>Need to be able to run 2 screens at 95fps
I hope everyone enjoys playing PS2 era graphics because that's what we're getting.
Anon, it's Rift/Vive have less pixels than a 2560x1440 display, that a lot of people already use at higher framerates.
It's going to be totally fine, if you're not playing on a toaster.
>a lot of people already use at higher framerates
>increase hud/subtitle size
Anything relevant is 4K on Netflix. 1080p looks better upscaled as well. 4K blurays will be coming out soon. Every game looks better in 4K and if you disagree you haven't tried it. If you can't afford 4K just steal it from a fucking store, it's easy and worth the risk.
4k is a meme
>You could get almost photorealistic graphics but instead we will increase the resolution which will give you a 20-30 fps loss and only a bit better AA enjoy :)
Waste of money.
I'm wondering, VR looks amazing and all, but it's limited to compatible and hackpatible games, wouldn't a fuckhueg tv be a more sound and probably cheaper investment for maximum immersion?
>streaming in 4k
God I can't imagine how bad that would look. Even streaming 1080p is full of compression aretefacts.
>Every game looks better in 4K
Maybe if you have a Cern supercomputer to run it at that resolution.
Don't worry family, the next-gen systems will still run 1080p and games will indeed be photorealistic. PC users like me will get 4K as a bonus however. Everybody wins, and games will look like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHjIoyEeCdo
and this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYX9I3ONHc4
>but it's limited to compatible and hackpatible games
Literally all First person games.
And there is a fuckton of first person games.
I played F.E.A.R on a dk2 and it was fucking amazing.
4K streaming looks pretty good, c*uckboy. Don't knock it till you've tried it. And with my 970 I'm able to run pretty much everything at 4K 30fps. Yes, I know it's a meme framerate but the resolution is so much better.
>wow this VR is amazing!
>It doesn't feel like I've strapped a box to my head at all!
Face it, this will always be a gimmick until we can jam a probe into our brain matrix style and can actually experience vidya with every sense.
Put there a game instead of a movie
>4K streaming looks pretty good
Do you also enjoy YIFY torrents?
And this is just 1080p so the aretefacts on 4K would be EVEN worse.
We've been down this road before remember /v/?
A few years ago everyone was saying how this was going to kill all consoles and PCs
I've tried some VR tech recently but all in all I have to say that it goes straight into the garbage.
Except google cardboard for porn and 3ds cause portable stuff is neat.
Tons of netflix movies and TV shows are in 4K. Compression isn't as big a deal as you're making it out to be, I barely notice it and clearly the general population doesn't either
Yes and it's full of graphic artefacts just like 1080p youtube.
YIFY encodes at high resolution but low bitrate. How do you think he's able to turn a 30GB blu ray into a 2GB file?
You're using very lossy compression and losing a lot of graphic fidelity.
>Tons of netflix movies and TV shows are in 4K
>1080p upscaled to 4K
You realise the difference between upsaling and shooting at a resolution right?
It's as pointless as buying the 1080p version of a film shot before the introduction of HD.
Logically it's going to be worse because in trying to encode for the higher resolution and keep the filesize small for streaming, you will have to sacrifice even more graphic fidelity in the compression.
Isn't this thread supposed to be able how bad the Oculus Rift will be?
- Screen door effect still exists
- Needs USB 3.0 requiring an addition purchase
-Graphics will need to be lowered considerably to get stable frames
-Price tag inflated by bundling with loads of bullshit
>Screen door effect still exists
Mos people who tried it said they didn't notice it and if they did it didn't matter.
>Graphics will need to be lowered considerably to get stable frames
Your shit hardware.
Yeah they come with a controller but the other shit is needed anyway.
but yea otherwise i agree. ill wait till it's about 200 dollars and till im playing games thatll actually use this vr stuff
atm im considering a 1440p monitor at a larger size since im sucked into mmos
I have USB 3.0 but it says It's not compatible?
Technically you do need a 'version' of 3.0, but most stores/online retailers classify it as "4.0" and sell it as 4.0. For all intents and purposes it really is a new paradigm, so "4.0" is warranted, but for whatever backwards as fuck reason Oculus calls it 3.0.
