object animations and positional travel less crisp. PS4 Pro apps can hit 90 fps at about the same level of detail but that depends on the developer. The PSVR's screen might be the brighest and uses a different pixel technology, less little dots and more solid squares, that is a matter of taste. It's a little heavier than Vive but is balanced between front and back so the weight rests on your forehead--in fact its screen guard doesn't even touch your face like Vive & Rift, and can move out and in for easier use by glasses wearers. PSVR's position tracking relies on visible light which is a bit less robust than the other two, though all of them have problems in direct sunlight.
Microsoft VR is further out but looks to be aiming for PSVR level performance on PCs with less than Rift/Vive specs. A notable feature is "inside-out" position tracking, coming from their Hololens research, which doesn't require external cameras like Vive/Rift/PSVR.
Daydream on a Pixel phone (Snapdragon 821) is surprisingly good for mobile. In our tests it has about twice the power of S7 running on GearVR, which our application can't yet run on with sufficient detail. Its applications require 60 fps but it has asynchronous reprojection to what feels like a 90 hz screen refre
Well, with gyroscopes, the input to the VR goggles is the same input to the inner ear.
It all depends on what you want out of VR.
The only computer I have at home these days is a Surface Pro 4, so Rift & Vive don't interest me at this point.
After following posts by/about John Carmack for years I figured if he plays Minecraft on the GearVR weekly, the experience must be pretty good. A refurbished Galaxy S7 ($300), a X-box One Bluetooth controller ($60), and a GearVR ($99) later and I am a happy camper.
GearVR is admittedly VR-Lite since it does not have positional tracking (only rotational) and uses a non-VR controller, but it is pretty amazing and 100% wireless. So far MinecraftVR and videos use up all the time I have for VR.
The most fun thing to do with it, though, is to have guests over and introduce them to VR. The most played games in my library are The Lab's archery demo, fruit ninja VR and the space pirate trainer. Some of the other titles I've tried are well executed, but a lot of the VR games on steam right now are just crap.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
...is none. Virtual reality will never work. The disconnect between what your eye sees and your inner ear senses will cause motion sickness in the vast majority of people.
This is not a problem if what your are showing matches what your inner ear senses. For example, if all you are showing is a static scene, there is no problem.
With proper direction, I thing it will appear what kind of scene are tolerable and what kind shall be avoided. For example, it appears that moving the camera against the user's will is a big no while teleportation is surprisingly well tolerated.
Anyways 'the vast majority" of people are not subject to motion sickness. Most people don't suffer motion sickness using current technology, some do, but chances are that they also suffer from it just playing a FPS game on a small screen. It didn't stop FPS games from being popular. A combination of better understanding of motion sickness, technological progress, habituation, and in the extreme cases medication will help taking care of the problem should it become the only problem of VR.
HTC vive is artificially tied to steam. You must have steam to even use Vive.
Rift is tied to Facebook. Rift maintains 24x7 persistent connections to Facebook from a service running with full administrative access to your system. It routinely uploads logs with data including every application you used with Rift and imposes mandatory software updates. There are no configuration settings of any kind to disable or prevent any of this from occurring.
Oculus has piss poor QA internally. Their automated updates *routinely* break shit with no recourse to the victim other than "waiting" for Oculus to push a fix and hoping the fix doesn't break anything else. No rolling back to previously working versions and no installing drivers from installation archives. Software and drivers 100% online/cloud managed.
Rift has a long history of screwing with it's customer base from retroactively imposing new "hardware" checks that turn working systems into not working systems for no technically defensible reason. Adding non-configurable features like ASW touted as allowing lower end hardware to work in practice actively introducing new problems for many such as unwanted clipping to 45 FPS. While it can be disabled with a number pad each time it is used it can't be disabled permanently through any configuration option and there is no feedback to know current state of it. They have also introduced new display problems such as very annoying display lag/smearing around dark objects that did not exist in previous versions of the software. Of course there is no configuration to control this either.
Rift seemingly has no intention of ever supporting any operating system other than Windows while Vive is actively working on Linux support.
If your into sims/sitting on yer ass get a Rift. The display is slightly better, cheaper and single IR tracking camera easier to deal with.
If you want "room scale" with tracked motion controllers vive is a better choice but Rift with 3 or more cameras and extension cabling isn't bad.
VR is nice but Facebook/HTC are shitty companies and no other vendors have yet to step up with a better product. 4k and higher FOV is going to be amazing.
Just wondering, have you tried Minecraft, or any game where you have to "walk" using a controller or keyboard? I don't mean teleporting. Games that make you straffe or move forward/backward without actually moving are the only thing that make me feel queezy. Most games avoid that though since they figured it out in testing. If you have tried those games and don't get sick, mind telling me what graphic card you have? I use a 980 and was thinking that the motion sickness effect could be refresh rate related
Everyone is busy royally fucking up locomotion. Strafing motions are fine. I've played overload alphas (DESCENT) for hours in VR with no problems. Strafe only controls are awesome.
