>Yfw 599 us dollars
350 would'a been perfect.
They blew it.
Everyone and their mother wants one
well what the fuck. I looked like a month ago and it said it was $350 Canadian dollars. $844 is a bit much
It's a lot better in every aspect though, it would be surprising if it was cheaper than the Asus or Acer or Benq displays. Although I believe the price will drop to ~800-900 within two or three months. Right now there is literally no stock of it. I got mine mid December already, because I pre-ordered directly from the Eizo webstore.
It has a WAY better image than anything I've ever seen, even my 700 Euro Samsung PLS WQHD (S27A850D) stinks in comparison. The Anti-G coating is so fine you cannot make out the grain, yet as or more effective than stronger coatings. As a result, you get an image almost as crisp as glossy displays, without the glare.
Reaction times and display lag are very noticeably better than my QNIX @ 120Hz, which already 0.8ms display lag, but Freesync is a very decent improvement on top of that.
I went from heaving to lead moving targets to having to aim directly at their heads to hit them.
Not to forget the excellent Eizo warranty. 5 years on-site exchange, and for the first 6 months even when it has as much as 1 bright subpixel.
It's painfully expensive, but if you have the cash, it's worth every cent.
I'm guessing it's only available to Europe right now right? Because on Eizo's page all I see is
>coming soon. this winter.
I'll have to wait for the price to go down, I just can't justify a grand on a monitor. Maybe the US will get a lower price along with the later release date. Great to hear that it's as good as I imagined it though.
if the gear vr is powerful enough to do vr games with last gen visuals then i'm sure the ps4 is. it was a bit stupid of oculus to tell devs to aim for a 980 ti as a baseline imo. sure, build your games to take advantage of the latest hardware, but at least make them playable on lower end stuff as well if you actually want to sell more than a handful of copies.
>spent 15k~ in the past month on holiday shopping/furniture/rent/traveling/getting a fucking lizard
>850 CAD for this toy
>another 500-700 CAD for a 970-980
It's not about being poor or rich at this point, it's just that you don't stay rich making blind buys on things that could be sitting in your closet after a month. I'll take my lizard and wait till I know this thing's not a piece of shit.
Console devs don't care about anything other than graphical fidelity of individual frames. They sacrifice everything else about the experience to make their promo-screenshots and pre-rendered 'in-game' footage as marketable as possible. They'd never be able to sell a VR game with last gen graphics. There's a few exceptions, like Ace Combat 7 might do well, but that won't need a lot of horsepower to look decent enough.
I was pretty ready and willing to cough up upwards of $400 for one, but fucking $600? Piss in my mouth.
>This became a hit just like first gen console
>Minus the "DRM" like back then because you can play it on any system.
>Competition start making better optional VR headset with cheaper price
>Buy Console VR with shitty hardware
>Get fucked because it locked for console games
>Hack solution fucked up most or your PC games because shitty compatibility
No one bought the first tablet that priced $2000 fifteen years ago, neither should you.
the thing is that you have no idea what you are talking about
I tested GearVR, the Oculus, Google Cartbox shit, and many more, there was a company hiring VR developers at our university and we could try everything.
VR is not like scalable videogames because it fucks your mind faster. When you are not drawing shadows and have a shitty draw distance and less than 90fps your vr experience is plain shit.
What you see on GearVR is VR Video or super low tech games. If you know any Rendering techniques you also know that you have to essentially render the scene twice (once for every eye).
This means the maximum Power your ps4 has in a 30fps game needed to be 3x more to get to 90fps and this need to be x2 to get to 90fps for every eye.
So to get the same gfx you have on the ps4 on a normal screen you need 6x the power for vr.
>So to get the same gfx
the point of my post was that it's unrealistic to expect to be able to play vr games with the same graphical fidelity as current gen games. last gen visuals are good enough.
The VR headsets have one panel for every eye, but only together their resolution is 2160*1200. So while you render two frames at the same time, you only actually render have the resolution per eye every time, right? You don't really render 2 times the whole resolution.