Listen faggots. You can bitch all you want, but getting a job to be able to pay of OR + a computer that meets the minimum specs is not that hard. You're just being entitled and lazy.
It's not really about the cost it's about the worth. You'll figure that our when you have your own house, a car and bills to pay.
$2000 just isn't worth it to play children's games.
If we can't play games that are already out there we're just going to get a bunch of meme games like the kinnect.
I wanted the Rift to play games like Project CARS and DCS: A10. But seeing as those games are already graphically intensive enough without the rift I guess that;s never going to happen.
In one respect, I'm almost glad it's priced as high as it is. Just means it's significantly less likely we'll have people with shit PCs that can't run the hardware buying it and complaining 'it doesn't work' when they have a toaster.
The first release of the thing is basically just a 'final devkit' more than a consumer version, it's pretty strictly for enthusiasts and developers in a large number of ways and price is only one of them.
>Already shelling out $600 for the first
>Hey why don't you buy better hardware too!
Can't wait for /v/ to be full of buyers remorse threads when VR is relegated to under the bed meme items like the Kinnect, your breadmaker and sodastream.
>Tons of netflix movies and TV shows are in 4K.
Anon, do you know why eve the biggest blockbusters regularly have black borders on the upper and lower border of the shot?
Because they lack cameras to shoot in 1080p, since they're really expensive.
You dont seem to understand that, what you see on that screen is not what you will see inside the oculus.
Meanwhile when OR comes out you'll be playing with an ipod touch screen for each eye.
The criticism for the thing itself being too expensive is legitimate, but criticism for not being able to run games at max settings and high framerates on relatively cheap PCs is just retarded and deserves that response.
>Except google cardboard for porn and 3ds cause portable stuff is neat.
Yeah, you tried rubbish "VR tech" if you think Google cardboard is good enough for porn.
And the 3DS? Are you kidding? The entire time I've owned a 3DS I've probably had the 3D effect enabled collectively for about 10 minutes. It's only purpose is for you to turn it on, say "hey, that's neat" and then turn it off so it doesn't drain your battery.
I played Fire Emblem Fates yesterday with the 3D on, and despite spending a good three minutes on one scene, I could not find any viewing angle where the 3D actually worked, every single angle and distance produced a double image instead of 3D.
The only thing the 3DS' 3D is any use for is making the 2D UI pop out seperate from the 3D gameworld, which I really like.
The sad thing is; a lot of the younger gamers actually think this way.
>simple graphics? NO THANKS
Completely disregarding head-tracking, sense of scale, depth perception, etc, etc, etc, I shouldn't need to list anything at this point. If your first reaction to VR is "oh, why aren't the games prettier?" then please stay the fuck away from it. The last thing I want is for the target audience of VR development to be a bunch of brats who are too dense to realize how incredible the tech actually is.
>if I can't afford it then it isn't impressive
It's sad that so many people are going to miss out on this tech, just so they can pretend they're somehow above everyone else and have higher standards in entertainment.
I know /v/ couldn't handle VR conversation.
Except the screens on the oculus are 1200x1080 each
The combined resolution is only a little bit higher than 1080p.
Playing your games at 1200x1080x2 at 90fps is comparable to 1440p@60fps
>VR require your pc to render the image twice at 95fps
Anon it doesn't matter that its two different angles. What matters is the total resolution. If he can render games at that fuckhuge resolution, he'll have an even easier time with Rift
It's more like 1.5x the performance hit. There's a few tricks you can do to negate the performance impact from multiple rendering angles, but that depends on implementation in a per-game basis.
Trust Zuckerjew to come up with something like this.
It forgets to mention that the "recommended" CPU is just an overclocked version of mine. Which is already overclocked to 4Ghz so better than the recommended CPU.
It also says my USBs aren't good enough but that's probably bullshit too.
I have the exact same CPU as you. But I have no idea how to over clock. Teach me your ways senpai. Every guide I look up says something completely different and I'm afraid to fuck it up
You are the dumbass who obviously doesn't understand how resolution works.
