By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Do You Own a VR Device?

 

Do You Own a VR Device?

Yes, and it's awesome 168 13.05%
 
Yes, it's alright 84 6.53%
 
Yes, but I regret it 43 3.34%
 
No, but I really want one 143 11.11%
 
No, but I'm considering it 243 18.88%
 
No, not interested at all 606 47.09%
 
Total:1,287
potato_hamster said:
the-pi-guy said:

1.)

People keep getting shocked that an expensive medium with few reasons to own it, isn't selling well.  Oculus Rift costs $400, not to mention the hardware to run it.  Vive is still $500.  

PSVR is $500 to get everything and the most mainstream thing on it is a game from 7 years ago.  

2.) Todd Howard's words not mine.  I'm not going to play the semantics game of "we have had VR for decades and it never succeeded, and it won't now."  

1) Price is one of the main reasons why VR "isn't there yet". How come you didn't mention the Oculus Go? People are literally arguing it's a better experience than PSVR and it's a standalone unit that costs $200. It came out of the gate decently selling about 200K units in the first month, but sales appeared to have declined steadily every single month since.Industry-wide, sales from January to July were down 30% year on year. This is an industry that's on the verge of mass appeal?

I mean, It's pretty common to bring up iPhone/Smartphones as a parallel, but I don't ever remember iPhone or smartphone sales dropping 30% year over year.... do you?

2) I don't care if it's Howard's words or yours. If you're quoting him positively as you did, you stand by what he's saying. If you're not willing to stand by an argument you're making, why make it?
a


Just to be clear, I'm only arguing that the Go is better when it comes to watching videos. It's got a web browser, a pretty good app store and really good resolution. The PSVR destroys it in almost every other aspect!



Twitter: @d21lewis

Around the Network
Errorist76 said:
vivster said:

Go is already the most convenient device. Until PC VR devices get their shit together and make wireless headsets.

It’s not that easy really. It’s much more difficult in terms of power consumption and weight of the batteries if the hardware isn’t integrated in the headset. It adds considerable cost and weight and the higher the resolution gets the more extreme this becomes.

The weight of the battery is about 1/10 of an HDMI cable. I don't see how you get heavier headsets and higher power consumption if there is LESS hardware in it.

the-pi-guy said:
vivster said:

Go is already the most convenient device. Until PC VR devices get their shit together and make wireless headsets.

The HTC Vive has a wireless pack already.  But it's ridiculously expensive, and I've heard of some very serious issues with it.  

I think we are just a few years away from getting there.  

Oculus Quest when it releases will be a lot better than the Oculus Go.

As far as I've seen the Quest is only a minor upgrade to the Go. The added tracking capabilities are irrelevant for videos. What I need is the Quest that's using a PC and has a proper resolution.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

vivster said: 
the-pi-guy said:

The HTC Vive has a wireless pack already.  But it's ridiculously expensive, and I've heard of some very serious issues with it.  

I think we are just a few years away from getting there.  

Oculus Quest when it releases will be a lot better than the Oculus Go.

As far as I've seen the Quest is only a minor upgrade to the Go. The added tracking capabilities are irrelevant for videos. What I need is the Quest that's using a PC and has a proper resolution.

Not sure what currently is on the market, but afaik there is no dedicated wireless VR headset for PC. Only adapters for said VR devices which are very expensive. You need to have a fuckload of bandwidth over wireless which is comparable to  one of a Display Port if you wanna use high resolution + high framerate with near to no noticeable latency. Latency would cause motion sickness. Thus, the high price for these wireless adapters is understandable. 



Intel Core i7 8700K | 32 GB DDR 4 PC 3200 | ROG STRIX Z370-F Gaming | RTX 3090 FE| Crappy Monitor| HTC Vive Pro :3

Peh said:
vivster said: 

As far as I've seen the Quest is only a minor upgrade to the Go. The added tracking capabilities are irrelevant for videos. What I need is the Quest that's using a PC and has a proper resolution.

Not sure what currently is on the market, but afaik there is no dedicated wireless VR headset for PC. Only adapters for said VR devices which are very expensive. You need to have a fuckload of bandwidth over wireless which is comparable to  one of a Display Port if you wanna use high resolution + high framerate with near to no noticeable latency. Latency would cause motion sickness. Thus, the high price for these wireless adapters is understandable. 

Delay is irrelevant when watching videos because they're buffered. A 4k video stream at 60Hz is less than 50Mbit/s over a wireless connection. That's possible for any regular Wifi. It would be very easy to create a high quality wireless VR headset specifically for video streaming. Roight now I'm using my oculus go to do exactly that. Starting a video player on the device and then stream content from my PC via DLNA.

Of course interactive games have much higher requirements because they do things differently, but for those I wouldn't need a wireless connection in the first place.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

vivster said:
Peh said:

Not sure what currently is on the market, but afaik there is no dedicated wireless VR headset for PC. Only adapters for said VR devices which are very expensive. You need to have a fuckload of bandwidth over wireless which is comparable to  one of a Display Port if you wanna use high resolution + high framerate with near to no noticeable latency. Latency would cause motion sickness. Thus, the high price for these wireless adapters is understandable. 

Delay is irrelevant when watching videos because they're buffered. A 4k video stream at 60Hz is less than 50Mbit/s over a wireless connection. That's possible for any regular Wifi. It would be very easy to create a high quality wireless VR headset specifically for video streaming. Roight now I'm using my oculus go to do exactly that. Starting a video player on the device and then stream content from my PC via DLNA.

Of course interactive games have much higher requirements because they do things differently, but for those I wouldn't need a wireless connection in the first place.

Ok, i misunderstood you. You just want a VR device for video streaming only....I don't think that such a device exists, at all. I'm not even aware if there will be one. I assume the market for such a thing is not really there.



