>>324132209 Because they lied about the price, I don't want facebook connected with my hardware in any way, I don't want to give money to facebook in any way, I don't give a shit about vr technology and my pc is too outdated to make use of it anyway. Oh, and 599 us dollarydoos
>>324132209 I am too poor to early adopt. Generally it's great though that the Oculus has generated this much interest. VR can only become cheaper from here on so whatever, I can wait until Christmas or maybe the Vive will actually and, I think this is a pipe-dream, be cheaper than the Oculus.
>>324133410 Did you forget how much of a massive flop the PS3 was during its early years, how Sony had to do some hardcore damage control to get the price down to a reasonable figure, only started having decent game releases several years into its lifespan, and never actually turned a profit?
"PS3 has no games" was a meme for a reason. That only changed during the second half of its lifespan.
>>324132798 >Because they lied about the price They didn't. I mean, it's still expensive but they always told that the final commercial build would be more expensive than the DK models. They said they were aiming for $350 for the DK but that the released version would likely be "more expensive" since better component.
Granted, they didn't precise what they meant by "more expensive" and nobody could guess it would be "nearly twice as much" but still. >I don't want facebook connected with my hardware in any way Are you just spouting retarded shit or do you have a source?
>>324132209 Because VR is a gigantic waste of devs and publishers time, money, and resources. It's another stupid and pointless gimmick that will be tossed to the curb the second the proverbial udders have been milked completely dry and the VR fad dies and fades into obscurity like with 3D and motion controls before it
>>324132209 I have a rich friend who pre-ordered one, and his computer can actually run it compared to mine. He's incredibly hyped about it, and he feels there's enough games/betas and whatever to keep him interested and justify the price. From the sounds of it, I really think VR could kick off pretty well. If not, it wouldn't bother me.
Anyone who complains about how games these days are stale and boring and then shits all over VR tech is a fucking retard. This is the first technology in a while that will actually make games more interesting, immersive and enjoyable. It might actually prompt game devs to think about game features other than fancy graphics and generic features we're sick of seeing.
>>324139184 >literally a graphics peripheral >might actually prompt game devs to think about game features other than fancy graphics
>generic features we're sick of seeing. you will get a hundred shooters, a thousand porn games (which will be reskins of each other), another hundred of "so original" games with really shitty concepts and even worse controls, another hundred racing games, etc
>>324139824 >how are you going to feel when second gen VR is really good? pretty good, I'll probably buy it with all the money I saved not buying 1st gen VR >>324140072 >supposed to be the height of immersion >have to use shitty integrated headphones instead of your own, or your surround sound speaker setup t-thanks I guess >>324140186 >have to get Xbone controller >already have a good, perfectly functional controller >prefer keyboard anyway I can't wait to listen to my good quality speakers, muffled through muted headphones, while my new Xbone controller gathers dust, along with the shitty bundled games that I don't want to play.
>>324132209 That's a lot of money for a poorly functioning gimmick that doesn't even have much support. People keep talking about how they'll have "super epic waifu sim sex xddd", but those retards don't know a single fucking thing about h-games. H-games are niche, the audience for h-games aren't exactly the biggest spenders, the people that make h-games aren't exactly rolling in money. It's just not feasible that they'd start making a ton of great games for some overpriced American gimmick; if they're lucky they'll get one or two doujin games with shit clumsy character models, or maybe some of the more mainstream games like AA with oculus support as an afterthought, but they're not going to get anything great or fully featured. It just doesn't seem like a good idea to invest into VR right now, maybe I'll consider it in a few years when some better alternatives release and it's affordable because then, and only then, will VR start to get some games worthy of playing.
>>324143795 Price is completely relevant. I wont throw away 1800 dollars just to see if something is good enough. Your point would have some kind of hold if they had easily accessible display demos at the very least, but the only way to ever get a shot at even trying that thing out is at closed-to-the-public trade shows. Meanwhile, for the price of the Rift, I can get an ultra high end monitor that does not require high end hardware and works with literally every single piece of software ever made. There are too many better options for that price. Also, saying that the price is nothing isn't a sign of wealth, it's a sign of a conspicuous consumer, and they are not actually very wealthy, just good at racking up credit card debt. Or that you have mommy's credit card.
>>324144367 >are you seriously arguing that someone can know whether VR is good or not because it's expensive? You completely missed the point. My point is that it's an idiotic gamble to wait 6 months, pay 600 dollars, or more if your PC can't run it, just to see if it's good. Also, Teslas and Oculus don't compare. Tesla offered the first mass scale electric car that actually looked good, had a good range, and offsetted the high fuel prices of the time. A Model S is actually useful. So what does the Oculus offer?
I hate to say it, but they've been trying to make VR succeed since the early 90s. Many people over the age of 18 should be able to remember the setups they had in malls where you would pay $5 to play a few minutes of what was essentially like a Wii controller with a trigger to shoot a gun and a button at your thumb to walk forward. You would look around with the goggles... Never went anywhere.
In the mid-90s, they tried VR headsets for PCs that let you look around while playing FPSes... Never went anywhere.
The 2000s went by without a mention of VR, probably to make people forget it's been tried before. Judging by how people are treating the OR and AR as something new that we'll all be using in the next few years, I'm probably correct in saying this.
I say, the smart thing to do is wait. More than likely, the hype'll die down, and early adopters will be stuck with $700 glasses anyone else would find at Goodwill for $20. If it does go anywhere this time, then there will be plenty companies who'll make their own glasses, and this'll drive the price down.
>>324146821 There is a fair bit of difference between a piece of hardware which used either extremely simplistic, low resolution LCDs or CRT display versus a relatively high resolution, high framerate, low latency OLED. You can't really compare it to the older iterations on the basis that the technology back then was too primitive to manage a sense of presence.
>>324147456 And in what way would the technology be improved, besides better graphics? Unless you were in a large field, you couldn't physically walk around the simulation, meaning you would have to sit or stand still while pressing buttons to move. Unless you had electrodes covering your body, you couldn't feel anything from the simulation. The immersive quality is lacking, and the experience won't be any different than it was back in the 90s, save for prettier graphic models.
>>324148680 >Save for prettier models That has nothing to do with VR, that's based around the games themselves. The VR technology is very different now to what it used to be - even if you play an ancient PS1 era VR demo on newer kit, it's going to look and play substantially better than using the old kit.
>>324148680 The main things are latency, field of view and ergonomics. Low tracking latency and monitors with high refresh rates and low persistence mean that you can actually do head tracking right, without tracking latency or judder. High field of view because of small, high-resolution screens should be obvious. The fact that all these components are a lot smaller and lighter than the shitty parts they had back then also mean that your headset is a lot more comfortable to actually wear.
Vendors were quick to write off 3D when they finally realized that consumers weren't willing to pay a premium for a lackluster experience.
The Occulus looks like VFX-1: Electric Boogaloo with nicer screens and setup, but with a lot of the issues that plagued the last attempt: -Requires special support from vidya -Requires upper end hardware -Controls still leave much to be desired -High cost of entry Head tracking and a bunch of the other secondary technologies were already mature in the 90's.
I'm going to give it at least a year after release before dropping any dosh.
AR actually looks promising, but hardware isn't ready for consumers yet.
>>324140947 >I can't wait to listen to my good quality speakers >speakers >for VR You're a fucking moron and part of the reason they bundled the headphones in the first place: to make people not use their goddamn speakers. Also, you can remove the headphones if you're gonna insist on using your own.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org with the post's information.