Rendering two images each at half the resolution of 1080p is almost the exact same as running one image at 1080p
Is it seriously that simple?
I read all this shit about needing to download programs to modify the voltage, and modify different voltage values for min and max and all this shit.
And you're telling me I could just use the BIOS the whole time?
Thanks anon. I feel stupid
People have reported that the screen door effect is all but gone in the CV1.
Apparently its more noticeable in the Vive but that doesn't make sense because its higher res. Maybe because it has a larger FOV?
>Less input lag
>Faster response time if fresh rate is tied to input (similar to above)
>plenty of monitors above 60hz
Oh I wonder why anon. I have a 60hz monitor but stop spewing shit. It's retards like you that want to hold back tech because they can't afford it themselves.
Because its gotta run at 90fps if you don't want motion sickness, and the resolution is a bit higher than 1080p.
And honestly the system requirements for oculus are stupid, because the requirements will be drastically different depending on the game you want to play.
There's no way you'll be playing Fallout 4 at 90fps 1200x1080x2 with a 290, but you could do it flawlessly with MGSV for example
They only put system requirements so stupid people don't buy it then get butthurt that they can't play it without getting sick
>What movies or are shot in 4K?
like all of them. 35mm is around 4k equivalent so all old movies will be able to get 4k transfers, and new movies are also mostly shot at 4k or above.
You can literally get over 120fps on any last gen garbage like HL2 on integrated graphics these days. The next generation of 14nm GPUs will cream that shit easily.
You console dogs are literally so retarded and backward and think the pinnacle of technology is Sony's 4 year old APU trash.
Oculus resolution isnt higher than 1080p, you are paying a shit display for the sake of gimmick. I wonder if they even support AA. I. sure peoples willing to pay $600 dollars to look at muddy texture and jaggies
Are you retarded? 4K Netflix requires 25Mbps, 1080p is fucking 5Mbps. Maybe it's not quite high enough to squeeze all the benefit out of 4K, but it sure as fuck is better than shit-tier 1080p.
>It's as pointless as buying the 1080p version of a film shot before the introduction of HD.
This is pretty retarded, you are aware that higher quality formats than whatever shitty VHS or DVD copy of a movie you got existed even before "HD" became a buzzword, right? They won't look as good as a modern film, of course, but they will sure as fuck look better than the crappy, low-res, artifact-ridden DVDs.
You do know reolution and AA are all run by your gpu? Sin e oculus need render everything twice your gpu probably gonna shit itself. Hence the question is it worthy to play a game at shit resolution for the sake of gimmick?. Next you're gonna say human eyes cant tell a difference between 720p and 1080p
Confirmed for being an idiot that never used a VR system in his life.
Oculus Rift renders at around 3k resolution and then downscales that to the 2k screen, there is PLENTY of AA.
Also the VR set has little to do with the rendering itself so obviously it supports AA.
I play most games at 144 frames per second at 1440p res.
I forgot to add that while you do need to render things twice the performance cost is not 2 times as high because there are lots of optimizations made, the performance hit is closer to 15%.
So, I haven't tried any of this vr stuff because I'm poor and all that. How is it? How does it feel like? Is it true vr? Colorful image to draw your attention to my post.
People say the sense of presence is amazing and you really feel like you are in a virtual world especially with the Vive, even with the simplest of graphics.
Just wait for the full release, there will be plenty of sets being demoed at hardware shops near you unless you live in Syria or something.
The Vive is more immersive purely because of the Lighthouse system, that's undeniable. The problem is that in a consumer environment, nobody has the space to dedicate an entire room to the tracking system to make it a worthwhile venture.
That's not true tho, light takes 0.1344 seconds to make a full loop around Earth, so even a server in the other side of the world would have a pretty decent ping if internet connections were perfectly designed.
>1st gen adopters
See you in 2017 when I get my wireless 8k 220° FOV full body + eye tracking Vive 2.
>It costs us almost nothing to bundle the controller. You can sell it secondhand for more than it costs you as part of the bundle. It literally saves you money if you don't want it.
