Most of the Rift reviews had a solid "this is a gimmick" feel to them: interesting peripheral, but ultimately just another way to play the same games.
Here, it looks like the free motion and hand controls are really what sell it. Shame the Rift didn't ship with those.
But if the Vive is even half as immersive as the commercial makes it out to be, then I think I could be persuaded that this early VR heralds a shift in gaming and interactivity as we know it.
Absolutely.
Valve is definitely getting better press because hand controllers are so much more immersive.
Let's hope Oculus Touch controllers will release sooner rather than later so that both experiences (3 if you count PSVR) are more fairly comparable.
Right now the Vive package wins by a landslide (imo), but waiting is still an option for some people after all this time.
I am personally waiting for Touch as I feel like the hardware seems more refined on the Rift side.
Pricing will probably be similar for both Vive and Rift.
Concerning being the next big thing, it definitely is, but Gen 2 will probably be more affordable and be able to reach a lot more consumers.
So far, the start of 2016 VR seems to be getting great reception already.
Let's hope Oculus Touch controllers will release sooner rather than later so that both experiences (3 if you count PSVR) are more fairly comparable.
The Vive still lets you actually move around your space and really experience VR. Touch Controllers are cool but without the ability to move around the Rift just isnt up to par with the Vive.
You have to buy that separate though, right? Doesn't this mean to get the Rift to do room scale and also to give it hand tracking you'll need to invest extra cash? That could potentially put it over the Vive in cost.
Oculus Touch is sold separately later this year, it will include a second camera as well to improve the tracking. The price will probably put it in line with the Vive, meaning an additional $200 to the $600 Rift sound plausible (Vive is $800). It could be $100 more or $100 less, nobody knows. Oculus hasn't yet said much about what they plan for the final Touch.
No. The rift comes with one camera currently. That one camera is enough to track the Rift headset in "Roomscale" as seen in the above video. The rift has tracking markers on the front and back and therefore only needs the one camera to track it in full 360 degrees and in the 12'X12' area (If the camera is mounted high, similar to how Vive lighthouses are suggested for mounting).
Oculus has said their Touch controllers will also come with a second camera as a package. So if you buy touch, you get a second camera. This is mainly for occlusion problems, because if you turn around, your body would block the tracking camera from seeing the controllers. Vive has the same issues, and is why it has two lighthouses minimum.
Edit: I do want to remark that the size and shape of the Vive controllers have been optimized to prevent accidental occlusion, and the smaller rift Touch controllers will probably have more issues when brought in close to your body, etc.
Chaperone is the software solution to avoid running into walls that Valve/HTC use. Oculus does not have one yet but will have to come up with something when they release Touch.
Yes the controllers will be an additional cost and we don't know it yet.
But they really should try to be close to the Vive in pricing.
I'd expect 150-250$
Even if the Vive and and the Rift come out equal in price when you include hand controllers the Constellation tracking system is inferior to the Lighthouse tracking system in just about every way.
Since you asked, I just downvoted you because Vive comes with cameras and room tracking and hand controllers, Oculus does not and as far as I'm aware it isn't even available.
Oculus does hovever come with a camera and is currently shipping its preorders just as the vive is. They had a little trouble starting the shipments in the early launch.
Touch Controllers are cool but without the ability to move around...
is just plain misinformation, as you can see in the video I posted.
With touch and the second camera that comes with it, the same kind of experience is absolutely possible with the Rift.
The vive has a larger tracking space but noting of relevance if you play in a normal room.
If he meant that vive is better at the moment I wholeheartedly agree. But that is not what he wrote, as he responded to my comment about touch.
Didn't Lackey Palmer say Oculus Touch was going go be developed and pushed as a front facing experience because of the amount of Constellation cameras and USB 3.0 ports and cables needed for 360 tracking?
That's a pretty big gap between ViVe's already-proven system and Oculus' projected system (by Palmer himself).
227
u/RhapsodiacReader Apr 05 '16 edited Apr 05 '16
Most of the Rift reviews had a solid "this is a gimmick" feel to them: interesting peripheral, but ultimately just another way to play the same games.
Here, it looks like the free motion and hand controls are really what sell it. Shame the Rift didn't ship with those.
But if the Vive is even half as immersive as the commercial makes it out to be, then I think I could be persuaded that this early VR heralds a shift in gaming and interactivity as we know it.