Just don't buy it, OR dare to put that crazy price range and still the preorder went out of stock in just 10 minutes because they are no competition right now.
You are fucking dumb if you put your price low when you are the first company who sold the first PC solution VR headset.
I did one of the PS VR demos at CES yesterday. I honestly wasn't expecting much given the relatively weak specs of the ps4 compared to even the oculus minimum specs but was actually somewhat surprised.
The graphical fidelity is somewhere along the lines of a later ps3 game, but the scene had relatively few moving rendered objects and was really pretty basic so it remains to be seen how performance will hold up in a more complex scene. The actual game was an on-rails shooter so really not much going on but it still looked alright and there were no framerate issues that I could detect. The motion controls with a pair of the PS move controllers actually worked really well, wrist motion was pretty accurately represented and the move controllers work fine as an input device.
I haven't tried the CV1 Oculus or the latest version of the Vive yet so I don't have too many comparison points yet but as long as the PS VR doesn't cost more than like 350 for the headset it should be fine. Seems like true AAA VR games aren't possible on the consoles but you can still have a good VR experience on a console.
I'm just going to do some math. I'm sitting in front of a 1920x1080 monitor. I'm pretty comfortable with this pixel density at this distance, I wouldn't want to go any lower. It would take 2 columns of this monitor, stacked 4 high to fill the forward field of view for one of my eyes. So basically that ends up being an 8k display for the whole thing. You want to be running games at 90+fps. So, take the standard [email protected] (that consoles can't even manage), multiply it by 1.5 for the fps, then multiply it by 16 for the resolution.
To get something that's similar fidelity to 1080 gaming, you need a computer 24x more powerful than a regular display.
>but [email protected] is outdated now, that's not even a fair comparison
Okay, [email protected], x9 for resolution, x0.625 for fps, ~5.5x the system requirements as compared to a resolution that's already pushing the limit of what PCs are capable of rendering right now for a similar visual experience (assuming you're okay with 90fps VR if you're used to 144fps normally).
I can half the distance to my screen until it becomes intolerably low pixel density, so those numbers can all be divided by 4. Which leaves you with only needing slightly more power, than the most powerful gaming PCs, in order to have a barely tolerable VR display. Yay!
Protip: if the vive costs less they would have dropped the bomb immediately and killed Oculus.
The fact that they're keeping silent means their price is likely higher.
>falling for the console meme in current year 2015+1
Fucking poor Homeless faggots youre nothing better than niggers
>I WANT EVERYTHING CHEAP
>PLZ GIEF VR+PC FOR 200€
>MOMMY DOENST MAKE ENOUGH MONEY SUCKING NIGGERCOCKS
>OMG 800$ THATS 4MONTHS OF MY WELFARE MONEY
>he doesn't want my shitty product
>damage control activate
>"stop being poor"
They said the controller costs virtually nothing to bundle. You can safely assume ms cut them a huge deal to include it, and the included wireless adapter was a nice touch. Really smart move on Microsofts part, tbf
Honest question, what supports the headset right now?
And not after-the-fact shoehorned in support either. What can actually make good use of this device right now?
I strongly suspect people are going to be paying $600 to beta test v1.00 of the device that works with a vanishingly small number of titles, and poorly at that, only to have a $300 model surface before Christmas 2016.
Speaking of that, who launches new product in the first week of January? People who feel they cannot compete with products released in November of the Christmas rush, thats who.
I guess it depends on what games and software support it.
It'll be another Kinect like on the 360 if it doesn't get much support.
I think if the Playstation VR is $200 and has a lot of games that might catch on with the mainstream more, and there may be better versions on the oculas for PC.
Not many companies are going to say yeah we're going to spend a lot of money for this very small audience on this new tech.
Plus personally even considering myself a PC enthusiast, I don't even know if I want VR having glasses and preferring nothing on my head in general like headphones. Same reason why I never see 3d movies... I don't want something extra to wear on my fucking head.