>he hast bought a gtx 970
Shiggy diggy stay mad fucking poorfag ple
He's an incompetent retard but I see no reason why he would outright lie about something like this.
Oculus is expensive for a lot of other reasons, not the controller:
300 custom parts, all requiring molds, tooling, materials, created by external companies and assembled on a single line. Absurdly expensive packaging, matte black heavy box with custom molded casing. High Quality IR camera, look up how much it costs to manufacture a GoPro. Comes from silicon valley. Results in a cost higher than you're expecting.
tl;dr: they obsessed over stupid details instead of making an affordable set
>It costs us almost nothing to bundle the controller.
>enjoys playing PS2 era graphics
I wish technology never jumped above PS2 era so devs would be forced to compensate graphics with superior art direction and voodoo majik to make games look good.
>make games look good
More like improve AI, world density, physics/animations, and various other things that have been shunted to the wayside in favor of pretty textures and shitty effects like DoF and chromatic aberration.
the headphones+dac are rumoured to come to about $200. luckey has been quoted as saying their cost was "insignificant", but given his track record, i'm going to wait for a tear down before i potentially spend $200 on audio gear that i don't need.
>Because they typically cost $200 to buy as a consumer, not $200 to build as a manufacturer. You would be amazed at the margins on most headphones - we can add a few bucks to our product (which is already being shipped, packaged, marketed, etc) and save people a ton of money on what they would have paid for a retail cost solution.
Oculus Rift is obscenely cheap for what it contains, just not cheap enough for mainstream adoption.
they are apparently the same drivers as in the hd598($150) and the same chips as in the nad dac 2($250), so $200 sounds believable. they should have just sold them as an optional extra.
>Vive winning every "best in show" award at CES over Rift
OCULUSKEKS WILL >STILL< RATIONALIZE THEIR PURCHASE
I wonder how much cheaper to manufacture the HTC vive CV1 will be, if they manage to hit the same total price with a cheaper shipping option then it will be a massacre.
They both seem like decent options, at the moment I am leaning more towards Vive for the front facing camera and tracking system. Several people in CES reviews seem to be in favor of Vive pre but it is too early to tell.
Rift seems to have better optics than the VDK2 based on several reviews as far as sde and artifacts from the Fresnel lense contours are concerned, however that can change with the consumer version.
FoV is apparently close with vive being even in distribution and circular and the rift FoV being rectangular shifted down and a bit wider. I might be wrong because I am using VDK1 FoV as a basis of comparison, the vive pre or consumer version might have a different FoV.
At any rate people have been claiming back and forth which has larger FoV based on what they have seen without any precise measurements. It seems they both have the same or very close FoV that it is negligible.
Not sure which I'd prefer FoV wise, rift seems like a more attractive option there since I look down with my eyes more and if I need to look up I usually use my neck instead of raising my eyes. A wider rectangular FoV is favorable especially if it makes use of all the pixels available to it without discarding any which would come in very handy for virtual desktop applications for reading text and what have you.
It all boils down to the end price at this point, If vive is $700 or less including fees then I am sold. Otherwise if it is retardedly expensive in comparison to rift+touch I will opt for the rift instead.
I have a feeling there is going to be intense competition between rift and Vive now, since oculus decided to step on their at the premium price point.
For finding out the effects of it.
You sure as hell will see NEETs doing this regularly so it's better to find out if it fries your brain or something.
Oh, and it's "performance art".
>People complaining that a gaming PC is an added cost to the Rift.
I don't get it all these PC master race people who have been bragging about playing all the old console games released on steam at 4k with 32x AA and anisotropic filtering and weird ass post processing shit suddenly don't even have computers powerful enough to do what they were bragging about doing?
Are bread makers really that bad? I've always wanted one, but never got around to buying.
It's not even that they all have toaster computers, the VR requires brand new cards so unless you upgraded to them recently you'll need to get one. I can do all that 393939K memeXD AA whatever but I'm not able to do VR.
My dad always uses his bread maker, nothing better than fresh bread, the loaves are small and the bread goes dry within a few days, depending on how often you use bread they're decent
You want me to refute what you claim is a logical fallacy that based on a premise you constructed using a straw man logical fallacy of your own?
