So we have two VR rooms in this building. One for our office and one for a second team working on something else.
My team doesn't work with motion controllers. Take everything I say about the Vive controllers and Touch with a grain of salt since I don't use them daily.
When we set up the VR room downstairs specifically for roomscale we did some measurements of the tracker's range and field of view and came to the conclusion that both have pretty much the same fov but the lighthouse stations have a slightly higher usable range which is by the way bigger than what they recommend as the largest play area.
From what I've heard they prefer Touch for the implications of finger tracking, the analogue grips and because they're shaped like a neutral hand pose.
No chat / messaging abilities at all on the Oculus software. Makes a friendlist a bit pointless IMO but maybe that's about to change soon.
There's a bit of pressure to use OpenVR for multiple headsets instead of seperate builds but we try to be as platform agnostic as possible.
1. Your headset of choice?
2. Better optics?
3. Preffered FOV?
4. SDE difference between all 3?
5. Have you tried touch? Did you like it or found any things that annoyed you? (such as tracking problems).
6. How are the added headphones on the rift?
7. Ergonomics on which one are better?
8. What software seems better for the consumer?
1) I like and dislike different things about all of them. No favourite.
2) Rift > Vive > PSVR
3) Vive > Rift > PSVR
4) Rift > PSVR > Vive
5) I'm not too experienced with Touch. We don't have a Touch in OUR office since our project doesn't utilize motion control but I had a couple of opportunities to try it out and was very happy with how well the tracking works. There were a couple of issues with finger recognition and rumor has it that's the reason why they delayed it.
6) IMO the most important difference between the three. The headphones provide an even target across all users for devs and add so much comfort.
7) The Rift and PSVR are equally comfortable IMO. Vive is a bit lacking in terms of ergonomics.
8) For consumers the Oculus software is way ahead at the moment. It's completely plug and play in our experience and feels like a polished console UI, even in its current beta state. My personal preference is the Steam VR interface though simply because it supports voice chat and that's what we use to communicate between our VR room and office.
Everything is tuned specifically for these headphones. The position of the in-game listener lines up with the position of the driver in front of your ear to ensure that you get the most acurate 3D audio possible.
The best thing of an integrated audio solution is that what I create will sound to you exactly like it sounded to me while I made it. If you play our game you hear everything like we wanted it to sound just like you see the world we created exactly like we wanted it to look because we use the same screen you use.
Less SDE on the Rift. To the point where I don't notice it at all if I'm not trying hard to stare at it. The Vive still has noticeable but improved SDE (from VDK1) with an oval FOV which I prefer over the Rift's rectangular one.
Both feel very similiar. The rift feels a litte bit wider but they are both supposed to be +-110 deg. It's a very subjective thing and can't be measured perfectly acurate.
I brought the lenses as close to my eyes as possible without touching my eyelashes. It's about the same on Vive and Rift but Rift feels a little wider horizontally to me while the Vive has my preferred FOV shape.
Lighthouse is a bit picky with reflective surfaces and strong direct light. Other than that no issues.
I don't really play favourites. They all have their strengths and weaknesses. From a comfort standpoint I like PlayStation VR the most, for the quality of the headset alone I like Rift the most and for the most compelling out of the box experience the Vive.
The nice thing about PSVR is that it doesn't press against your face. The mounting mechanism is a cushioned ring you wear around your head. You can wear it for hours without getting that feeling of weight on your cheekbones.
Keep in mind that I don't use a PSVR regularly and the unit at our office is not the current model shown at GDC but from what I can tell close or identical.
The Rift doesn't press against your face but it still touches it and applies a bit of weight on your cheekbones. It's great comfort wise but I can wear PSVR for longer without even noticing it.
Since PSVR doesn't touch your face for the most part there is more light leaking in than with the Rift and Vive. Not just at the nose but all around the eyebox It's not too bad IMO but you might want to play in a dark room if that's something you don't like.
I don't like having to wait for tracked controllers. If I would buy a headset for myself right now it would probably be the Vive because it's a complete VR package for what I want to do in VR while the Rift is a slightly superior, much more ergonomic headset but is also making me wait for touch for half a year.
Absolutely. If I look purely at the comfort and quality of the headsets alone I would give it to the Rift but the ability to reach out and "touch" the virtual world is what makes the Vive so magical for me.
