Now that the dust has settled can we all agree that it was a

>he hasn't gotten on the vr porn train yet
Missing out, my friend

Heh, absolutely not.

>>55729252
>$700 VR
>$800 gpu
>Game still lags
No thanks

>>55729274
>$25 chinkshit headset in combination with my phone and headphones that I already own anyway
?

>>55729252
They didn't even provide a high quality headset with their price point

Op is poorfag

>>55729461
So which game are you enjoying in your VR ?

>>55729671
Mostly H3VR, but also Raw Data, SPT, Tilt Brush and Assetto Corsa at the moment.

I tried out the Hololens a few day ago and it was really cool

I'm excited for the future

I'll buy one when there's vr touhou.

>>55729671
I been flying in DCS. It is freakin unreal. Dogfighting is just amazing. Feels like I actually havre been flying once I get out of it..crazy shit.


>>55729274
You just read some shit I see.

File: 3d64efd4f4cdde0a1329f31f6a7e66be.jpg (49KB, 600x432px)

49KB, 600x432px

>>55729297

>He paid 25$ when you can get the best ones for 17$

BoboVR Z3 Masterrace reporting in.

>>55729845
>>55730075
So basically cheap ass indie games
No thanks not gonna spend more than 1k on setup for shit indie games

>>55729252
This. VR porn is NOT a meme.

You can get a shitty google cardboard from aliexpress for $1 and try it out for yourself. VR looks REALLY looks real. Not real as in max gaming graphics but real as in really fucking real with depth perception.

>>55730205
That's fine, but if you had the money to do it, it's definitely worth it.

>can we all agree that
You could finish the sentence by saying "the sky is blue" and the answer would still be no.

>>55730235
It's funny because the sky isn't actually blue, claiming that something objectively has a certain color is a human arrogance anyhow.

>>55730342
You could say that "we can all agree that water is wet" and the answer would still be no.

>>55730342
But colours are objective. "Blue" is light with wavelength between 450 and 495 nm. You can't get more objective than that.

>>55730362
You didn't specify temperature range. Above boiling point or significantly below freezing point water is, in fact, not wet.

>>55730366
As far as we know, yes. But for millennia we were limited by our eyes, and indeed if we had other eyes, we would have seen it differently. Today we know (or claim) too that there is light we can't see, but before we didn't even suspect that we didn't know. So to claim then that today we know for certain, that, while we may have missed things back then, that we were limited by our senses back then, we knows everything for certain today, that is human arrogance at its finest.

>>55730432
>autism
>the post

how can mirrors be real if our eyes arent real desu?

/g/ is the real r9k, you autistic faggots

>>55730342
The sky is actually blue, dude. The atmosphere refracts blue wavelengths more than others, so you're seeing scattered sunlight. Since it is the atmosphere that causes this effect, the sky is blue.

>>55730449
Buttmad empiricist stemfag: the post

>>55730432
Nevertheless, the word "blue" it has an objective definition. That definition may change as our understanding of physics changes, but guess what? That's okay because language changes, too. So you can say that something is blue and be objectively right(or objectively wrong).

>>55730205
>dcs
>cheap ass indie game
Woah.

>>55730471
So then, did gamma radiation objectively not exist in mediaeval Europe? Because they didn't know of it, and it didn't fit in any of their definitions.
I'll be the first to admit that this a particularly useful question, that for all intents and purposes, we can claim it's objective, and that, in fact, we can hardly do anything else if we want to progress in any meaningful way. But it is nevertheless a form of arrogance.

>>55730514
This isn't*

>>55730137
That looks way nicer than $17

>>55730514
Just because something hasn't been defined doesn't mean it doesn't exist. However, if a man during medieval times said "the sky is objectively blue" he would have been wrong, because blue did not have an objective definition. As our understanding of physics advances, we may come to the conclusion that our current definition of blue is bad for various reasons, and then change that definition. But that doesn't change the fact that the wavelength of light is a well-defined and objective measurement. And we can give names to various ranges of wavelengths, and those names are objective.

>>55730514
You're really confusing something here - gamma radiation did not affect the concept of 'blue', it just indicated that the electromagnetic spectrum was broader than the visible spectrum. Now, as we understand that it is a continuous spectrum of radiation, technically we have defined all possible form of electromagnetic radiation, irrespective of whether there are any possible emitting bodies.

Blue light is a continuous spectrum within a set frequency band. It was well defined, and entirely objective.

>>55730342
So going back to your earlier post - not, it's not human arrogance to claim something is a certain colour, so long as we can measure it. For example, we can objectively say that a sodium lamp is radiating a yellow light, at 589.0 and 589.6nm (d-level splitting), which we can measure objectively, and confirm via our understanding of the excitation of sodium vapour.

The light the passes through, and is scattered by, the atmosphere is predominantly blue, so it is true to say the 'sky', being the light scattered through and beneath the atmosphere, is blue.

File: 559px-Gartner_Hype_Cycle.svg.png (29KB, 559x363px)

29KB, 559x363px

Nay, we merely pass through the trough of disillusionment.

>>55730342
>>55730432
>claiming that something objectively has a certain color is a human arrogance

>naming concepts to aid in communication is arrogant

>>/tumblr/

le euphoric metaphysics argument

I still don't understand how these fucks works. So I buy one and stick my phone in it and watch porn? Or do I buy one with lenses or some shit and stick it in my computer? This is confusing.

>>55731045
Depends on the VR you are buying
Samsung VR is connect straight to the phone
Oculus/vive is fix many cables to extension cord and computer

>>55731208
Which one is cheaper? I am assuming the phone ones are going to be way cheaper given that I'm reading you fucks discussing graphic cards n'shiet. What do I even do with the two different kinds? Porn in both cases? Vidya? Apps?

I feel like saying it hasn't really started yet, but I said that for steam machines, constantly waiting for the big announcement, but the biggest announcement was that they were killing them.
How long till the vive price drop like HTC said they would? They can't seriously expect that people are still buying from, what did they call it, all the holding back for years?
I mean, I almost feel like buying one now just coz it doesn't look like the price is dropping, once that crowd buys it really is time for a price drop.

>>55730137
Holy shit that looks so much better than what I usually consider "good".

File: 1449435572834.jpg (400KB, 1920x1040px) Image search: [Google]

400KB, 1920x1040px

>>55730205
>Assetto Corsa
>DCS World
>Cheap indie games

Calm down there pal.

You know you're missing out when you can't come home from your day job, put on your $350 dollar DK2 from 2014, coupled with an even older GTX 650ti, and drive European trucks up and down the Autobahn to your hearts content.

People keep saying VR porn, but I can't seem to find any, at least any that's not behind a bunch of paywalls.

File: unzips_wallet.jpg (532KB, 850x1000px)

532KB, 850x1000px

>>55731705
Of course it is expensive and there is no piracy for it yet