I don't want to stream my loli porn to my facebook friends tho.
Also Palmer outright said they only officially support seated experiences for now AND you have to buy the touch controllers separately so no dev will bother making room-scale games for it since a smaller portion of users will have the full bundle necessary.
Do you know brand be uses or can provide a recommendation otherwise?
Can we just make this thread about bread makers now?
Also, I bought a Mattel View Master VR headset from Amazon for $20, so all you keks can suck muh sack.
Isn't there an option to start using the rift with no AA and the lowest settings? As long as you can get into say that Cinema app with the same resolution and no AA, you can still watch Avatar 3D the same as anyone else.
You know a guy making loli vr porn?
It's 1080x1200 for each screen and the performance hit for rendering two perspectives is lower than rendering two completely different scenes, it's about 15% more instead of 100%.
Not sure how much in the US but that's the model, you could probably get ones cheaper
If true, that is a load of my mind. I read something about a GPU technician somewhere saying that all VR would be XBox360 graphics due to limitations in physical materials and such.
You're absolutely right on that feeling. Now is the time when the corporates want you to invest, because they make money over you alpha testing the service. Wait a couple more years, major kinks should be solved by then.
No, but it is fiscally irresponsible to go out to a nice restaurant that just opened with inflated prices and inferior ingredients because the food shipments haven't arrived yet.
That's a nice looking bread maker, anon. What about the hole in the bottom from the paddles? I noticed that the sample image didn't have holes in the slices.
Yeah you get a small hole and lines in the bottom when you take the loaf out but nothing to care about really, sometimes it can be a pain to get the loaf out and the paddle might get lodged in the loaf.
The rift isn't even out yet and there's already way more content being developed for it than Kinnect, and then there's the shit being developed for the Vive that hasn't been announced yet.
The difference between VR and Kinnect/3D/someothermemedevice is that there's a shit ton of money going into VR content
Is there any source of Oculus officials actually saying the word "exclusive"? Because it sounds like bullshit as I'm not seeing how they're going to prevent the games from running on other headsets.
You really believe oculus are paying retail price for a fucking controller? They could make their own one and it wouldn't cost them as much as retail price. It's like saying Apple pays retail price for it's CPUs
I don't know. I just think that it's not practical enough. Like end-goal VR is some SAO shit. Everything before that is physically limited. Imagine once we augment movement tracking. You lazy fucks will last like 20 mins lel.
Imagine the point where we can track not only head movement, but your arms and legs too.
He outright said in that article that they are not letting devs support other VR sets for their Oculus-funded games since "Oculus took all the risk".
Obviously he won't outright use the work "exclusive" since it has such a negative connotation but the intention is clear anyway.
>Stay mad poorfag
>Using lower end Logitech LCD keyboard
>low end razr shit mouse
>Not using the Xbox One Elite controller or even the wireless 360 one, but the wired 360 one
"funding" and "bribing" is just a semantical difference.
Also it's not like they are saying "you can support other sets if you want but it's not part of the funding", the are outright disallowing any kind of cross-compatibility purely for monetary reasons.
But like I've said, we've had VR for 20 years and nothing has changed. If it was such a revolutionary technology, people would have invested in it, and it would be significantly more advanced now than what we have. Cars were adopted right away because they changed everything. A 3 day trip could now be done in a fraction of the time.
Also, this isn't virtual reality. Actual VR is more like .Hack and SAO. which this isn't even close to.
"Bribing" means an individual puts some money in their pocket and does stuff behind closed doors. "Funding" means the game gets made. You're one of those people who had an aneurysm when Bayo 2 was Wii U exclusive weren't you?
They're bribing people to make games? No, they're funding the games and they aren't paying the devs to work on other headsets. Literally nothing wrong with that. The devs aren't going to spend work hours doing support for other headset because that's not what they're being paid to do.
>not even close
It's not that far away actually, VR treadmills already exist and there are already decent customer-priced ones out already.
Haptic feedback suits too, it's not "actually touch the virtual world" good but it's pretty decent already, it also comes with climate controls.