What is getting everyone sick is move to where you are looking schemes which intentionally create disconnects in change of direction/rotation without the user actually doing it. I would argue in many cases without actually wanting to do it either. These mechanics actively penalize players for daring to look around.
I got a Samsung Gear, and I have no idea what to do with it. It seems to be some locked-in sort of bullshit thing with lame videos of crap I could care less about. Then it stops working after ten minutes, and tells me it's too hot. Hell, I could hardly hold my phone in my hand, not good for the battery that can't be removed! I originally bought it for my DJI Mavic for FPV since those lame ducks haven't produced the googles they said they would, but that requires a USB cable to the transmitter, and the Gear VR has a USB connector built-in and making life hell for me. SO.... I cut a groove in the clip opposite the stupid USB connector, and fly with my phone upside down, which automatically rights itself, of course. Google Cardboard is a better investment IMO.
The Steam Hardware Survey shows 0.23% of users having a Vive, vs. 0.11% with an Oculus Rift and 0.2% with the older Rift DK2 development kit
http://store.steampowered.com/...
Have you considered that maybe your brain and eyes are damaged or inferior? I put it in that way because you seem to have anger at people who don't get motion sickness from VR and went out of your way to preemptively belittle and insult.
I've had a dozen or so people over to play with my Rift ad Sony VR systems, and only one person indicated discomfort, and that was at the teleport mechanic in a couple of games.
Mostly I find games are substantially more immersive, and the only issue I have is when I run into a real-life obstacle that isn't visible in VR. I have scraped knuckles from smacking into a (very real) wall when trying to pick something up in VR.
Since I can't tell them apart, I treat all ACs as the same person.
I have a Rift and, while it seems to work just fine, VR is almost there but not quite.
The first issue is the resolution. It's not the high resolution, crisp displays we're used to with current gen monitors.
The Vive is glasses friendly, sort of. You'll need narrow frames if you want to comfortably wear them.
Some folks don't care for the weight, but it doesn't bother me much. Is similar to a set of heavy headphones like the Astro A50's.
The cable connection is a pita and I find myself unwinding from it quite a lot. They're supposed to be working on a wireless solution.
Some folks can't handle the immersion without becoming motion sick. Test it out before you commit first.
Make sure your play area is large and clear of obstructions. The VR does a good job of making you forget you're in a small room until you whack the wall, ceiling fan or door while swinging about.
What's holding VR back atm is GPU capability. You want the same resolution as that shiny monitor you have, but current gen GPU just can't push dual 4k ( one for each eye ) at 90 fps. It struggles to keep up as it is, depending on how many polys the system is trying to throw around on screen at any given time.
Once the GPU hardware is sufficient, THEN VR will absolutely rock.
At least the GPU folks have new reasons to innovate again :)
I have all the Oculus devices since dev kit 1 for work. Over the last year my (nearly grown up) kids and I all chipped in and bought VR headsets and rigs just for kicks.; so now we also jointly own current versions of the Vive and a PS VR. ...
We use the PS VR only for gaming; while we use the Oculus and Vive for both gaming and non-gaming applications. Non-gaming applications include data visualization, 360 degree video experiences, watching 3D movies. We also did some initial experiments in alternate reality experiences for disabled folks (but that was not as effective as we hoped it would be).
For non-gaming applications; the Vive seems to be everyone's favorite hands down. It just feels more "accurate" to folks who are not hard core gamers and are not as used to what gamers feels when they are deep in a game. For gaming, we find that we spend more time playing on the PS VR or Vive because the Playstation and Steam ecosystems are deeply entrenched in our household.
There's nothing really wrong with the Oculus; but it does not seem to get as much love as the others.
Now for something to really blow you away, you have to try the $3,000 Microsoft Hololens. The augmented reality experiences are way more fun than the closed off world of the VR headsets. One our friends got one home from work; and I don't think anyone slept that night; with all of us taking turns to play with it. There are cheaper versions of those coming out we hear. The whole family is staring to save up to get one of those
I run a museum with a public VR setup, introduced last July. After looking at HTC Vive and Oculus Rift I decided the Rift was better for our situation because it's more comfortable and the visuals scored better with my test audiences. IMO the resolution and overall visual experience is close enough that it's not a big deal but I do give the edge to the Rift. I also love the Touch controllers but I haven't tried the Vive controller so I can't compare.
You can safely ignore the people who claim VR is dead or doesn't work.
VR is a huge hit at our museum, possibly our most popular attraction. We have regular visitors who come back just for the VR. We have an active gaming community full of people who never want to go back to screen games. The educational applications are enormous. The software is growing and improving all the time.
At this stage anything other than Rift or Vive won't give you a decent VR experience. They are fine in their own way but they're not the real thing.