Apartment sizes need to improve
The pressure to make a roomscale game also work just standing and turning on both the Rift and Vive to maximize the potential audience feels like a slight bottleneck to creativity. my team is not working on a game with tracked controllers but our coworkers are and it's a bit depressing to see how many steps back they took from the original idea once they realized that most people are not ready or capable to dedicate a 3.5x3.5m or even 2x2m space in their home to VR.
Most of the devs we're in good contact with are building games for PSVR and the Rift as these are the projected market leaders of console and PC VR with Vive versions in mind. Other platforms like OSVR, StarVR or the Totem (which is technically OSVR compliant) will only see straight ports if at all.
There aren't many PSVR-to-Rift ports though. That's partly because Sony invests a lot of money in games specifically developed for PSVR. Exclusives if you will. They don't outright buy exclusivity rights to existing projects but fund projects that wouldn't exist otherwise and then demand in return that they will stay on PSVR for a while.
On PC the two major headsets are more or less identical once touch launches, there is no need to treat development and the potential usecase on those headsets differently. Pretty much all games that use roomscale can also be played standing and turning simply because it makes the most sense business wise but if you do have a setup where you can walk around you get the perk of more freedom in your movement.
Rift's screen looks like a continuous surface with a subtle pattern while the Vive's SDE looks like on Gear VR (with S6) but with thinner lines.
The rifts on-ear headphones sound great and offer us as devs the luxury of being able to target a single device that will sound exactly like envisioned across all Rift users.
That's technically still true for the Vive but the fact that they're IEMs will stop many people from using them. At least that's what happened in our office. Out of 10+ people here only one can actually stand IEMs and that's me. They sound pretty good. They're just off the shelf HTC IEMs. Slightly tuned for the beats generation with a lot of low end but not bad at all.
PSVR is great for what it is. Of course you have to make sacrifices on a comparatively weak console but it's surprisingly close to the Vive and Rift.
Nope. Eyestrain is only an issue if your set IPD is off. All three are very comfortable to my eyes for long sessions.
It's hard to recognize them as pentile displays due to the almost nonexistent SDE. It's a little bit more visible on the Vive but nowhere near as bad as on DK2 where you can see the uneven distribution of subpixel colors.
PSVR is visually closer to Rift and Vive than you would expect due to their RGB panel but we're at a point where one pixel arrangement doesn't really look better than another.
It's a smart move to equip PSVR with an RGB panel because you have to render a full image anyway no matter if you then loose some of the information to an uneven subpixel arrangement or not. Their perceived resolution is higher than it would be on a 1080p pentile screen without performance sacrifices.
1) You can adjust the angle and move them up and down. They should work for most if not all heads. 2) The consumer Rift feels like wearing a hat. There is no real pressure applied anywhere on your head.
All of them will have retail presence. The PSVR a lot stronger than the Rift and Vive. Sony will be doing limited in-store demos and we even got contacted about making a demo of our game specifically for this purpose. That's still a bit far away though. Sony is treating PSVR like a console launch in terms of their marketing, how they approach E3 and the distribution of devkits.
I don't wear glasses myself but from what I've heard around the office it's pretty comfortable with PSVR and Vive. The Rift has a different faceplate specifically to accomodate glasses but we didn't get one.
HTC Vive is $799 - you can order now, begins shipping on April 5
Oculus Rift is $599 - you can order now, begins shipping on March 28
PSVR is $399 without camera and Move controllers, $499 with - pre-orders for the bundle begin tomorrow at 10 am EST for the US. Headset only will be available for pre-order at a later date.
Video Card NVIDIA GTX 970 / AMD R9 290 equivalent or greater
CPU Intel i5-4590 equivalent or greater
Memory 8GB+ RAM
Video Output Compatible HDMI 1.3 video output
USB Ports 3x USB 3.0 ports plus 1x USB 2.0 port
OS Windows 7 SP1 64 bit or newer
If you go to the Oculus website, you can find 'Rift-ready' PC bundles starting at $1,499.