Body tracking has existed for years already in consumer products, just lower the latency and it's perfect.
Fun fact, I was getting around 150 fps with the Vive Source 2.0 engine demo's and a 980 gtx ti, which will basically be what? $350 for the same performance when the round of next gen video cards come out? 1000 series I guess?
>we've had VR for 20 years and nothing has changed
>nothing has changed since the virtual boy
That's just retarded.
This is a big step towards virtual reality. Cars were slow and shitty at first and not everyone realized they would become that amazing. You are simply shortsighted.
You know supporting both SDKs is extremely painless and not time consuming, right?
Both sets are almost identical, they output the same XYZ coordinates for tracking, image rendering is built into the SDK itself so there's no work needed for the dev there.
It's purely an artificial barrier, wherever this is ethical or not is subjective but it is invariably an anti-customer practice.
it is strange, if anything a lot of platformers are being developed for VR since it is easier to deal with locomotion.
In first person there are a lot more variables to consider because you don't want people to become motion sick. They are straying away from using gamepad to move instead resorting to teleportation and you physically moving in a limited space.
Room scale sounds cool but I imagine having a limited space to walk in will get old fast and teleporting sounds cumbersome. There are treadmills as well but they aren't great.
There is a technique called redirected motion or something along those lines, it rotates the world slowly as you move and makes you walk in a curve but your brain thinks you are moving in a straight line.
It is still in its infancy however and has its own set of limitations, the most obvious one being that you require a rather large space so you end up walking in large circles.
What do you mean not physically practical?
A treadmill occupies less space than a room-scale game on Vive and a suit is easy to wear.
Sure it's prohibitively expensive if you include everything but it's still far closer than it was just a few years ago. I wouldn't be surprised if almost full immersion for all senses came out at a "casual enthusiast" price in less than one decade.
When I say nothing has changed, I mean that VR didn't change anything 25 years ago despite the clear applications of such a technology, and not going to now. Also, people are hailing OR as some kind of revolutionary new technology, which is annoying as shit.
>universal serial bus
>30 different standards
>VR didn't change anything 25 years ago despite the clear applications of such a technology
The applications mean jack shit if the technology can't achieve them. We are at a point where tech is good enough for something that makes an impact. This is the proper beginning to virtual reality, everything before it was just premature attempts and failures.
>limited technology that is expensive to develop, implement, and use
>5 FPS simulations
>debilitating and causes massive headaches
>massive headgear and barely responsive motion controls
>not cost-effective for R&D due to all the major drawbacks
>20 years later
>technology finally advances to a point for cheap high resolution head mounted display
>finally cost-effective to research and develop
it's like you're a fucking retard or something, anon
That's what they said in the 90's. :^)
The truth is that people will never be satisfied with current technology and will always dream about the unachievable-by-definition "future" instead.
>Why do you think all the demos and showing of the technology has been first person games and demos?
they haven't. even one of the bundled games is 3rd person. you still have head tracking and are immersed in the world. it's just like you're a floating head following a character that you can control.
>20 years later
>technology finally advances to a point for cheap high resolution head mounted display
>they decide to ignore all of the affordable displays like they were using in the dev kits and go for custom ones instead bumping up the price to double and ensuring that the market will be so small it won't be viable for developers to make content for it
it's just like palmer said, at $600 it might as well not exist.
Why directly interface with it if you can simulate the world around you for now?
Also there is a fucking lot of research being done about the brain, we know a lot more about it than just a few years ago.
The DK1 was thousands of times better than what that anon was referencing. The technology has changed in a very important way.
It was the same exact shit with computers. It wasn't until the mid-late 80's that home computers actually became a common thing for a house. Because before that they were so god damn expensive nobody wanted to even touch them except for early adopters.
And then less than a decade later they're everywhere because they got to be significantly cheaper. Because the technology advanced and was able to be made cheaper and better.
It's a fucking $600 VR headset. If you already have a $1k+ computer what difference does it make? I drop $400-$600 every time I go to MicroCenter on random ass computer bullshit every 3 or 4 months.