Well 90% of my nerd friends wear glasses. Is this something you're going to want on your head for 5+ hours at a time with that?
Who is this targeted to? Someone who has money, wants new tech, no glasses or issues putting a bunch of things on his head, and doesn't care what software it has?
It's not even out yet for another 3 months and there's already way more content for the rift than Kinect.
Also, Kinect sold like 15 million units do their problem was obviously not a small audience, Kinect is just trash, console shitters buy new consoles with no games all the time as well so they obviously don't give a shit about content
The headphones and dac are what fucking irks me. Taking them out? "YOULL SAVE 20$ AT MOST RETARD, THEY ARE CAREFULLY ENGINEERED PIECES OF TECH". If it would only shave off 20$ it's nowhere remotely close to near being audiophile quality, no matter how subsidized CV1 is or how much dick Oculus sucked.
You can't have it both ways, either it's a piece of shit that wouldn't have a price impact, or it's good quality AND IT FUCKING IS having an impact on price.
>tfw I actually really love kinect for XBone, but support is being pretty much fucking dropped, even though it's a really good peripheral, not necessarily for gaming, but for all the other parts like voice commands etc.
I accidentally say shit like "Xbox, volume down" all the time at friends houses
>and preferring nothing on my head in general like headphones
holy autism, I've never heard anyone with issues putting on headphones. Protip: not everyone has your level of autism
You ever stop to think that audiophile tech like DACs just has ridiculously high profit margins, and doesn't cost that much to manufacture? I mean, Beats certainly isn't the first to con people into buying literally $12 worth of tech for $200+, and we're not even talking about meme tube DACs, here, just something above average. It wouldn't take much to sound decent, especially if you're not going for studio flat EQs
>some people will die before they can get their Rift/Vive
You are completely right. Still pissed at the hipocrisy, I am also completely sure it won't sound as good as my headphones. Anyone who can afford this can also afford non-shit audio.
Now i get it.
The $599 price will include the new touch controllers released in july
that's the only logical explanation to the sudden increase of expected price, and the enigmatic answer to the question about the case having some space reserved for the controllers.
>>The $599 price will include the new touch controllers released in july
Dream on. Zuckerjew needs his sweet sweet tech enthusiast retards money
It's actually genius, the same people that don't use Facebook or are technically literate enough to block the ads and thus his revenue now directly deposit in his bankaccount on the promise of a virtual waifu
>cuckulous rift amiright?
this is the thought process of 90% of this board
>I can't wait for the oculus rift!
>Wait, I can't afford $599
>hahah you fags VR is going to fail it's a niche product dead on arrival no one wants it hahaha assholes
Shit, I made enough for a rift in 3 days during my summer internship
Uh I don't know about you but I usually buy consoles with no games yet and videocards that are good for like 1 game, and usually not the ones I spend most of my time on. Every segment of nerds is doing that.
So you don't have a steady salary? That isn't exactly an ideal situation. I'm sure a lot of people here have at least 600 dollars. That doesn't mean you should spend it all on VR.
So it's comfortable to wear glasses, then 3D glasses or VR on top of that for you?
I know 1 person who's even interested in this out of a dozen nerd friends. The same one likes 3D stuff. No one else is even asking for this.
Are people on 4chan so unused to having people agree with them?
Yeah, doing fine, a shame that I cannot justify the price. It goes up into crazy territory where I live.
Me and a group of friends were hyped for it, all of us have capable PCs. None of us are buying it. Hope it stays alive long enough for real customer VR to be a reality
I bet all the devs working on stuff for the rift are super happy with this news...
I made enough money last summer to last until this summer entirely independently.
I'm still in school so I can't really get a steady salary. Regardless, I'm taking an easier job this summer so I won't be making as much... so I'm still on the fence as to whether I can afford a new computer/headset for VR.
Do you work part time?
>So it's comfortable to wear glasses, then 3D glasses or VR on top of that for you?