For some background:
I lead an Augmented and Virtual Reality community of practice. As such, I've developed for the HTC Vive, Oculus Rift, Microsoft Hololens, and Google Cardboard (I haven't gotten to Daydream yet). I've used OSVR and PSVR, though I haven't developed for them. Here's my current breakdown:
HTC Vive is likely best-of-breed VR tech at this moment (more on this later). If you have a fairly large space (15+ square feet), it has a better tracking system, though it does at time have foibles. The cords can be a pain, though there are new products out to help deal with the cord issue, the price really starts to add up.
Oculus Rift is a very capable system, and is not to be ignored. For standing setups up to about 15 square feet or so, it's often my preference. The touch controllers are more ergonomic than the Vive wands. It seems to lose tracking more often than the Vive (especially in larger areas), though I haven't done extensive tests to fully characterize what conditions this is the case.
Both have good "starter" catalogs of content. Not many exclusives (and sometimes you can break through the exclusivity with tools such as ReVive).
PSVR is a nice starter, but isn't as full featured as the PC VR headsets.
OSVR has some promise. There's certainly industry interest... Thus far everything looks a bit rough around the edges though. There are games on Steam that will run on OSVR, so it's not a total open-source wasteland. They seem to be off to a good start, but are trailing the "big" players right now. This is for those who want to tinker / experiment, or have open-source running through their veins.
For Augmented Reality, everyone is months, if not years, behind the Microsoft Hololens. That is, however, a VERY expensive device, and isn't really for entertainment like the other systems. Look into it, but don't buy unless you're really sure that's what you want.
What's coming up????
Microsoft is positioning themselves to make some big announcements about Windows Holographic sometime soon. They've already partnered with companies such as Dell and Lenovo to build new VR headsets. Looks like they're structuring things much like how Google does Android: Some first-party hardware, but open so third parties can build too.
Apple looks to be going toward Augmented Reality. I know they've been hiring some high-power counterparts at other organizations (they just made a hire from the Jet Propulsion Lab).
This sig has been enciphered with a one-time pad. It could say almost anything.
It really comes down to rate. Switchbacky race courses (Assetto Corsa-Hill Climb) are a lot more pukey than high speed sweepers (old Monza), everything else being equal.
Which is the killer for most 3d shooters, the spin, run, spin and shoot is fundamental. Will have to be rethought, levels changed.
The worst game I ever played in VR was Descent 2. No cockpit, no artificial horizon. Granting that was on a whole previous generation of VR hardware. There were games back then that were less puke inducing than games out today. It all comes down to content. Nobody (almost nobody) pukes watching a virtual widescreen movie playing normal content. Almost nobody wants to rind virtual roller coaster after virtual roller coaster etc.
Vive room scale forces content to keep up up, which is the best plan, at least until players build tolerance to VR sickness, it comes. Driving is good to start, if you've already got a wheel and pedals. Helicopter is generally better than fixed wing which is generally better than space (get 3 axis stick and throttle, having something to hold onto make games less pukey). Keyboard and game controllers both suck for VR.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
I so wanted Alien isolation to work OK in VR. The head motion tracking kills it.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Everyone has their opinion of course but all I can tell you is I fucking love my Vive. I've dedicated a room to it and while it's hard to find time in between work and family it's truly an escape like no other. Google Earth is almost enough reason to have it alone. Let alone exploring space, works real and imagined, and of course games. Why watch entertainment when you can be inside it? Everyone should try it.
The biggest weakness is they are all the technological style equivalent of the brick-sized cellphones of 1980, and are going to look primitive in three years compared to the ones they will then be selling for $34.95 at Wall-Mart.
Well, that's the point of the 6-axis sensors. They are the exact electronic equivalent of the semi-circular canals of the inner ear. In fact even if you're magneto-sensitive, the current sensors can track that as well.
It's really a psycho-physiological problem. We are able to watch the flickering pictures in movies and scan-line television because the perception of the eyes isn't as important as the perception of the brain. One of the tricks that I have heard of in tracking head/body motion is to take advantage of the fact that the human eye cannot focus on all the interim points between point A and point B, so you can do fast/fuzzy rendering while motion is going on and only have to fill things in when everything is stable.
There are a number of hardware debates here, but for most people what matters is the software that exists and how well it runs, given that the general VR display and tracking is roughly the same between Rift and Vive. But the Rift software is much better than the Vive software. Blame it on exclusives, but the fact remains. And the Oculus engine is better than Vive and runs smoother and with better detail on any given hardware. This is largely because the Rift has "ASW" and "ATW" and the Vive only has partial ATW on only NVidia. For most users who don't have hardware religion, the Rift is better in practice.
Virtual reality headsets sounds amazing. I want them.
An social justice warrior?
I think he meant An Ess-Jay-Double-You?