Intel Core i7 8700K | 32 GB DDR 4 PC 3200 | ROG STRIX Z370-F Gaming | RTX 3090 FE| Crappy Monitor| HTC Vive Pro :3

Around the Network
Peh said:
vivster said:

Delay is irrelevant when watching videos because they're buffered. A 4k video stream at 60Hz is less than 50Mbit/s over a wireless connection. That's possible for any regular Wifi. It would be very easy to create a high quality wireless VR headset specifically for video streaming. Roight now I'm using my oculus go to do exactly that. Starting a video player on the device and then stream content from my PC via DLNA.

Of course interactive games have much higher requirements because they do things differently, but for those I wouldn't need a wireless connection in the first place.

Ok, i misunderstood you. You just want a VR device for video streaming only....I don't think that such a device exists, at all. I'm not even aware if there will be one. I assume the market for such a thing is not really there.

The standalone headsets fit the bill quite well but they're just too low quality because if it's not connected to a PC people don't even expect quality. I just want 4k or more with very high FOV. Probably not gonna happen anytime soon with standalones which are more focused on portability.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

vivster said:
Errorist76 said:

It’s not that easy really. It’s much more difficult in terms of power consumption and weight of the batteries if the hardware isn’t integrated in the headset. It adds considerable cost and weight and the higher the resolution gets the more extreme this becomes.

The weight of the battery is about 1/10 of an HDMI cable. I don't see how you get heavier headsets and higher power consumption if there is LESS hardware in it.


Have you seen the cost, the weight and the size of the Vive wireless pack?

Wireless data transmission costs huge amounts of power, especially at high res 90 fps stereoscopic with ultra low latency.

I’m sure you’ve experienced how fast your cell phone drains from looking at a few websites.

It also needs a very high bandwidth data transmission, all this is not cheap.



Errorist76 said:
vivster said:

The weight of the battery is about 1/10 of an HDMI cable. I don't see how you get heavier headsets and higher power consumption if there is LESS hardware in it.


Have you seen the cost, the weight and the size of the Vive wireless pack?

Wireless data transmission costs huge amounts of power, especially at high res 90 fps stereoscopic with ultra low latency.

I’m sure you’ve experienced how fast your cell phone drains from looking at a few websites.

It also needs a very high bandwidth data transmission, all this is not cheap.

My cellphone needs more than 1 day to drain and I'm playing Hearthstone with it while having 4G, bluetooth and wifi on at all times. You need to get a better phone. Wireless transmission is extremely efficient nowadays and will only consume a tiny fraction of what the display does, which is what the battery pack is mostly for.

The battery pack is just huge because the Vive is not meant to be used wireless and has as such zero energy saving features and hardware, let alone proper compression. Also because it's external and not integrated. A proper headset that's designed for wireless use is gonna be just fine.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

Errorist76 said:
Medisti said:
I tried PSVR one time for about fifteen minutes and go so sick I almost threw up, so you can understand why I personally never want to try VR again. I get carsick pretty easily, too, though, so it's probably a problem with me that VR advancement will likely not fix. If you're less motion sickness-inclined, it might be cool, though.

I’ve even read about people who got rid of their real life motion sickness by training in VR. Or vertigo, fear of spiders you name it.

If you are sensitive it’s very important to do it slow, start with easier and more stationary games. What game did you play if I may ask?

You can see why I would have an issue with intentionally making myself physically ill to try to make my getting physically ill slightly less bad. If being in a car for twenty years hasn't helped my car sickness, I don't see how VR would. My mom has the same issue. Our bodies know they aren't moving and makes the brain go "WRONG WRONG." My mom has it way worse. She can't play a 3D game without becoming so sick she has to lay down.

Whatever the racing game was in the PSVR demo disc.



Medisti said:
Errorist76 said:

I’ve even read about people who got rid of their real life motion sickness by training in VR. Or vertigo, fear of spiders you name it.

If you are sensitive it’s very important to do it slow, start with easier and more stationary games. What game did you play if I may ask?

You can see why I would have an issue with intentionally making myself physically ill to try to make my getting physically ill slightly less bad. If being in a car for twenty years hasn't helped my car sickness, I don't see how VR would. My mom has the same issue. Our bodies know they aren't moving and makes the brain go "WRONG WRONG." My mom has it way worse. She can't play a 3D game without becoming so sick she has to lay down.

Whatever the racing game was in the PSVR demo disc.

Sad to hear that. I got a little motion sickness by using locomotion ( moving instead of teleporting) and it took some time to get used to it. I am fine for the most time. But I also tried project cars and wow....did I got dizzy....this was way too much.

Motion sickness usually activates when your eyes and your vestibular system sends different information to your brain. Your brain reacts with protective measures like trying to empty your stomache for possible food poisoning. 

You can avoid that by having a reference point for your eyes which goes on par with your vestibular system. In a car it's mostly when looking outside the window. I for instance cannot read when sitting in a car. Your brain also slighty predicts the movement of objects and especially if you are causing the movement. That's where random latency or moving without your interaction can cause motion sickness.

 

Thus, teleporting in VR is what helps against those symptoms. But it also limits you to certain games.

When I started with VR I mostly teleported. Then by playing Pavlov VR I get used to locomotion and won't miss it.

 

In all seriousness, I am getting slighty sick by scrolling through the Switch eshop or notification system.  Not because of all the garbage you can buy. But because the down button doesn't always scroll the screen down. It has some kind of weird latency due to how the UI is structured. Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't.

Last edited by Peh - on 10 October 2018

Intel Core i7 8700K | 32 GB DDR 4 PC 3200 | ROG STRIX Z370-F Gaming | RTX 3090 FE| Crappy Monitor| HTC Vive Pro :3