I'm not the one pretending every tech enthusiast or /g/ user has a multithousand dollar wad of cash to buy new shit.
This is the reality: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/30/financial-emergency-report_n_2576326.html
And besides, you're imagining the parents are the ones instead with the multithousand dollar wad of cash. That means you're imagining someone even richer than if the person made that money independently
you fucking weebs gonna spend all your shekels even it would cost 1000$+ for the opportunity to fuck waifus
>this is the reality [of literal morons who can't plan financially but still buy electronics]
If you're that poor you shouldn't buy tech, game, or anything that's not basic food, shelter, clothing, and education.
I'm planning on fucking my wife while I wear it. She's not ugly, or anything, and she's cool with it, she's just really into getting me off in weird ways. The other day and offered to give me a rim job, and I didn't even ask.
I didn't accept, but I gave her one. I know I wouldn't lick my asshole, if I were her.
Just returned my FS2735.
Decent amount of backlight bleed, just like my CG246 and CX271, terrible glow and...fuck this shit...terrible overdrive artifacts.
I wont even bother to complain about the new POS touch 'sensitive' OSD controls and the much shittier stand than the Flexstand2/3.
I had the 65" OLED TV fund just about flush but now I think I need more for the 2016 LG OLED.
>that Dell OLED monitor, too
And by the way: that 'excellent' Eizo warranty didnt repair my CG303W, which died after year and half of usage, because 'replacement parts' were no longer available. So i was left with a dud, but thanks to consumer laws, the seller paid me the original sum.
the consumer ones in the 90s were around the $600 mark. granted that's more if you adjust for inflation, but i think $600 of today's money will still be too much for most people.
>be afk for 2 days
>come back to find out that VR is kill
>99 USD moto g first gen
>10 USD ritech 3d cardboard set
>9 USD trinus VR app
Dirt cheap vr gaming. Upgrade phone for better res. You're welcome.
considering how much people pay for a phone they only use for facebook and replace in a year it's not bad.
>implying Oculus is the only VR headset coming out
m8 there'll be like a dozen to choose from in a couple of years
if people don't think the rift is worth that much to them then it's irrelevant. you don't see phone manufacturers defensively trying to justify their pricing by saying saying stuff like "come on [insert other piece of expensive tech] is that much as well!".
Give it 2 years, good DX12 supported games, and some AAA devs that know what their doing, and I believe the recommended specs will end up being in the midrange again, and the price will be right where we want it.
Considering what 2 years has done for the Xbox and PS4 prices, I'd say I'm not far off, especially if Facebook doesn't flat out drop it like a dead cow
there's still sony's VR headset that still has a chance at being cheaper, if the console market VR is successful that'll probably keep it alive long enough for when cheaper pc only VR headsets hit the market.
there will be affordable alternatives, the problem is they will be cheap Chink shit that will make you vomit.
1st gen VR is just not going to be mainstream, and the price is not the issue, the issue is GPU tech, when low-end GPUs are ready for VR it will take off. You need to remember that most people don't even have a dedicated GPU and Oculus is asking for a GTX 970 as a minimum
You are fucking dumb, handheld phone considered as a rich tech in the past and cost more than $1k because the company who manufacture them still can be numbered.
RIFT literally the only company right now that released a PC solution of consumer VR.
Do you think all new and hyped consumer tech will cost 5 buckets of KFC? Even Microsoft sold their first consumer tablet with $2000 price tag in 1999.
Rift is not dumb, they know they are the first one who owned the market and just like any tech company they sold their shit at highest price and still the preorder got sold out in just couple minutes.
If you want a cheap solution then wait another couple months or at least a year for the competitor product to come out.
>the issue is GPU tech
to a point, but it's always going to be more demanding to run games with current gen graphics on hmds than it is on monitors. are people just going to just keep on saying gpu tech isn't there yet forever? you're always going to have to be super rich to run current gen games in vr. gpus are ready now to run games with last gen visuals on current vr hardware, and that's what they should have been aiming for when building games for vr from the ground up if they want to reach a wide market.