GPU: NVIDIA® GeForce® GTX 970, AMD Radeon™ R9 290 equivalent or better
CPU: Intel® i5-4590/AMD FX 8350 equivalent or better
RAM: 4 GB or more
Video output: HDMI 1.4, DisplayPort 1.2 or newer
USB port: 1x USB 2.0 or better port
Operating system: Windows® 7 SP1, Windows 8.1 or later, Windows 10
You also need a minimum 5' x 6.5' if you want to take advantage of room-scale VR with the Vive. Anything less than that is limited to seated or standing only.
Four ports is only if you want to have Xbox One and Oculus Touch controllers plugged in at the same time. I don't know why they decided to list it that way now. For the devkits, they always just said you needed two ports for the headset and camera. They never said anything about needing a third for a controller. It probably has to do with this being a consumer device, whereas they knew people buying the devkits would just know another port was obviously required.
Ive heard other people that have had great experiences with the move controllers so its hard to tell if they just had a bad calibration issue for whatever reason of there actually is real problems with their effectiveness. Ill reserve judgement for now until there is more concrete evidence one way or another.
They seem to be taking forever to get them out the door. There are huge threads of people trying to figure out when theirs will ship based on how many minutes after launch they placed their pre-order. A lot of people who had no doubt that theirs would arrive this week are worried they won't even receive it by next week now.
yeah, the crux of it is the shipping delays. they appear to be enormously behind schedule right off the bat, and there hasn't been a single device shipped to anyone in aus/nz, even to kickstarters (who get a free device before the preorder people). europe is getting screwed also, but not as bad.
that and it's not shipping with a separate insert for people who wear glasses (read: 40% of people in the developed world), even though they specifically stated it would. and lastly, absolutely zero communication from the company, and the majority of things palmer has written on twitter/reddit in the past week have been snide douchebag comments.
so yeah, people aren't happy.
jiggy, there are many devices out there with press and the kickstarters, and tons of reviews are out. just google or go to r/oculus
it's so hilarious how badly oculus are handling this launch. meanwhile it looks like htc are going to nail it.
I believe its also safe to say that not launching with a viable room scale experience was a mistake. I fully expect OR to outsell Vive, at least initially for sure. They just had such a huge jump on them in name recognition. But the buzz right now is definitely much louder on the side of Vive throughout the gaming world I believe.
Its going to be interesting watching how things continue to develop throughout the year after both units have hit the market and Touch is released ect.
i agree that people are most buzzed about the stuff that involves not being rooted to a spot, but the longevity of those experiences and the practicality of that solution remains to be seen. having that amount of space in front of your computer is a pretty niche thing.
Yea, I feel like room scale is huge for marketing purposes and I'm sure it's amazing when you try it at demos, but it does have the vibe of being rather gimmicky long term - at least for this generation of VR.
The combination of space needed, keeping track of wires so you don't trip and the further immersion-breaking of being told there's a rl-life wall or obstacle when there isn't one in the game makes it feel a bit wiimotey.
I'm sure there'll be fun stuff to do with it - but I think it'll be a lot more limited than many think.
I think it really doesn't matter much which one you go for - they're both going to offer amazing and very similar VR-experiences and possibilities (once the rift controllers come at least) and hopefully we have no, or very little, of the exclusive nonsense happen for PC-based VR.
Either a partner ****ed up or there's a QC issue, but having Palmer handle PR with a large group of your most enthusiastic but currently unhappy customers is just lol. All he does is argue, basically.
As far as anyone can tell they are up to minute two of pre-orders with zero units shipped today.
"Imagine how much more different this sub would be 1000s of people had rifts instead of the handful now. Not very different, apparently, because there are already many thousands of Rifts out there even at this early point, with more arriving as we speak. Remember that this sub[reddit] is a tiny minority of the overall VR market - 70k is not even an accurate measure, considering how many subs are from old accounts or lurkers with no headset. The vast majority of people don’t care about posting pictures or reviews of their new toy to an internet enthusiast group."
If not for OR and Luckey, there would be no VR - OR, Vive or PSVR - right now.
Luckey has already secured his place in history as one of the founding fathers of VR - if anyone thinks that 30 years from now he'll be remembered for a bit of delay in getting CV1 out, they're missing a pretty significant part of the big picture.
And lol at 400 cancellations mattering for what is the most significant technological breakthrough since the Internet.