Developers have already made content for it. That's what the whole "dev kit" thing was about. It wasn't intended for consumers to use and test and play with. It was meant to be bought by developers to develop content for the platform so that when the consumer model released, there would be a serviceable amount of content for use.
I'm not saying I like the price of it, I was hoping for $400. But I understand why it's more than that, and I'd rather have a product that was designed as best as it can be for current VR than a slightly better devkit.
It does and it's something google has already made. You can record videos with panorama lenses on a stereoscopic setup, which is then normalized into a regular fov. This allows you to rotate your "head", while there's a sky(sphere)box that has the video. Which in turn allows your "head" XYZ movements, although of course it's noticeable if you don't record in 4k quality.
This is a thing that can easily thrive without anyone making content specifically for it. It's a display. I'm sure many people will want it regardless of shitty motionware games.
I am coining this phrase by the way. "Motionware", it is what we will be calling those games that nobody will care about because we'll all be playing real games with it. Screencap this.
In 10 years the standard will be 1Gb/s gaming streaming services that uses quantum computers to make any game run 8k@∞fps on any device.
It's more like 3-4 years until your regular casual joe will have good enough hardware to be able to play most new games in VR with decent graphics.
Moore's law is still a real thing.
for me personally the problem isnt having a fast computer or not enough money.
the problem i have with vr is
i only have two games that would be good with vr, only one of those is compatible.
the rest is, kinda good, i have no idea how well vr would work with cities skylines or terraria, but thats the kind of games i end up playing, because fun.
>Developers have already made content for it.
based on the assumption that consumer version would be about $400. oculus going the premium route just made it a lot less attractive to developers. they're going to start dropping it pretty fast if not enough people buy it.
>SDE practically gone and barely noticeable, unlike the DK2 which is like staring at everything through a net
>2016 and he doesn't have USB 3
>2016 and having shitty hardware
>pricetag inflated by bundling
>palmer stated himself the bundled shit contributes next to nothing in the price
>the extra $200 is from the highly customized and experimental 2k 90hz RGB-non pentile panels custom specced by samsung
And not a whole lot of people had it when it was still prototyping and yet the content was made, long before any speculation came out as far as cost was concerned for the consumer platform.
Most of the games are VR-capable, not VR-native. A truly VR-native game would be extremely silly and not worth it right now. However, devs that take some time to at least patch in some nuance of VR support will get a crowd of folks playing it in VR. Elite does this, hopefully Star Citizen will soon. War Thunder is another good example (too bad the game is shit).
Alien: Isolation as well. Pretty sure EVE: Valkyrie is also a VR-capable but not VR-native title too.
Besides, it's not the games that are going to be the driving forces behind how well this thing sells. It's going to be the porn. Whether it be interactive lewd hentai vidya game porn (which is great btw), or recorded with special cameras. People pay top dollar for that shit, and so far that whole department has come extremely far.
There's a god damn pair of sex toys, one for male and one for female, that can sync up and if you thrust your dick in the male toy the female toy responds in kind based on how you are doing it.
That is motherfucking incredible and it's that shit that is going to launch VR into the mainstream.
Holy shit where did all these oculus fags come from? VR is gonna fail, deal with it. You guys keep going on and on about how anyone who doesn't have the required hardware is a poorfag, but most people aren't gonna go out of their way to get a 970 and definitely won't spend $1500 on a bundle. VR is going to remain niche and have a shit ton of shovelware and die with a whimper. Simple as.
Polaris and Pascal are going to address most of that, games are going back to single buffers to decrece latency and the higher memory bandwidths will help push the performance for all them pixels of the 2 screens.
This years flagships will totally be able of getting those numbers, and next years games, and next years 320 bucks cards (ie the best selling tier of cards) will do the same.
>There's a god damn pair of sex toys, one for male and one for female, that can sync up and if you thrust your dick in the male toy the female toy responds in kind based on how you are doing it.
This sounds like the most important computer peripheral of the 2020's
I am, you fucking mongoloid. My main monitor is connected to my Nvidia card and not to my iGPU.