>the issue is GPU tech, when low-end GPUs are ready for VR it will take off.
Next gen GPU come out this year anon both from Nvidia and AMD, literally new 14nm architecture instead of the same shit we have been using for the last 4 years.
what are the minimum specs for that game though? unless it's really badly optimised, i doubt they're the same as something like crytek's dinosaur demo, which i'm assuming was also made with the 980 ti baseline in mind.
if the gear vr can run acceptable looking content at 2560x1440, then i'm sure a lot of people's pcs can run something similar at cv1's 2160x1080.
That's pretty fucking dumb. The Mac Pro is the perfect portable VR setup, the absolute most power per size and weight you can get. The 7970 equivalents might not be the highest end but it's better than most and if Xfire VR works as AMD says then it exceeds the requirements.
>>cry harder applecuck
Please, I don't own one Apple product, fact just is there isn't anything like the Mac Pro. It's way fucking overpriced for what it is, so is the Rift, but it's more than decent hardware.
And you can get 16 in the upcoming Xeon line of Lenovo for productivity, also HP sells 18 core Xeon e5 for the same price as Mac Pro, as I said lurk more + learn what you're talking about then come back
So, let's recap:
Some guy says the Mac Pro is an ideal machine for VR because of its 7970 equivalents in X-Fire.
You respond by saying the laptops from MSI, Asus and Dell are better...
Then realize your mistake, and start talking about other workstation computers that are less portable...
And are now talking about microservers without good GPUs in them...
I just wanted to recap so you can see in one post how brain dead you actually are, and to give you perspective on how little you contribute to any conversation at any given time by failing to rebut any element of the proposed statement, instead using semantic gymnastics to completely avoid the point, making a series of tangential statements that ultimately refute nothing.
it will never become affordable unless you plan on playing old games on it exclusively because you're always going to need a better gpu to run a game on vr headset than a monitor.
>Mfw the initial high pricepoint killed all of these new technologies at the time
>Video game consoles
One of the selling points was that this would be relativly cheap (150-300) so as to make it available to a broader audience. At this price range, I dont expect a whole lot of people to aquire this, and therefore developers are going to have a reduced motivation to implement this into their engines and games.
Price is part of the reason VR didn't take off the first time. The whole reason people were excited this time around is that it seemed consumer VR would be affordable enough that it would make sense for developers to make content for it.
They could have released a slightly improved DK2 for around $400 like they had originally planned and it would have almost certainly been successful. Their 180 turn in the premium direction could easily kill VR for another 20 years.
VR in its current state is.
If not, you're welcome to point out previous failures of Oculus/Vive etc quality.
No, people are excited this time round because it's not complete fucking trash.
good vr hasnt been cheap until now though. And by cheap i mean before now non 480*240 headsets were 20k+ plus needing some specially developed single use program owned by the government or nasa. and honestly compared to a dk2 those sucked. why do you think governments and shit bought up tons of dk2s? they were cheap and good and easy to develop for compared to their dinodick old shitty headsets. they're finally not shit, meaning they can be of actual use to well, anyone.
A DK2 with the screens they have in the CV1 for $400 would have been doable and absolutely fine for first gen.
>Initial perceptions matter much more than price point now.
You know what also matters? Content. If the adoption rate isn't high enough early only, you run the risk of developers abandoning it. If developers abandon it, who is going to buy it besides the early adopters?
They're custom samsung oled non pentile 1080*1200 screens. samsung was deep in the pentile game so its a big step kinda. we know what the screens are, just not the model name and cost because literally only oculus buys them.
I really doubt it. The DAC and Headphones they used are rumoured to be ridiculously expensive. Cut out those and all of the other junk they decided to bundle with it and Palmer probably wouldn't have to be apologising for his $350 ballpark comment.
Have you looked at the trend in mobile phones? Major flagship phones had to offer steep price cuts for the very first time last year because people weren't buying them at $600+ (Samsung S6, LG G4... and do I even need to mention the Edge)?
you know i've been thinking about that and it kinda makes me chuckle how everyone and their mum is saying the vive is so much better when the only real difference is the tracking.
It's just fanboys that haven't actually been following things. They're really close with their pros and cons. It's going to come down to price and games really and the ball is now in Valve's and HTC's court.
Well it was originally the case. The vive was going to be the premium option and the rift was going to be the affordable option, but oculus changed their mind at the last minute.
I don't buy that really. The only reason why Rift was going to be considered affordable over the Vive is that with Vive you're locked into buying the wands which is going to add cost. And then the reason that only richer folks could use room scale but that's silly since there's no one forcing you to use it. Some games might not work but we don't know what the Vive's launch is going to be like yet.
The reason was that dev kits were affordable and they repeatedly pushed the "affordable vr for the masses" angle right up until the last minute when they decided they wanted to do a premium device as well.
Well you're right there but I just meant affordable relative to the Vive. The Vive honestly doesn't seem like a premium product over the Rift even before we knew about all the silly 'premium' add-ons.
>tfw it will probably be upwards of $800 US in straya
people have. anyways, vive added a circle after oculus cuz it works better than the ball they had before. the steam controller touch pads suck absolute cock(I've used them plenty) and vive controllers so far have made zero mention of tracking finger movements(which in demos apparently works pretty good and no doubt adds to immersion)
vive tracking is apparently more accurate but a few articles have said its kinda spotty soooo yeah they may not even have the tracking edge
>TFW I was dumb enough to back the Kuckstarter
>TFW Free Oculus Rift
>TFW My rig can handle it.
$599 is priced perfectly imho.
The people interested are wealthy early adopters. That are very little games that can run VR, and at least a $1k computer is required to adequately power a VR system.
With low elasticity and low market size. It makes perfect economic sense to sell it at the high price. A lot of people complaining about the $350 dollar price tag, probably weren't going to buy it anyways. Key word is people saying "I would be interested if it was $350" not "fuck I wish I could afford it, I was really planning to buy one".
If there's anyone who understands pricing, its Facebook. They have so much market data.
>the top 20% of the US wouldnt even sneeze at 600 for their child
>neet or otherwise
>pc master race is maybe 5% of gamers
>5% of 60 millions americans
>3 million cucks totally ready to drop 600 or more on niche bullshit
nice try you fuckin mook
Jesus fuck guys
If you want cheap VR Oculus helped make Gear VR, theres PSVR which has to undercut them now, Vive might undercut them after this showing,
And if you want 10$ VR you can buy Google Cardboard headsets from China
>Try looking around battlestation threads more often.
cannot stop laughing.
>People who like making content will make content.
neet spergs will continue to make trash demos out the wazoo, i'm sure. serious developers are going to start dropping it fast if it doesn't gain some traction soon.
and yet oculus only sold 175000 dev kits at half the price even with every 12 year old in the world foaming at the mouth to get one because of youtubers like pewdiepie shilling them.
MFW I ordered at 7:57 am and got it before you plebs and I didn't even look at the price until I was done ordering
Also the same face I will make in VR heaven in March. You poorfags will just have to coddle your waifus in 2d for a little longer until the price comes down...
>being the early adopter scum
>paying for one of the biggest gimmicks ever
Late Majority master race here, does this thing have any interesting content? and no, a 20 min island demo is not content for me.
This thing will be shite for gaming, because your eyes will be burning like hell after 2 hours.
600$ is nothing crazy if you have a job of any kind. But there is no sense in getting it now. I'd wait a year for good stuff for it. Price will drop and there will be some used models for really cheap too.
I've usef my 1+1 for almost two years, i bought this in spring 2014. No incentive to upgrade for now. And this cost $300.
I have the monies for rift, but not gonna buy kekbooks gimped hmd with a xbox controller. Im waiting for vive
They are are barely making a profit on it anyway.