>implying I could run 3D games on max settings with 144 FPS on a fucking intel igpu
It doesn't matter whether I've used it or not. Only fedoralord "hardcore" gamers will go out of their way to buy stable fps on this. And that means only shovelware games will come to it.
That's not a problem with the technology, it's a problem with demand and a changing landscape.
Nowadays no one cares about having the latest bestest computer because a "good enough" computer is enough to run any game at decent graphics thanks to optimization and such.
VR will increase the demand if it becomes truly popular and we will start to see a higher performance increase.
This. Not only is the increase of computer power dying down. But innovation is dying down as well. This generation simply won't see the increase in technology that our parents did over our lifetime. Our cyberpunk fantasies will remain just that: fantasies.
TOTAL computing power is not dying down, it's just desktop computers that are slowing down.
All the computing power is going to smartphones nowadays, this (outdated) image illustrates the point by showing how desktops went from completely dominating the processing power market in 2000 to only 66% in 2007, I couldn't find a more up-to-date chart but I wouldn't the surprised if desktops were down to 30% or so.
>Needs USB 3.0 requiring an addition purchase
Stop squatting around slav and earn some money to buy a motherboard. Any decent motherboard today comes with 6 3.0 ports standard.
Oculus Rift? more like the Oculus Piece of Shit
No, but the bulk of R&D and demand is going into smartphones for now.
Technological advance is not a linear thing, if there's no demand then it simply won't advance at the same rate as before.
VR increases this demand at least in the enthusiast desktop PC market, so expect things to speed up a bit in the next few years.
oh yeah? what about kekbook's nsa prism collaboration? Or multiple psychological studies on unknowing/unwilling users?
You have to be quite a fucking cuck to defend jewbook and cuckzuckerberger.
>the bulk of R&D and demand is going into smartphones for now
So then, I was essentially correct. I hope you are right about VR increasing demand but I get the feeling people just won't give a fuck and be complacent with their shitty apple laptops and iphones like they have been for almost a decade.
In a few years you guys will look back on this VR fad as just that, a fad.
People will get hype, then the disappointment will eventually set in and people will regret ever buying into this bullshit.
>>spend $300+ on a video game peripheral
>senpai, this is not the Wii, you casual famtard
You're not making any sense anon, how is he a casual when he's doing the opposite of what a casual does?
Best post of the thread. This modern day "VR" is just an autistic screen taped to your face. It causes sickness and it's "immersion" is not worth $600. I'll be happy when this motion control tier bullshit dies.
>A BLOO BLOOO I WANT A HOLODECK NOW FUCK INCREMENTAL STEPS
Fuck off retard. If people listened to losers like you, we'd still be in the fucking stone age.
>a speer? pfft, call me when we have tanks
Curved, 3440x1440, VA Panel, less flicker, decent refreshrate. Its expensive, but i love it. Pic related.
>inb4 muh 120hz, I have a 27inch 120hz monior aswell, but I prefere the resolution and fov.
>comparing something as widely useful as the spear to this autistic, unnecessary bullshit. This is not even a step towards VR, just a retarded tangent. This will go the way of the 3D TV.
The shills are fucking desperate to salvage this wreck
for a while digital movies were being shot at 4k, effects were done in 4k, and then they down sampled it to 2k for archiving and threw away the 4k masters because they didn't think consumer 4k would be a thing. so you'll get old stuff shot on film in 4k, and new stuff in 4k, but a lot of things from the beginning of the digital era will be restricted to 2k.
It will make your "This is not even a step towards VR" claim fall flat in its face.
Let me define it for you then:
>a realistic simulation of an environment, including three-dimensional graphics, by a computer system using interactive software and hardware.
the headset already supports over 300 short games and apps: https://vrjam.devpost.com/submissions
Besides, quite a few genres require minimal modification to support VR so it will be implemented in a lot of games in the future
these were made under the assumption that palmer wasn't lying when he said things like "$350 ballpark". devs are shitting themselves now because no one is going to buy this thing at $600.
> "habe you evr tried wun" meme
i need to trie one to tell you that you're fucking retarded and believe it, i bet you'd use a shitty Apple product
wrong again, dumbass grandpa