And aree people fucking retarded? VR wasn't just going to materialise one day in a perfect state and be adopted by everyone. These things take time, it's always the enthusiasts like us who experience and test this shit first then it's refined upon and the normies get it too later.
Plus this thing comes with a couple of games and a gamepad.
tfw you woke up at 9:30 in a cold sweat and are damned to the may shipping under race
>burning after 2 hours
just with a dk2 i can go for hours playing dirt 3, live for speed, skyrim(but tweeked to completely remove shadows), star conflict and a few other games.
so yeah as it is theres interesting content as it is.
>Oculus killing VR
Despite that, consumers tend to choose the product that's just good enough to get the job done, so expect the VR solution with the least impressive specifications to be the most popular.
This of course assumes that consumers WANT VR, and most don't since most don't want to escape into virtual worlds when they could go outside and do things with their lives instead.
Multi-IMU piece datagloves still cost more than double that amount; when they said they're selling it "at cost" I believe they're telling the truth.
In my experience non-rectangular RGB pixel patterns (like pentile) might almost work better with something like this as they help break up the obvious pixel grid a bit.
>putting a contraption on your head which completely disconnects you sensorily from your surroundings
Can it get more autistic than that? Is this why the Virtual Boy failed utterly 20 years ago? Will they ever learn that VR glasses in practice are just as silly as "Minority Report"-style user interfaces or taking cyberpunk seriously?
>is this why the virtual boy failed utterly 20 years ago
>Comparing 5bit greyscale (redscale, really), 1 x 224 pixel displays that has to sit on a desktop to the Rift
must be a troll; can't possibly be this retarded
>Is this why the Virtual Boy failed utterly 20 years ago
that may have had something to do with red scanline potato graphics on something needing a fucking tripod.
why do fagtards continue to make comparisons to reaally shitty past tech suggesting this is more of the same
lmao wake me up when we have implantable biotech interface
It's not even because of how the picture looks. It's because an autist with a contraption on his head who is detached from his surroundings looks fucking stupid and people don't want to look like him (nor do bystanders have a means to interact with him, making it unsocial). That's the real reason the VB failed in 1995, and none of these have changed in the OR. Normies just won't buy into this, just as they didn't 20 years ago. VR may be fun on paper just like 3D touch interfaces or some cyberpunk shit, but it doesn't work out in practice.
What is it about this product that brings naysayers out of the woodwork? Too expensive for you? That's too bad for you; fuck off. Think it won't catch on because you're an insecure fuck and are afraid people will laugh at you? Fuck off (btw that's the way all video games were until 15 years ago).
Why wouldn't they say it then, I would probably buy it in a heart beat if it was confirmed
they've sold as much as they can produce until july.
also, palmer pretty much already said it:
>Everyone with Touch needs a Rift, consider discount built into price of the subsidized Rift hardware.
>High end VR is expensive, but Rift is obscenely cheap for what it is
>Q:The Case that the CV1 comes in, is there a place for the Oculus Touch in that case?
I'd wait until I got a shipping notification for vive. In fact, I'm waiting until my vive ships to assess what GPU I'll buy.
For some reason I'm wishing either nvidia or amd jumps on the bandwagon and offers some sort of a bundle, like vive+980ti or something.
>mfw my university is offering a course on Virtual Reality
>they're using Unity3D as their engine of choice and coding in C# using the Oculus Rift HMD.
Should I take it guys? I passed the requirement of getting an above C average in Computer Graphics ;). But I've already graduated.
You're using that word wrong again, anon. Please explain how using a headser/putting something on my head is autism.
In fact, your fear of putting things on your head and projectingthat onto others could imply that it is YOU tbat has autism.
>do things with their life
Won't even lie, I'd rather watch porn, read books, watch TV, fuck women, eat, and piss before i went outside, got a job or did anything ambitious.
The Oculus system ready tool is bullshit. I'm doing fine.
8350 @ 4.7Ghz